2 SAMUEL 23 COMMENTARYEDITED BY GLENN PEASE

The Last Words of David

1 These are the last words of David: "The oracle of David son of Jesse, the oracle of the man exalted by the Most High, the man anointed by the God of Jacob, Israel's singer of songs

BARNES, "The last words of David - i. e., his last Psalm, his last “words of song” 2Sa_22:1. The insertion of this Psalm, which is not in the Book of Psalms, was probably suggested by the insertion of the long Psalm in 2 Sam. 22.

David the son of Jesse said ... - The original word for “said” is used between 200 and 300 times in the phrase, “saith the Lord,” designating the word of God in the mouth of the prophet. It is only applied to the words of a man here, and in the strikingly similar passage Num_24:3-4, Num_24:15-16, and in Pro_30:1; and in all these places the words spoken are inspired words. The description of David is divided into four clauses, which correspond to and balance each other.

CLARKE, "David spake unto the Lord the words of this song - This is the same in substance, and almost in words, with Psalm 18:1-50, and therefore the exposition of it must be reserved till it occurs in its course in that book, with the exception of a very few observations, and Dr. Kennicott's general view of the subject.

GILL, "Now these be the last words of David,.... Which refer not to the psalm in the preceding chapter, but to what follows; not the last words he spoke, for he said many things afterwards; for the advice he gave to Solomon, and the instructions to him about building the temple, were delivered after this time; but these were the last after he had finished the book of Psalms; or the last that he spoke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or that he delivered out by way of prophecy; though the Jews (f) will not allow him to speak by the spirit of prophecy; they own he spoke by the Holy Spirit, which they distinguish from prophecy; but the Targum calls these words a prophecy, and takes them to be a prophecy of the Messiah, and of things to come, as undoubtedly they are, paraphrasing them thus;"these are the words of the prophecy of David, which he prophesied concerning the end of the world, concerning the days of consolation that should come;''this is observed to excite attention, the last words of dying men being usually regarded and remembered:

1

David the son of Jesse said; he began with his descent, which was comparatively mean, in order to illustrate the distinguishing goodness of God to him in his exaltation:

and the man who was raised up on high; from a low estate to an high one, from the sheepfold to the throne, to be king over all the tribes of Israel, and a conqueror, and head of the nations round about him:

the anointed of the God of Jacob; who was anointed king by Samuel by the order of the God of Jacob; and which was an instance of his being the God of Jacob or Israel, and of his care of them, and regard unto them, that he anointed such a man to be king over them, as well as it was an honour to David:

and the sweet psalmist of Israel; who composed most of the psalms and hymns of praise for the people of Israel; invented and set the tunes to them to which they were to be sung, and the instruments of music on which they were sung; and appointed singers to preside, and lead them in that part of divine worship, singing psalms and hymns; and very sweet were the psalms he composed as to the matter of them, and very sweet and delightful to the ear was the music in the manner of singing them: it may be rendered, who was "sweet" or "pleasant in the songs of Israel" (g), his warlike exploits and victories being the subject of them, 1Sa_18:6,

said; as follows; for all that goes before are the words of the penman of this book, drawing the character of David; in which he was a type of Christ, a branch out of the root of Jesse, highly exalted, and chosen from among the people, anointed to be prophet, priest, and King; and who sweetly expounded the psalms concerning himself, and ordered them to be sung in the churches, and of which he is the subject, and may be said to be sweetly held forth in them, see Luk_24:44.

HENRY 1-2, "We have here the last will and testament of king David, or a codicil annexed to it, after he had settled the crown upon Solomon and his treasures upon the temple which was to be built. The last words of great and good men are thought worthy to be in a special manner remarked and remembered. David would have those taken notice of, and added either to his Psalms (as they are here to that in the foregoing chapter) or to the chronicles of his reign. Those words especially in 2Sa_23:5, though recorded before, we may suppose he often repeated for his own consolation, even to his last breath, and therefore they are called his last words.When we find death approaching we should endeavor both to honour God and to edify those about us with our last words. Let those that have had long experience of God's goodness and the pleasantness of wisdom, when they come to finish their course, leave a record of that experience and bear their testimony to the truth of the promise. We have upon record the last words of Jacob and Moses, and here of David, designed, as those, for a legacy to those that were left behind. We are here told,

I. Whose last will and testament this is. This is related either, or is usual, by the testator himself, or rather, by the historian, 2Sa_23:1. He is described, 1. By the meanness of his original: He was the son of Jesse. It is good for those who are advanced to be corner-stones and top-stones to be reminded, and often to remind themselves, of the rock out of which they were hewn. 2. The height of his elevation: He was raised up on high, as one favoured of God, and designed for something great, raised up as a prince, to sit higher than his neighbours, and as a prophet, to see

2

further; for, (1.) He was the anointed of the God of Jacob, and so was serviceable to the people of God in their civil interests, the protection of their country and the administration of justice among them. (2.) He was the sweet psalmist of Israel, and so was serviceable to them in their religious exercises. he penned the psalms, set the tunes, appointed both the singers and the instruments of music, by which the devotions of good people were much excited and enlarged. Note, The singing of psalms is a sweet ordinance, very agreeable to those that delight in praising God. It is reckoned among the honours to which David was raised up that he was a psalmist: in that he was as truly great as in his being the anointed of the God of Jacob. Note, It is true preferment to be serviceable to the church in acts of devotion and instrumental to promote the blessed work of prayer and praise. Observe, Was David a prince? He was so for Jacob. Was he a psalmist? He was so for Israel. Note, the dispensation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal, and therefore, as every man has received the gift, so let him minister the same.

II. What the purport of it is. It is an account of his communion with God. Observe,

1. What God said to him both for his direction and for his encouragement as a king, and to be in like manner, of use to his successors. Pious persons take a pleasure in calling to mind what they have heard from God, in recollecting his word, and revolving it in their minds. Thus what God spoke once David heard twice, yea often. See here,

(1.) Who spoke: The Spirit of the Lord, the God of Israel, and the Rock of Israel,which some think is an intimation of the Trinity of persons in the Godhead - the Father the God of Israel, the Son the Rock of Israel, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son, who spoke by the prophets, and particularly by David, and whose word was not only in his heart, but in his tongue for the benefit of others. David here avows his divine inspiration, that in his psalms, and in this composition, The Spirit of God spoke by him. He, and other holy men, spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. This puts an honour upon the book of Psalms, and recommends them to our use in our devotions, that they are words which the Holy Ghost teaches.

ELLICOTT, " (1) The son of Jesse said.—The description of the human author of the following prophecy is strikingly analogous to that of Balaam in Numbers 24:3-4; Numbers 24:15-16. The word “said,” used twice, is a peculiar form (used between two hundred and three hundred times) of direct Divine utterances, and applied to human sayings only here, in the places referred to in Numbers, and in Proverbs 30:1, in all which special claim is made to inspiration.

The sweet psalmist of Israel.—Literally, He that is pleasant in Israel’s psalms, i.e., by the composition and arrangement of Israel’s liturgical songs he was entitled to be called “pleasant.” David, with life now closing, fitly sends down this prophetic song to posterity with such description of its human writer as should secure to it authority.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:1. These be the last words of David — Not simply the last that he spoke, but the last which he spake by the Spirit of God, assisting and directing him in an extraordinary manner. When we find death approaching, we should endeavour both to honour God, and to profit others with our last words. Let those who have had experience of God’s goodness, and the pleasantness of the ways of wisdom, when they come to finish their course, leave a record of

3

those experiences, and bear their testimony to the truth of God’s promises. The man who was raised up on high — Advanced from an obscure estate to the kingdom. Whom God singled out from all the families of Israel, and anointed to be king. The sweet psalmist — He who was eminent among the people of God, for composing sweet and holy songs to the praise of God, and for the use of his church in after ages. These seem not to be the words of David, but of the sacred penman of this book.

COFFMAN, "Verse 1

A MESSIANIC PROPHECY AND A LIST OF THE 37 MIGHTY MEN; A PROPHECY OF THE MESSIAH

"Now these are the last words of David:

The oracle of David the son of Jesse, the oracle of the man who was raised on high,

the anointed of the God of Jacob, the sweet psalmist of Israel:

`The Spirit of the Lord Speaks by me, his word is upon my tongue.

The God of Israel has spoken, the Rock of Israel has said to me:

When one rules justly over men, ruling in the fear of God.

He dawns on them like the morning light,

like the sun shining forth on a cloudless morning,

like rain that makes grass to sprout from the earth.

Yea, does not my house stand so with God?

For he has made with me an everlasting covenant. ordered in all things and secure.

For will he not cause to prosper all my help and my desire?

4

But godless men are like thorns that are thrown away; for they cannot be taken with the hand;

but the man who touches them arms himself with iron and the shaft of a spear,

and they are utterly consumed with fire.'"

We are by no means satisfied with this translation; it stands in sharp variance with the KJV. By way of excuse for the RSV, it should be pointed out that, "The text is appallingly corrupt."[1] Added to that, we must consider the eagerness of may modern translators and commentators either to eliminate altogether or to diminish the impact of all Messianic prophecies in the O.T. For these reasons, we believe that Christians should be slow indeed to accept the RSV in these seven verses. Willis also warned that, "The text and precise interpretations of this paragraph are complicated ... and (some of them) must be regarded as tentative."[2]

This writer's problem with the passage lies principally in 2 Samuel 23:5, where the RSV puts into David's mouth the declaration (in the form of an interrogative) that his house "stands so with God," that is, "in perfection righteousness before God!" And we simply cannot believe that David could ever have said anything like that. The King James Version renders the same verse, "Although my house BE NOT SO with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant," There is no doubt whatever that the negatives are in the Hebrew text; but the RSV translators contradicted them by "taking the negatives as interrogatives and thus changing them into strong assertions."[3] That is only another device for contradicting the word of God. We agree that, "The rendering of the Authorized Version here is that of the ancient versions and should be retained. David could not have but felt that his house was too stained with sin for him to have been able to claim that he was actually in fact what the theocratic king was in theory."[4]

True to the clearly visible purpose of critical commentators to deny all predictive prophecy of the Messiah, they always, as a last resort, will declare that a prophetic passage is "an interpolation," or "a comparatively late production."[5]

Adam Clarke wrote concerning these seven verses, "The words of this song contain a glorious prediction of Messiah's kingdom and conquests, in highly poetic language."[6] C. F. Keil likewise viewed this passage as absolutely Messianic, as elaborated in the notes below. We shall base our comments on the KJV rendition as far more trustworthy than the RSV in this particular passage.

5

"Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel said, The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue." (2 Samuel 23:1-2)

"The introduction to this prophetic announcement (2 Samuel 23:1), both in form and substance, rests upon the last sayings of Balaam concerning the future history of Israel (Numbers 24:3,15); and this indicates that David's prophetic utterance here is intended as a further expansion of Balaam's prophecy of the Star out of Jacob and the Scepter out of Israel."[7]

"2 Samuel 23:2 here carries the divine seal of all that David has sung and prophesied in the Psalms, regarding the eternal dominion of his seed, on the strength of the divine promise which he received through the prophet Nathan, that his throne should be established forever (2 Samuel 7). These words here are not merely a lyrical expansion of that promise, but a prophetic declaration by David concerning the true King of the kingdom of God."[8]

"The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spoke to me. He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass springeth out of the earth by clear shining after rain." (2 Samuel 23:3-4)

The meaning here is not absolutely certain because the injunction must be is supplied by the translators, not being in the sacred text. Leaving out the supplied words, which are merely a guess, we have the following:

"The God of Israel saith,

The Rock of Israel speaketh to me:

A Ruler over men, just,

A Ruler in the fear of God.

And as light of the morning, when the sun rises,

As morning without clouds:

From shining out of rain ... green out of the earth."

6

"Ruler over men" does not mean `among men,' but `over all men'. And just WHO is that Ruler? "According to the Chaldee version, he is the Messiah himself."[9]

"As the light in the morning when the sun rises, ..." (2 Samuel 23:4). Martin Luther explained this as meaning that, "In the times of the Messiah, it will be like the light of morning." The words remind us of the Messianic promise in Malachi 4:2, "But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings."

We have largely followed Keil's exegesis on these first four verses; but we prefer to stay with the KJV in 2 Samuel 23:5, as indicated above.

Another viewpoint concerning the meaning of this very difficult passage is that of Willis who wrote: "If David and his descendants rule justly and in the fear of God, God's everlasting covenant with him will continue (2 Samuel 23:3c-5); but, if they rule wickedly, they will be utterly consumed with fire."[10]

However, that everlasting covenant that God made with David concerning the bringing in of the Messiah to mankind through David's posterity, was not conditional nor was it premised upon the righteous rule of David's posterity; because, the following kings in David's dynasty were as wicked (generally) as any rulers who ever lived. God brought in the Messiah via David's descendants in spite of the wickedness of both the kings and the people.

Certainly David had failed in the realization of the better purposes of his heart. "So it was God's good pleasure that the covenant in spite of this personal failure remained firm and secure."[11]

Admittedly, this Messianic prophecy, if that is what it truly is, is not clear and unambiguous like many other prophetic promises pointing to the Christ; and perhaps we should explain that as due to the damaged nature of the sacred text at this place. Understanding the passage as a promise of Christ, as did many of the scholars in previous generations, is far more appealing to this writer than merely writing the passage off as untrustworthy.

Of course, that is exactly what Bennett did, calling it, "A false production, not produced by David at all."[12] However, in spite of the opinions of such critics, and in spite of the fact that some of the passage is uncertain, there are far more than sufficient grounds for hailing the passage as Messianic.

COKE, "2 Samuel 23:1. Now these be the last words, &c.— It is supposed that

7

these are called the last words of David, as being the last which he pronounced by the inspiration of the Spirit of God. Dr. Grey, who has taken great pains to explain this passage of Scripture, observes, that it is a point in which the learned seem now to be universally agreed, that this illustrious prophesy, introduced in so magnificent and awful a manner, is to be understood of Christ's spiritual kingdom, and his final triumph over the enemies of it. The beginning of its accomplishment may properly be dated from his entrance upon his mediatorial office; but when the time shall be of its perfect completion, is yet a secret in the hand of God. The royal Psalmist, immediately (as is probable) before his death, when the spirit of prophesy was most strongly upon him, as it had been upon Jacob and Moses in the like circumstances, being favoured by God with a clearer and more distinct revelation of this great and wonderful event, begins first with expressing the deep sense he had of the divine goodness in this gracious and comfortable communication to him, and of the certainty and powerfulness of the inspiration he was under. In the four first lines [see the following translation] this peculiar grace and favour is heightened from a consideration,—Of the person inspired; one whom, from obscure parentage and a low condition, God had exalted to be king over his chosen people, and made an instrument of establishing, or at least of considerably improving, the most delightful part of his religious worship. In the four next,—Of the author of the inspiration: the Lord Jehovah, the God and rock of Israel; whose powerful impulse is expressed by repetition of the words, He hath said, He hath spoken, and His word is upon my tongue. After this magnificent introduction, he breaks out into a kind of transport of joy and admiration at the prospect before him: 2 Samuel 23:3.

"The Just One ruleth over men!"

In the four following lines he describes the spiritual nature and glorious effects of this dominion; at line 14 his firm assurance of its perpetuity, and of the designation of it to a person of his own house and lineage; with a lively declaration of the delight and comfort which this assurance gave him, line 17. From hence to the conclusion, is a short but dreadful representation of the condition of the wicked, and of the everlasting vengeance which awaits them at that terrible day, when the wheat shall be gathered into the garner, and the chaff shall be burned with unquenchable fire. Dr. Grey observes further, that this beautiful piece of poetry consists of an agreeable mixture of iambics and trochaics, which he has reduced to metre, and given us the following translation of it:

Line 1. David the son of Jesse hath said, Even the man who was raised on high hath said, The anointed of the God of Jacob, And the sweet Psalmist of Israel.

5. The Spirit of the Lord hath spoken by me, And his word is upon my tongue. The God of Israel hath said, Even to me hath the rock of Israel spoken.

8

The Just One ruleth over* men! *or among 10. He ruleth in the fear of God!

As the light of the morning a sun shall rise, A morning without clouds for brightness, When the tender grass after rain springeth out of the earth.

For is not my house established with God? 15. Yea, he hath made an everlasting covenant with me, Ordered in all things, and preserved: Surely in him is all my salvation, and all my desire!

Doubtless the wicked shall not flourish: They are like thorns thrust away. 20. Which shall not be taken by the hand: But the man who shall lay hold of them, Shall be armed with iron, and the staff of a spear; And they shall be utterly burnt with fire.

The sweet Psalmist of Israel— This title seems most eminently to belong to David, as he was the person who had brought to perfection the music of the Jewish service; and this not only as he was the author of most of the Psalms, but as composer of the music they were set to; as prescribing to the performers their several parts; as having invented the instruments which accompanied them, and as bearing himself a part in the performance. Grey.

LANGE, "David’s Last Prophetic Words

2 Samuel 23:1-7

1Now [And] these be [are] the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said 2 The Spirit of the Lord [Jehovah] spake by me [or, into me], and his word was in [on] my tongue 3 The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in 4 the fear of God. And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even [om. even] a morning without clouds, as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain [when from shining after raining the herb springs from the earth]. 5Although my house be not so with God; [For is not my house so with God?] yet [for] he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure; for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow [for all my salvation and all my pleasure, shall it not prosper6(or, shall he not cause it to prosper)?]. But the sons of Belial shall be [And the wicked are] all of them as thorns thrust away, because they cannot be taken with hands [for they are not laid hold of with the hand]. 7But the man that shall [And if a man] touch them, must be [he is] fenced with iron and the staff of a spear, and they shall be utterly burned with fire in the same place.

9

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

These “last words of David” have not a merely lyrical (Ewald), but a lyrical-prophetical character. Their historical pre-supposition is the prophecy through Nathan, 2 Samuel 7. Their connection with the preceding Song of Solomon, chap22, is not indeed a chronological one, since there is no chronologically definite statement in either; but as both obviously belong (22by its content, 2 Samuel 23:1-7 by its title) to David’s last years, they cannot lie far apart in time, and both, partly by their retrospect of a long and eventful life that rose out of the depths to high honor, partly by their outlook into a still more glorious future, have the character of the solemn, grand final words of a king. For an inward connection of the contents of the two songs is clearly to be seen in the fact that the closing view of 2 Samuel22. (based on the prophecy of an everlasting house, 2 Samuel 7) traverses and controls this whole Song of Solomon, 2 Samuel 23:1-7, that the seed of the Anointed of the Lord ( 2 Samuel 22:51) is here individualized into a person, and the salvation there promised as an everlasting possession to the Anointed and his seed by God, is here more definitely announced as one proceeding from and secured by the messianic Ruler.—On the theocratic attitude in the biblical-theological content of this Song of Solomon, see further in the appropriate section [Historical and Theological].

For the exegesis compare the following literature: Luther on the last words of David, 2 Samuel 23:1-7, opp. Jen. VIII:137–152. Walch III:2790–2910. Erl. A. Bd37, p 1 sqq.—Pfeiffer, Dubia Vexata, pp398–401—Buddeus, Hist. Eccl. N. T. I, pp194–196.—Crusius, Hypomnemata II, pp219–224.—Joh. G. Trendelenburg, Comment, in noviss. verba David, Göttingen, 1779.—Herder, Vom Geist der ebr. Poesie, II:2, Leipz, 1825, p387 sqq, and Briefe das Studium der Theologie betreffend, I, p135.—Ewald, Die poet. Bücher des Alt. Bundes [Poetical Books of the Old Testament], I, pp99–102, and Hist. of Israel, III:268 (3ed.).—Vaihinger, Zur Erklärung des Liedes 2 Samuel 23:1-7, in the Stud, und Krit., 1843, pp 983 sqq.—Hengstenberg, Christology of the Old Testament, in loco.—Reinke, Beiträge zur Erklärung des Alt. Testament, IV, p455 sq. Fries, Die letzten Worte Davids 2 Samuel 23:1-7, Stud. u. Krit., 1857, pp645–689.—G. Baur, Gesch. der alt-test. Weissagung, I:387.—Tholuck, Die Propheten und ihre Weissagung, p166 sq.—H. Schultz, Bibl. Theol. des Alt Testament, I:463 sq. [Oehler, Theol. of the Old Testament, § 230.—Tr.].

2 Samuel 23:1. The superscription.—And these are the last words of David.—The Davidic origin of this Song of Solomon, affirmed by the superscription, is raised above all doubt by the archaic form of the introduction, the pregnant curtness of the expression, the characteristic peculiarity of the thoughts, the Davidic stamp borne by form and content, and the originality of the Messianic thought, as well as the direct reference of the latter to 2 Samuel7. “Only hyper-criticism could declare against the Davidic origin by first forming an arbitrary conception of David’s poetic style, and then rejecting this song for not coming up to that conception.—A poem that was composed later and put into the mouth of the royal singer would certainly betray its origin by a fuller and clearer

10

exposition of the idea of the Israelitish kingdom” (Baur, as above, p388). So H. Schultz, as above, 464. Though the song is by its superscription attached to 2 Samuel22, the opinion held by some (Mich, Dathe, Maurer), that the “last words” are only words later than the song in chap22, is untenable. Nor can the superscription refer to the following history of David, as given in the remaining part of “Samuel” and the beginning of 1 Kings (Paulus, exeg. krit. Abhandl., pp99–134). Further, it does not mean: the last prophetic word in the list of David’s prophetical utterances (Grot.), or the last psalm (Vatablus: “after he produced all his psalms”), or, his last will and testament, “though he said, did and suffered much afterwards” (Luther); but it is to be understood in the absolute sense: the last of all his words, which he spoke at the end of his life in his theocratic calling and royal consciousness, and in reference to the kingdom of God in Israel, “the last poetical flight that he ever took, perhaps shortly before his death, and which was specially noted down for the reason also that it was (from 2 Samuel 23:2) regarded as the utterance of a seer (נאם, Numbers 24:3-4; Numbers 24:15-16)” (Thenius).

Divine saying (נאם[FN1]) of David. The word always signifies a saying or oracular utterance based on immediate revelation or inspiration. It is the passive participle, = “the thing breathed in, inspired word,” and stands here with the Genitive of the human receiver, as in Numbers 24:3 sqq. (Balaam) and Proverbs 30:1 (Solomon),[FN2] while it is as a rule followed by “Jehovah” as the author of the inspiration. The following words of David are thereby announced to be a peculiarly prophetic declaration, which rests on an inspeaking of God by His Spirit into his soul. The introduction of the song corresponds in form and content with that of Balaam’s prophecy, Numbers 24:3. It begins with a simple personal designation, and then designates the qualities of this person that here come into consideration, and may serve to give the reasons for the expression “divine saying” (Hengst.) [As this expression is frequent in the prophetical writings (in Eng. A. V, rendered by “saith the Lord”) it is not improbable that the title is from the hand of a later prophetical editor.—Tr.]—The son of Jesse. “How humbly he proceeds, boasting not his circumcision, his holiness or his kingdom, not ashamed of his lowly stock, that he was a shepherd; for he will speak of other things that are so high that they need no nobility or holiness, and shall be hurt by no sorrow, neither by sin nor by death” (Luther).

And divine saying of the man who was raised up on high[FN3]—the contrast to his lowly origin, as in 2 Samuel 7:8, “with omission of those above whom he was raised, in order to express absolute superiority” (Hengst.). Tanchum: “Fixed on the plane of loftiness.” On this idea see 2 Samuel 22:44; 2 Samuel 22:48.—Next follows the unfolding of the content of this idea in two members: the Anointed of the God of Jacob, and the pleasant in the praise-songs of Israel [the sweet psalmist of Israel]. The first designates his high position not only in the theocratic royal dignity conferred on him by God, but also in his royal dominion as Anointed of the Lord as God’s representative and in God’s name over against the people, and “not merely as an individual, but also as representative of his race” (Hengst.). The second member characterizes David as the representative towards God of the people in their praise of the Lord for His mighty deeds.

11

“Pleasant (lovely) in the praise-songs of Israel.” The Adjective (נעים) does not mean “approved, well-pleasing,” as Fries takes it, explaining: “chosen to sing Israel’s songs of triumph,” which is contrary to the constant signification of the word; comp. Ew. § 288 c, 291 a. Nor is it: “beloved [popular] through the songs that Israel sings” (Mich.), or “kindly through songs” (Maurer). It is not an ordinary song that it is here named (זמיר), but a solemn, joyful song of praise, Job 35:10; Psalm 95:2; Psalm 119:54; Isaiah 24:16, and so in Exodus 15:2 (זמרה) and in the titles of the Psalm (מזמור).—As the “Anointed of the Lord” he is equipped with the Holy Spirit from above; as one that is “pleasant in Israel’s songs of praise” he likewise shows himself filled with the Lord’s Spirit. His high position consists on the one hand in the dignity of his royal office as God’s representative towards the people, and on the other hand in his priestly position, wherein as representative of the people towards God he guides their worship to the height of praise and prayer; and in so far as he is raised to and enabled for both positions by the invoking of the divine Spirit, he is also a prophetical king and singer of his people, and his word is now spoken as a “divine word.”

NISBET, "DAVID IN FOUR ASPECTS

‘The son of Jesse … the man who was raised upon high … the anointed of the God of Jacob … the sweet psalmist of Israel.’

2 Samuel 23:1

Thrown on the opening words of this chapter, we do well to give due weight to the fact that they are David’s dying utterances. How do men speak in that hour? Is the mind always clear and logical, or is the heart so busy and the memory so quickened that often order will be set aside before the rushing flood of tender and mighty thoughts that sweep onward to the verge of eternity? The thoughts of a dying man like David are indeed ‘long, long thoughts.’ Yet I think the key-note of this hymn is struck in the first verse. David, the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said ——. His autograph, with which David starts off, following so far the usual custom (Numbers 24:3-4), is four times repeated, only with different titles. It is David in four of his aspects, the man, the king, the inspired messenger, the psalmist. All that he has to say belongs to one of these four names of his. He seems to see himself, as he looks away from his deathbed, four times over.

I. David, the son of Jesse.—Intensely human, David was in no danger of forgetting his humble origin. He had none of that pitiful pride that ignores the lowly cradle in the splendour of the royal crown. When much else is forgotten, historians will remember how, at his inauguration as President, General Garfield stooped down to kiss his old mother. Voltaire says truly enough that whoever serves his country well has no need of ancestors, but perhaps the ancestors had a good deal to do with the loyal service. We must not forget that Ruth the Moabitess was one of the progenitors of David, the son of Jesse.

This reference to his birth may have suggested what David further said here as to his own descendants. The popular reading of the verse seems to be a mistaken one. The connection does not lead us to expect a tremulous note, and still less does the fact that here David was a prophet, knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the

12

fruit of his loins he would raise up Christ to sit on His throne. We shall probably come nearer to what he really did say if we read thus: For is not my house thus with God? For an eternal covenant hath He made for me, ordered in all things and secured: for all my salvation and all good pleasure shall He not cause it to spring forth? Connecting the sense with the preceding verse about the true ruler, David expressed his confidence that, because of God’s eternal covenant with him, such a ruler would arise out of his house.

II. The man who was raised up on high.—Realise literally this vivid expression by reading the last three verses of the 78th Psalm. Raised up to rule, that was the history of David. Now see how he paints the portrait of what a true sovereign must be. Six words only in the original, six vigorous touches, and the portrait lives before our eyes. He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. Here are two points, a righteous rule, controlled by piety. ‘Royalty without religion is but eminent dishonour.’ Such being the governor, then, see what his reign or his term of office will be. A cloudless morning following rain, the air washed to a crystal purity, and the tender grass springing out of the earth in response to the clear shining of the sun. The shepherd lad of Bethlehem saw the fields about his father’s farm once more, and the poet spoke through the lips of the king.

Then follow the shadows in this glowing picture. (vv. 6, 7.) The thorns grow apace amid the corn, and he who deals with them must arm himself with iron and a spear shaft, ‘an iron hook fastened to a long handle.’ Torn up in this way they shall be utterly burned with fire. Perhaps in this view of his enemies as sons of Belial, foes of God, men to be rooted up and cleared away, before prosperity can be looked for, we see an explanation of David’s last words to Solomon as to Joab and Shimei.

III. The anointed of the God of Jacob.—Thrice anointed by the hands of man David here speaks of the spiritual anointing, the unction from the Holy One, which made him prophet, psalmist, and king. Notice how assured he is that by him God has spoken. The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was in my tongue. Here he makes, in the plainest language, a claim to be inspired. Our Lord sets the seal of His approval upon the claim when He says, David in spirit calls Him Lord. We cannot dwell longer on this point, but there can be no doubt that here, on his deathbed, David’s language, as that of Jacob before him, ‘did attain to somewhat of prophetic strain.’

IV. Lastly, David speaks of himself as the sweet psalmist of Israel.—He was shepherd, sovereign, seer, and singer. Why did he put this title last? One sufficient answer is that his poetry was itself inspired. God spoke through these wonderful psalms. Another reason may be that after all it is by his psalms that David is remembered. The Temple, the dream of his life, the royal line on which his heart was fixed, these, in any literal sense, have ceased to be long ago. But David, the sweet psalmist of Israel, is immortal in his works.

Through busiest street and loneliest glen

Are felt the flashes of his pen;

He rules mid-winter snows, and when

Bees fill their hives,

Deep in the general heart of men

13

His power survives.

In conclusion, we ask, now that so much is slipping away, what is left to David? We answer, his faith. Faith in God’s choice of him, in God’s covenant with him, in God’s government, in God’s salvation in Christ—in one word, faith in God Himself.

(SECOND OUTLINE)

In David we have: (1) an example and (2) a warning.

I. The characteristic of David was loyalty to the Lord his God, loyalty to the King of kings.—Loyalty is love evinced towards a superior, love which induces us to do all that in us lies, as circumstances from time to time admit, in small things or in great, to promote the glory of Him whose servants and subjects we are, and to advance the interests of His kingdom. We are to show our loyalty: (1) by from time to time renewing our vow as subjects and soldiers of the great Captain of our Salvation; (2) by seeking to enkindle in our souls, through prayer for the renovating influences of the Holy Ghost, love towards Him Who first loved us; (3) by looking out for opportunities of service.

II. The history of David is also a warning.—However excitable the devotional feelings may be, the man is not in a state of grace whose conduct is not conformable to the moral requirements of the Gospel. David fell; and if David had not repented, he would have perished everlastingly. Those whose hearts are fervent in adoration have need to take warning from David and watch as well as pray.

—Dean Hook.

Illustration

(1) ‘David was lifted into prominence in Israel as a man after God’s own heart, as a king who aimed to rule by translating the law of God into his daily conduct, instead of following the promptings of personal ambition, and making use of his position and opportunities for his own selfish gratification.’

(2) ‘Note the description of the human personality. First, the natural “David the son of Jesse,” like “Balaam the son of Beor” in the earlier oracle. The aged king looks back with adoring thankfulness to his early days and humble birth, as if he were saying, “Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should proclaim the coming King.” Then follow three clauses descriptive of what “the son of Jesse” had been made by the grace of God, in that he had been raised on high from his low condition of a shepherd boy, and anointed as ruler, not only by Samuel and the people, but by the God of their great ancestor, whose career had presented so many points of resemblance to his own—the God who still wrought among the nation which bore the patriarch’s name, as He had wrought of old; in that, besides his royalty, he had been taught to sing the sweet songs which already were the heritage of the nation. This last designation shows what David counted God’s chief gift to him—not his crown, but his harp. It further shows that he regarded his psalms as divinely inspired, and it proves that already they had become the property of the nation. This first verse heightens the importance of the subsequent oracle by dwelling on the claims of the recipient of the revelation to be heard and heeded.’

14

PINK

The passage for our present consideration (2 Sam. 23:1-7) presents somewhat of

a difficulty, especially to those who are not accustomed to the drawing of

distinctions and the taking of words relatively as well as absolutely. It opens by

telling us, "These be the last words of David," when in fact the close of the

patriarch’s life was not yet reached. It seems strange that we should read of this

here, when so much else is recorded in the chapters which follow, for we

naturally associate the "last words" of a person with his closing utterances as life

is expiring. Nor is the difficulty decreased when we note what vastly different

language is upon his lips in 1 Kings 2:9. Thomas Scott suggested that "perhaps

he repeated them in his dying moments as the expression of his faith and hope

and the source of his consolation." This may be the case, for quite likely such

sentiments were in his heart and mouth again and again during his declining

days.

However, it seems to us that 2 Samuel 23 refers to "the last words of David" not so much as those merely of a man, but rather as being a mouthpiece of God, thus forming a brief appendix to his Psalms. That our passage concerns the final inspired utterance of David appears to be quite plain from the specific terms used in it. First, he makes definite mention of himself as "the sweet Psalmist of Israel" (v. 1), which obviously refers to his official character as the Lord’s servant and seer. Second, he states "the Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His Word was in my tongue" (v. 2), which language could only be used of one appointed to formally deliver the oracles of God, of one so completely controlled by the Holy Spirit that his utterance was a divine revelation. Third, what he said in verses 3 and 4 looked beyond himself, being a prophetic announcement concerning the antitypical ‘Ruler"—proof that he was "moved by the Holy Spirit." Further, there is nothing in the chapters following which indicate David was giving forth a formal utterance by divine revelation.

There is still another distinction which may be drawn, that clears away any remaining difficulty from our passage. Not only are we to distinguish between David’s utterances as a man and as the mouthpiece of Jehovah, but also between his acts and words looked at historically and considered typically. In the course of this lengthy series of chapters we have pointed out again and again that in many (though by no means in all) of his experiences David is to be viewed representatively, as treading the same path and encountering the temptations and trials common to all the saints as they pass through this wilderness of sin. 1 Kings 1 gives us the historical close of the patriarch’s life, the last utterance of the aged king being "but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood." "Blood" is the final word on the lips of the dying warrior, a "man of war" from his youth, as Philistine enemies and Amalekite foes could testify.

But in 2 Samuel 23 we are permitted to gaze upon the other side of the picture, a most blessed and refreshing one. Here, the Spirit of God brings before us not "the man of war" (1 Sam. 16:18), but "the man after God’s own heart," the one who had found

15

favor in His eyes and had been loved with an everlasting love, and thus the representative of His chosen people. Here we listen to the holy breathings of the saint, and the scene becomes to us a "gate of heaven." As the believer draws near the end of his wilderness journey, like David, he reviews the Lord’s goodness, dwells upon the amazing grace which lifted him from the dunghill and made him to sit in the heavenlies in Christ (v. 1), and while he laments the spiritual condition of some near and dear to him and his own failure to grow in grace as he ought, yet he found unspeakable comfort in the fact that God had made with him an everlasting covenant.

"Now these be the last words of David" (2 Sam. 23:1). Rightly did Matthew Henry point out that "When we find death approaching, we should endeavour both to honour Cod and to edify those about us with our last words. Let those who have had long experience of God’s goodness and the peacefulness of wisdom’s ways, when they come to finish their course, leave a record of that experience and bear their testimony to the truth of the promise." It is not all who are granted a clear token of their approaching dissolution or given a season of consciousness, so that they may clearly avow their faith and hope; but when such is afforded, their duty and privilege is plain. David thus acquitted himself to the glory of God and the comfort of His people, and everything else being equal, so should we.

"David the son of Jesse, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said" (v. 1). The Hebrew word for "said" (twice used in this verse) signifies to speak with assurance and authority, thus confirming what we have pointed out above concerning the divine character of this utterance. David described himself, first, by the lowliness of his origin—"the son of Jesse," unknown amongst those arrayed in purple and fine linen. The stock from which he came was indeed an humble one, for when it was asked in Saul’s court "whose son is he?" the answer was returned "O king, I cannot tell" (1 Sam. 17:55); and so David had to answer for himself, "I am the son of thy servant Jesse, the Bethlehemite"—a small and despised house, and he the least in that house. Typically speaking, this is the believer owning his humble origin, looking back to the hole of the pit from which he was digged.

"And the man that was raised up on high": here he makes mention, secondly, of the dignity of his elevation. Though of such mean parentage, from one of the humblest of Saul’s subjects, yet he found favor in the sight of the Lord, being exalted to the throne and made ruler over all Israel. The nearer the believer approaches the close of his life, the more is his heart made to wonder at the sovereign grace of God in laying hold of one so utterly unworthy and raising him to a position of dignity and honor above that occupied by the holy angels. Third, David described himself as "the anointed of God’: as such he was again the typical believer, for of Christians it is written, "Now He which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God" (2 Cor. 1:21). Finally, "and the sweet psalmist of Israel": that of course refers to his official character, and yet this too is representative: though he composed the Psalms, they are for our use (James 5:13).

"The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and His word was in my tongue" (v. 2). Though it be useless for us to attempt any explanation of the rationale of divine inspiration, yet this is one of many statements found in Holy Writ which serves to define its nature and extent. When we come face to face with the conjunction of the divine and the human, we confront that which transcends the grasp of the finite mind; nevertheless

16

by the aid of what is revealed we may make certain postulates, so as to guard against terror at either extreme. The Scriptures are indeed the very Word of God, inerrant and imperishable, yet the instrumentality of the creature was employed in the communication and compilation of them. The mouth uttering it was human, but the message was divine; the voice was that of man, but the actual words those of God Himself.

"Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Pet. 1:21). those holy men were the actual mouthpieces of the Almighty: their utterances were so absolutely controlled by Him that what they said and wrote was a perfect expression of His mind and will. It is not simply that their minds were elevated or their spirits sublimated, but that their very tongues were regulated. It was not merely that their wills received a supernatural impulse or that their minds were divinely illuminated, but the very words of their message was conveyed to them. Nothing less than this can be gathered from the verse before us: when David affirmed God’s Word was "in his tongue," far more is denoted than that a concept was conveyed to his mind and he felt free to express it in his own language. Nothing less than their verbal inspiration is predicated of the Scriptures themselves—compare 1 Corinthians 2:13.

"The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God" (v. 3). The older writers saw in these verses, and we believe rightly so, a reference to the blessed Trinity. First, in verse 2 David affirmed "The Spirit of the Lord spake by me," and that a divine person rather than a spiritual inflation was denoted is plain from "and His word was in my tongue." Second, "the God of Israel said": that is, God the Father spake, as a reference to Hebrews 1:1 and 2 makes clear. Third, "the Rock of Israel spake to David" alludes to the Son, in His mediatorial capacity, of whom it was predicted, "And a man shall be as a hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land" (Isa. 32:2). Though a fuller and brighter manifestation of the Godhead has been made under Christianity, nevertheless the Tri-unity of God was definitely revealed in the Old Testament Scriptures.

There is a distinction to be drawn between what is recorded in the verse preceding and in verse 3: there it was "the Spirit of the Lord spake by me," here "spake to me"—that relates to what he was moved to record by divine inspiration (principally in the Psalms), this a more personal message for himself and family. "Let ministers observe that those by whom God speaks to others are concerned to hear and heed what the Spirit speaks to themselves. They whose office it is to teach others their duty, must be sure to learn and do their own" (Matthew Henry). Particularly must due attention be paid unto these two things: "He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God." The immediate reference is to civic leaders, hut the principle applies strictly to ecclesiastical ones too: impartiality and righteousness ought ever to characterize both magistrate and minister alike, while the office of each is to be discharged in the awe of Him to whom an account will yet have to be rendered.

"And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain" (v. 4). Here is the blessing and prosperity assured to those who faithfully discharge their obligations, keeping both tables of the Law. "Light is sweet and pleasant, and he that does his duty shall have the comfort of it; his rejoicing will be the testimony of his conscience. Light is bright, and a good prince (or minister) is

17

illustrious; his justice and piety will be his honor. Light is a blessing, nor are there greater and more extensive blessings to the public than princes that rule in the fear of God. It is like ‘the light of the morning,’ which is most welcome after darkness of the night; so was David’s government after Saul’s. It is likewise compared to the tender grass, which the earth produces for the service of men; it brings with it a harvest of blessings" (Matthew Henry).

Verses 3 and 4 can also be rightly regarded as a Messianic prophecy, for the Hebrew may be rendered "There shall be a Ruler over men which is just, ruling in the fear of God." The qualities essential in the one who is to rule for God’s glory and His people’s good, are righteousness and dependence—found alone in their perfection in that blessed One who came not to do His own will, but the will of Him who sent Him. Saul wielded the power for himself; David had to hang his head and own "my house be not so with God" (v. 5); which requires us to turn to Christ. He orders the affairs of the Father’s kingdom according to the divine will. He is "as the light of the morning" because "the Light of the world," and "as the tender grass’ because He is "the Branch of the Lord" and the Fruit of the earth (Isa. 4:2).

"Although my house be not so with God" (v. 5). Here again the historical merges into the typical. After the prophetic fore-view just granted him, David turned his reflections upon himself and his own house, and sorrowed over the state of the same. "By his own misconduct, his family was much less religious and prosperous than it might have been expected, and both he and Israel had suffered many things in consequence. Several grievous and scandalous events had occurred: matters were not yet as he could wish, and he seems to have had his fears concerning his descendants, who should succeed him in the kingdom" (Thomas Scott). Grief, then, was mingled with his joy, and dismal forebodings cast a dark shadow over his lot.

As the believer nears the end of his course, he not only meditates upon the lowliness of his original estate and then the elevated position to which sovereign grace has lifted him, but he also reviews his follies, bemoans his failures, and sorrows over the wretched returns he has made unto God’s goodness. This is the common experience of the pious: as they journey through this wilderness they are sorely tried and exercised, pass through deep waters, experience many sharp conflicts, and are often at a loss to maintain their faith.

Favour’d saints of God,His messengers and sears,Thy narrow path have trod,

‘Mid sins, and doubts, and fears.

And at the end they generally have to mourn over the graceless condition of some that are nearest and dearest to them, and exclaim, "Although my house be not so with God."

"Yet He hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure" (v. 5). Blessed antithesis. The opening "yet" is placed over against the "although" at the beginning of the previous clause: it is the faithfulness of God set in delightful contrast from David’s failures. It illustrates most solemnly the awe-inspiring sovereignty of God: Divine justice had been meted out to his foes, divine grace had dealt with himself. At least one of his children had evidenced himself to be among the reprobate, but God had entered into an eternal compact of peace with the father. Here was indeed sweet consolation for his poor heart. The allusion is to that covenant of

18

grace which God made with all His people in Christ before the foundation of the world. That covenant is from everlasting in its contrivance, and to everlasting in its consequences.

That everlasting covenant is so "ordered" as to promote the glory of God, the honor of the Mediator, and the holiness and blessing of His people. It is "sure" because its promises are those of Him who cannot lie, because full provision is made in it for all the failures of believers, and because its administration is in the hands of Christ. "For this is all my salvation." David rightly traced his salvation back to "the everlasting covenant": alas that so many today are ignorant of this inexhaustible well of comfort. It is not enough that we go back to the hour when we first believed, nor even to the Cross where the Saviour paid the price of our redemption; to the everlasting covenant we must look, and see there God graciously planning to give Christ to die for His people and impart the Spirit to them for quickening and the communicating of faith. This is "all our salvation" for it entirely suffices, containing as it does a draft of all the salvation-acts of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

In consequence of the nature, fullness and sufficiency of the everlasting covenant, it must be "all my desire": that is, obtaining by the Spirit’s help an assurance of my personal interest in its grand promises. "Although He make it not to grow." First, with reference to his house: "in number, in power; it is God that makes families to grow, or not to grow (Ps. 107:41). Good men have often the melancholy prospect of a declining family, David’s house was typical of the Church of Christ. "Suppose this be not so with God as we could wish: suppose it be diminished, distressed, disgraced, and weakened by errors and corruptions, yea, almost extinct, yet God has made a covenant with the church’s Head, that He will preserve to Him a seed: this our Saviour comforted Himself with in His sufferings: Isaiah 53:10, 12" (Matthew Henry). Second, with reference to himself: he had received the grace of the covenant, but it had not flourished in him as could be desired—his own neglect being the criminal cause.

David concluded (vv. 6 and 7) with a most solemn reference to the awful fate awaiting the reprobate. Destitute of faith, self-willed, unconcerned about God’s glory, despising and ill-treating His servants, righteous retribution shall surely fall upon them. "As thorns thrust away" is a figure of their rejection by God; ultimately they shall be "utterly burnt with fire." It was a prediction of the eternal undoing of all the implacable enemies of Christ’s kingdom.

PINK

The last thirty-two verses of 2 Samuel 23 have received comparatively scant

attention from those who are accustomed to read the Scriptures, and even most

of the commentators are nearly silent upon them. Probably the average Christian

finds it somewhat difficult to glean much from them which he feels is really

profitable to his soul. A number of men are enumerated—some of them

mentioned in earlier chapters, but the great majority otherwise quite unknown

to us—and one or two of their deeds are described; and then the second half of

our chapter is taken up with a long list of names, over which most people are

19

inclined to skip. Nevertheless, these very verses are included in that divine

declaration, "Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our

learning" (Rom. 15:4); and it is therefore to the dishonor of God and to our own

real loss if we ignore this passage.

There is nothing meaningless in any section of Holy Writ: every part thereof is "profitable" for us (2 Tim. 3:16, 17). Let us therefore settle it at the outset that this passage contains valuable instruction for us today, important lessons which we do well to take to heart. Let us, then, humbly bow before God and beg Him to open our eyes, that we may behold "wondrous things" in this part of His Law. Let us gird up the loins of our minds, and seek to reverently ponder and spiritually meditate upon its contents. Let us bear in mind the law of the context, and endeavor to ascertain the relation of this passage to the verses immediately preceding. Let us duly take note of how these "mighty men of David" are classified, and try to discover what is suggested thereby. Let us look beyond the historical and trace out what is typical, at the same time setting bounds to our imagination and being regulated by the analogy of faith.

Before entering into detail, let us point out some of the general lessons inculcated—suggested, in part by the brief notes of Matthew Henry. First, the catalogue which is here given us of the names, devotion and valor of the king’s soldiers is recorded for the honor of David himself, who trained them in their military arts and exercises, and who set before them an example of piety and courage. It enhances the reputation of, as well as being an advantage, when a prince is attended and served by such men as are here described. So it will be in the Day to come. When the books are opened before an assembled universe and the fidelity and courage of God’s ministers is proclaimed, it will be principally for the glory of their Captain, whom they served and whose fame they sought to spread, and by whose Spirit they were energized and enabled. Whatever crowns His servants and saints receive from God, they will be laid at the feet of the Lamb, who alone is worthy.

Second, this inspired record is made for the honor of those worthies themselves. They were instrumental in bringing David to the crown, of settling and protecting him in the throne, and of enlarging his conquests; and therefore the Spirit has not overlooked them. In like manner, the faithful ministers of God are instrumental in establishing, safeguarding and extending the kingdom of Christ in the world, and therefore are they to be esteemed highly for their works’ sake, as the Word of God expressly enjoins. Not that they desire the praise of men, but "honor to whom honor is due" is a precept which God requires His people to ever observe. Not only are the valorous soldiers of Christ to be venerated by those of their own day and generation, but posterity is to hold them in high regard: "The memory of the just is blessed." In the Day to come each of them shall "have praise of God" (1 Cor. 4:5).

Third, to excite those who come after them to a generous emulation. That which was praiseworthy in the sires should be practiced by their children. If God is pleased hereby to express His approbation of the loyalty and love shown unto David by his officers, we may be sure that He is pleased now with those who strengthen the hands of His ministers, be they in the civil or the ecclesiastical realm. Those alive today should be inspired and encouraged by the noble deeds of heroes of the past. But to raise the thought to a higher level: if those men held David in such great esteem that they hesitated not to hazard their lives for his sake, how infinitely more worthy is the

20

antitypical David of the most self-denying sacrifices and devotion from His servants and followers! Alas, how sadly they put most of us to shame.

Fourth, to show how much genuine religion contributes to the inspiring men with true courage. David, both by his Psalms, and by his offerings for the service of the temple, greatly promoted piety among the grandees of the kingdom (see 1 Chron. 29:6), and when they became famous for piety, they became famous for bravery. Yes, there is an inseparable connection between the two things, as Acts 4:13 so strikingly exemplifies: even the enemies of the apostles "took knowledge of them that they had been with Jesus" when they "saw their boldness." He who truly fears God, fears not man. It is written, "The wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion" (Prov. 28:1). History, both sacred and secular, abounds in examples of how pious leaders imbued their men with courage: Abraham, Joshua, Cromwell, being cases in point. From the record of their exploits courage should be inspired in us.

Let us now inquire, What is the connection between our present portion and the one preceding it? This is a principle which should never be neglected, for the ascertaining of the relation of one passage to another often throws light upon its typical scope, as well as supplies a valuable key to its interpretation. Such is the case here. The first seven verses of 2 Samuel 23 are concerned with "the last words of David," and what follows is virtually an honor role of those who achieved fame in his service. What a blessed foreshadowment of that which will occur when the earthly kingdom of the antitypical David comes to an end. Then shall His servants receive their rewards, for the righteous Judge will then distribute the crowns of "life" (Rev. 2:10), of "righteousness" (2 Tim. 4:8), and of "glory" (1 Peter 5:4). Then shall He pronounce His "well done thou good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy Lord." Let therefore those now engaged in fighting the Lord’s battles be faithful, diligent and valorous, assured that in due course they will be richly compensated.

"These be the names of the mighty men whom David had: The Tachmonite that sat in the seat, chief among the captains; the same was Adino the Eznite: he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time." (2 Sam. 23:8). When God calls a man to perform some special service in the interests of His kingdom and people, He also graciously raises up for him those who support his cause and strengthen his hands by using their influence on his behalf. Some of those helpers obtain the eye of the public, while others of them are far more in the background; but at the end each shall receive due recognition and proportionate honor. It was so here. David could never have won the victories he did, unless a kind Providence had supplied him with loyal and courageous officers. Nor had men like Luther and Cromwell performed such exploits unless supported by less conspicuous souls. Thus it has ever been, and still is. Even such a trivial work as the ministry of this magazine is only made possible by the cooperation of its readers.

The first one mentioned of David’s mighty men is Adino the Eznite. He is described as "The Tachmonite that sat in the seat, chief among the captains," by which we understand that he presided over the counsels of war, being the king’s chief military adviser. In addition to his wisdom, he was also endowed with extraordinary strength and valor, for it is here stated that he "lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time." His case seems to have been one similar to that of Samson’s—a man endued with supernatural strength. Typically, he reminds us of Paul, the chief of the apostles, who was not only enriched with unusual spiritual wisdom, but was

21

mightier than any other in the pulling down of the strongholds of Satan; but whereas the one was famous for the taking of life, the other was instrumental in the communicating of life.

"And after him was Eleazar the son of Dodo the Ahohite, one of the three mighty men with David, when they defied the Philistines that were there gathered together to battle, and the men of Israel were gone away (v. 9). Here is the second of David’s worthies, one who acquitted himself courageously in an hour of urgent need. Nothing is said of him elsewhere, save in what some term "the parallel passage" of 1 Chronicles 11. This son of Dodo was one of the heroic triumvirate that enabled their royal master successfully to defy the assembled Philistines, and that at a time when, for some reason or other, the king’s army was "gone away." Eleazar refused to flee before the massed forces of the enemy, and he not only nobly stood his ground, but took the offensive, and with his confidence in the living God fell upon and slew hundreds of them.

The Spirit has placed special emphasis upon the noteworthiness of Eleazar’s prowess by informing us it was exercised on an occasion when "the men of Israel had gone back." That is the time for true courage to be manifested. When through unbelief, lack of zeal, or the fear of man, the rank and file of professing Christians are giving way before the forces of evil, then is the opportunity for those who know and trust the Lord to be strong and do exploits. It does not require so much courage to engage the enemy when all our fellow-soldiers are enthusiastically advancing against them, but it takes considerable grit and boldness to attack an organized and powerful foe when almost all of our companions have lost heart and turned tail.

God esteems fidelity and holy zeal far more highly in a season of declension and apostasy than He does in a time of revival. A crisis not only tests, but reveals a man, as a heavy storm will make evident the trustworthiness or weaknesses of a ship. What is here recorded to the lasting honor of Eleazar makes us think of the beloved Paul. Again and again he stood almost alone, yet he never made the defection of others an excuse for the abating of his own efforts. On one occasion he had to lament, "This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me" (2 Tim. 1:15). Later, in the same epistle he wrote, "At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge. Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me" (4:16, 17). Let the servants of God today take heart from these blessed examples.

"He arose, and smote the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand clave unto the sword" (v. 10). Let it be duly noted that Eleazar did not stop when his work was half done, but went on prosecuting the same as long as he had any strength remaining. "Thus, in the service of God, we should keep up the willingness and resolution of the spirit, notwithstanding the weakness and weariness of the flesh; faint, yet pursuing (Judges 8:4); the hand weary, yet not quitting the sword" (Matthew Henry). Alas, in this age of ease and flabbiness, how readily we become discouraged and how quickly we give in to difficulties! O to heed that emphatic call "Be not weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not" (Col. 6:9). Such incidents as these are recorded not only for our information but also for our inspiration, that we should emulate their noble examples; otherwise they will put us to shame in the Day to come.

"And the Lord wrought a great victory that day." It is the daring of faith which He ever delights to honor, as He had so signally evidenced a few years previously, when

22

David as a stripling had challenged and overcome the mighty Goliath. It is the perseverance of faith which the Lord always rewards, as was strikingly demonstrated after Israel had marched around the walls of Jericho thirteen times. No doubt God struck this army of the Philistines with a terror as great as the courage with which He had endowed this hero. It is ever God’s way to work at both ends of the line: if He raises up a sower He also prepares the soil; if He inspires a servant with courage He puts fear into the hearts of those who oppose him. Observe how the glory of the victory is again ascribed to the Lord, and carefully compare Acts 14:27 and 21:19. "And the people returned after him only to spoil" (v. 10). How like human nature was this: they returned when there was "spoil" to be had!

"And after him was Shammah the son of Agee the Hararite. And the Philistines were gathered together into a troop, where was a piece of ground full of lentiles: and the people fled from the Philistines" (v. 11). This incident concerned an armed force of Israel’s enemies who were out foraging, and who struck such terror into the hearts of the countryside that the peaceful locals fled. But there was one who refused to yield unto the marauders, determined to defend the food supply of his people, and under God, he completely routed them. Here is another courageous man of whom we know nothing save for this brief reference: what a hint it furnishes that in the Day to come many a one will then have honor from God who received scant notice among his fellows. No matter how obscure the individual, or how inconspicuous his sphere of labor, nothing that is done in faith, no service performed for the good of His people, is forgotten by God. Surely this is one of the lessons written plain across this simple but striking narrative.

"But he stood in the midst of the ground, and defended it, and slew the Philistines: and the Lord wrought a great victory" (v. 12). How this reminds us of what is recorded in Acts 14:3: "Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the Word of His grace and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands." Then let us heed that divine injunction, "Be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil" (Eph. 6:10, 11). Let us duly observe how, once more, the victory is ascribed to the Lord. No matter how great the ability and courage of the instruments, all praise for the achievement must be rendered alone unto God. "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches" (Jer. 9:23), for what has he that he did not first receive from above! How needful is this exhortation in such a day as ours, when pride is so much in the saddle and men’s persons are "had in admiration." God is jealous of His glory and will not share it with the creature, and His Spirit is quenched if we do so.

PINK

2 Samuel 23 supplies a vivid illustration of the great variety of spiritual gifts and

graces which God bestows upon His people in general and on His ministries in

particular. All are not called upon to engage in the same specific form of service,

and therefore all are not alike qualified. We see this principle exemplified in the

natural sphere. Some have a sceptical aptitude for certain avocations, while

23

others are fitted for entirely different ones: those who find it easy to work a

typewriter or keep books, would be quite out of their element it they attempted

to do the work of a farmer or carpenter. So it is in the spiritual realm: one is

called to some particular sphere and is endowed accordingly, while another is

appointed to a different junction and is suitably equipped for it; and naught but

confusion would follow if the latter attempted to discharge the duties of the

former.

"Every man hath his proper gift of God: one after this manner, and another after that" (1 Cor. 7:7), but whether our talents be more or fewer it is our duty to use and improve the same for the good of our generation. "But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will" (1 Cor. 12:11), and therefore we must be content with the gifts and position which God has allotted us, neither despising those below nor envying those above us. There are various degrees of usefulness and eminence among Christians, just as there were different grades of honor among those worthies of David. Of one of them we read, "Therefore he was their captain, howbeit he attained not unto the first three" (v. 19), and later in the chapter we are given a list of another thirty who occupied a yet lower rank. First in eminence were the apostles; next to them were the Reformers; and below them are those who have followed during the last four centuries.

Throughout the long and checkered career of David there were two things to cheer and comfort him: the unchanging faithfulness of God and the loving devotedness of his servants. Another has pointed out that at the close of Paul’s career he had the same spring of solace to draw from. "In his second epistle to Timothy he glances at the condition of things around him: he sees the ‘great house,’ which assuredly was not so with God as He required it; he sees all that were in Asia turned away from him; he sees Hymenaeus and Philetus teaching false doctrine, and overthrowing the faith of some; he sees Alexander the coppersmith doing much mischief; he sees many with itching ears, heaping to themselves teachers, and turning away from the truth to fables; he sees the perilous times setting in with fearful rapidity; in a word, he sees the whole fabric, humanly speaking, going to pieces; but he, like David, resting in the assurance that the foundation of God standeth sure, and he was also cheered by the individual devotedness of some mighty man or other, who, by the grace of God, was standing faithful amid the wreck. He remembered the faith of a Timothy, the love of an Onesiphorus; and moreover, he was cheered by the fact there would be a company of faithful men in the darkest times who would call on the Lord out of a pure heart."

In the preceding chapter we called attention to the logical connection of 2 Samuel 23 with the previous chapter, where "the last words of David" (his final inspired and official message) are recorded. We may also notice that our present passage comes immediately after David’s reference to the "Everlasting Covenant" which Jehovah had made with him (v. 5). How significant is this, and what blessed instruction it conveys to us. The two things are intimately, yea inseparably connected: the eternal counsels of God’s grace and His providing us with all needed assistance while we are in a time state. In other words, that "Everlasting Covenant" which God made, with His elect in the person of their Head guarantees the supply of their every need in this world, the interposition of the Lord on their behalf wherever required, and the raising up of

24

faithful friends to help in each hour of emergency. Thus David found it, as the verses before us amply demonstrate.

If the Spirit of God has been pleased to chronicle some of the bravest exploits of David himself, He has not been altogether silent upon the heroic achievements of those who stood loyally by him when he was menaced by his numerous foes. This too adumbrated something yet more blessed in connection with the antitypical David and His officers. Some of their deeds of devotion may not be known among men, or at most little valued by them, but they are recognized and recorded by God, and will yet be publicly proclaimed from His throne. We should have known nothing of these deeds of David’s worthies had not the Spirit here described them. So, many a heart which now throbs with affection for Christ of which the world is not cognizant, and many a hand which is stretched forth in service to Him which is unnoticed by the churches, will not pass unheeded in the Day to come.

In our last chapter we dwelt upon the exploits of the first triumvirate of David’s mighty men—Adino, Eleazar and Shammah (vv. 8-12): our present passage opens with a most touching incident which records (we believe) another heroic enterprise in which the same three men acted together. We are told "And three of the thirty chiefs went down, and came to David in the harvest time unto the cave of Adullam: and the troop of the Philistines pitched in the valley of Rephaim" (v. 13). This most probably takes us back to what is narrated in 1 Samuel 22, when the uncrowned son of Jesse was a fugitive from the murderous designs of King Saul. It was not, then, in the hour of his popularity and power that these three officers betook themselves unto David, but in the time of his humiliation and weakness, while taking refuge in a cave, that they espoused his cause. No fair weather friends were these, but unselfish supporters.

"And David was then in a hold, and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem" (v. 14). How strangely varied is the lot of those who are beloved of God! What ups and downs in their experience and circumstances! Bethlehem was the place where David was born—presaging the incarnation of his Son and Lord; but now it was occupied by the enemies of God and His people: how many a dwelling-place which once gave shelter to an eminent servant of God is now the abode of worldlings. From the fertility and peacefulness of Bethlehem David was forced to flee and seek refuge in a cave: then let us not be cast down if a lowly and uncongenial habitation be our portion. But David was not forgotten by the Lord, and He graciously moved the hearts of others to seek him out and proffer their loving service. Take heart, then, lonesome believer: if God does not raise up earthly friends for thee, He will doubly endear Himself to thine heart.

"And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate!" (v. 15). Some of the Puritans believed that David was not here expressing his desire for literal water, but rather for the Messiah Himself, who was to be born at Bethlehem. Though this does not appear to be borne out by what follows, yet it is surely significant that such excellent and desirable water was to be found there. Bethlehem means "the house of bread," and as the Lord Jesus declared, He is in His own blessed person both the Bread of Life and the Water of Life—the sustainer and refresher of the new man. Personally, we agree with Matthew Henry that what is recorded in this verse "seems to have been an instance of his weakness," when he was dissatisfied with what divine providence had supplied, giving way to inordinate affection and yielding to the desires of mere nature.

25

It was summer time, when the weather was hot and trying, and David was thirsty. Perhaps good water was scarce at Adullam, and therefore David earnestly cried, "Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem" True, it is natural to hanker after those things which Providence withholds, and such hankering is often yielded to even by godly men in an unguarded hour, which leads to various snares and evils. "David strangely indulged a humour which he could give no reason for. It is folly to entertain such fancies, and greater folly to insist upon the gratification of them. "We ought to check our affections when they go out inordinately toward those things which are more pleasant and grateful than others" (Matthew Henry). The best way, and perhaps the only one, of doing this is by heeding that injunction "giving thanks always for all things unto God" (Eph. 5:20), thereby evidencing we are content with such things as we have—instead of lusting after those we have not.

"And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David" (v. 16). What proof this gave of how highly these brave men valued their leader, and how ready they were to face the greatest of dangers in his service. It must be remembered that at this time David was uncrowned, a fugitive from Saul, and in no position to reward their valorous efforts on his behalf. Moreover, no command had been issued, no one in particular was commissioned to obtain the water from Bethlehem: it was enough for them that their beloved master desired it. How little they feared the Philistines: so absorbed were they in seeking to please David, that terror of the enemy had no place in their hearts! Do they not put all of us to shame? Flow feeble in comparison is our devotedness to the antitypical David! How trifling the obstacles which confront us from the peril which menaced them.

"Nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord" (v. 16). Blessed is this, and a lovely sequel to what has just been before us. Those three men had spontaneously responded to the known wish of their leader, and, not counting their lives dear unto themselves, they had—whether by use of the sword or by strategy we are not told, but most likely the former—obtained and brought back to David the longed-for refreshment. Such devotion to his person and such daring on their part was not lost upon David, and being recovered from his carnal lapse and seeing things now with spiritual discernment, he deemed that water a sacrifice too costly for any but Jehovah Himself, and hence he would not suffer the sweet odor of it to be intercepted in its ascent to the throne of God.

"And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mighty men" (v. 17). This is ever one of the marks of a gracious man. When he is conscious of making a mistake or of committing folly, he does not feign ignorance or innocence, but acknowledges and seeks to correct the same. The outstanding characteristic of regeneration is that where this miracle of grace is wrought an honest heart is ever the evidence of the same. It is those who are under the full sway of Satan who are crafty, deceitful and serpentine in their ways. Those whom Christ saves He conforms unto His image, and He was without guile. David was now ashamed of his inordinate desire and rash wish, and regretted exposing his brave officers to such a peril on his behalf. This is another mark of the genuine child of God: he is not wholly wrapped up in himself.

Sin and self are synonymous terms, for as someone has quaintly pointed out the center

26

of Sin is "I," that is why when the Church confesses "all we like sheep have gone astray," she defines it by saying "we have turned every one to his own way." If sin and selfishness are synonymous, grace and unselfishness are inseparable, for when the love of God is shed abroad in the heart there is awakened a genuine concern for the good of our fellows, and therefore will the Christian seek to refrain from what would injure them. "Upon reflection and experience, a wise man will be ashamed of his folly, and will abstain not only from unlawful indulgences, but from those also which are inexpedient and might expose his brethren to temptation and danger" (Thomas Scott).

"And Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief among three. And he lifted up his spear against three hundred, and slew them, and had the name among three" (v. 18). We are not here informed when or where this extraordinary feat was accomplished, but from the analogy supplied by the other examples in this chapter, we know it was performed by divine enablement, for the public good, and in the service of David. It is solemn to note that Abishai’s more famous, and yet infamous brother, has no place in his role of honor, illustrating the solemn truth that if "the memory of the just is blessed" yet "the name of the wicked shall rot." "Was he not most honourable of three? therefore he was their captain: howbeit he attained not unto the first three" (v. 19). These degrees of eminence and esteem exemplify the fact that men are not designed to all occupy a common level: the theory of "socialism" receives no countenance from Scripture.

"And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a valiant man, of Kabzeel, who had done many acts, he slew two lionlike men of Moab" (v. 20). It is good to see the sons walking in the steps of their sires when a noble example has been set before them: God takes notice of the one as much as the other. Those men of Moab might be fierce and powerful, but nothing daunted, Benaiah went forth and slew them. This too is recorded for our encouragement: no matter how strong and furious be our lusts, in the strength of the Lord we must attack and mortify them. "He went down also and slew a lion in the midst of a pit in time of snow" (v. 20). Amid the frosts of winter our zeal is not to be relaxed. Nor must the soldiers of Christ expect to always have plain sailing: even when engaged in the best cause of all, formidable obstacles will be encountered, and the soldiers of Christ must learn to endure hardness and acquit themselves like men.

"And he slew an Egyptian, a goodly man: and the Egyptian had a spear in his hand; but he went down to him with a staff, and plucked the spear out of the Egyptian’s hand, and slew him with his own spear" (v. 21). If his slaying of the lion is a figure of the servant of Christ successfully resisting the devil (1 Peter 5:8), his vanquishing of this Egyptian (spoken of in 1 Chron. 11:23 as a "man of great stature") may well be regarded as a type of the minister of God overcoming the world, for in Scripture "Egypt" is ever a symbol of that system which is hostile to God and His people. And how is victory over the world obtained? We need go no farther than this verse to learn the secret: by maintaining our pilgrim character, for the "staff" is the emblem of the pilgrim. If the heart be fixed upon that fair Land to which we are journeying, then the shows of this "vanity fair" will possess no attraction for it. The world is overcome by "faith" (1 John 5:4): a faith which grasps the good of God’s promises enables us to reject the evils of this world.

"These things did Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and had the name among three mighty

27

men. He was more honourable than the thirty, but he attained not to the first three. And David set him over his guard" (vv. 22, 23). Once again we are reminded that there is a gradation among the creatures and servants of God: there is no such thing as equality even among the angels. How wrong it is, then, for any of us to be dissatisfied with the status and position which the sovereign will of God has assigned to us: let us rather seek grace from Him to faithfully discharge our duties, however exalted or lowly be our station in life. Our chapter ends with a list of thirty men who were in the third grade: the first being Asahel (v. 24) and the last Uriah (v. 39), the former being murdered by Joab and the latter being sent to his death by David—deliverance from one danger is no guarantee that we shall escape from another.

ROSSIER, "2 SAMUEL 22 — THE SONG OF DELIVERANCE

We have now reached David's final deliverance. All his enemies, of whom Saul was one (v. 1), have disappeared. This song which historically belongs at the beginning of 2 Samuel 7 is placed here because the last enemy of David and of his people has just been defeated (2 Sam. 21: 21) and from now on this hostile power will never again raise its head. Indeed, these words which we find again in Psalm 18 could not have been spoken on this occasion, for they mention a time when David was not under discipline but had by grace been preserved from falling amid his cruel enemy's pursuit. But even in these times of strength and holiness which had characterized the first period of his career David could never have applied all the verses of this psalm to himself, as we shall see. David was a prophet; his prophetic songs arise from his personal experiences, but they would not have been prophetic if they did not have Christ as their object. In his experiences David is a reflection of Christ, and this is an immense privilege; but this is only a feeble light, a small reproduction of the perfect Model.

This psalm here before us is divided into three parts.

The first part (vv. 1-19) celebrates deliverance from Saul's hand: “He delivered me from my strong enemy” (v. 17). This deliverance recalls that of Israel, saved from Pharaoh's pursuit, crossing the Red Sea: “The beds of the sea were seen, the foundations of the world were uncovered at the rebuke of Jehovah, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils. He reached forth from above, He took me, He drew me out of great waters” (vv. 15-16). However, this picture does not correspond exactly to David's deliverance or to Israel's deliverance out of Egypt. It treats of a time yet future and prophetic. It deals with the remnant's deliverance at the time of the end when God will intervene openly and visibly in their favor (vv. 8-15). They will be led to death's door, and then God will intervene in their favor and will scatter their enemies in an instant. Before this deliverance the remnant will learn that their Messiah, David's Son, passed through this anguish alone and bore it, thus associating Himself with the future distress of His people, in order that He might deliver them. David could only in feeble measure realize these words which make us think of the agony at Gethsemane: “The waves of death encompassed me, torrents of Belial made me afraid. The bands of Sheol surrounded me; the cords of death encountered me” (vv. 4-5).

The second part of the Psalm (vv. 19-30) is even more striking in this respect than the first. The reason for David's deliverance is that God takes pleasure in His anointed according to all the perfection of his character. Now, even before David's fall and how much less after that fall, David's character did not exactly correspond to these verses: “He brought me forth into a large place: He delivered me, because He delighted in me. Jehovah hath rewarded me according to my righteousness, according to the cleanness of my hands hath He recompensed me. For I have kept the ways of Jehovah, and have not wickedly departed from my God. For all His ordinances were before me, and His statutes, I did not depart from them, and I was upright before Him, and kept myself from mine iniquity. And Jehovah hath recompensed me according to my righteousness, according to my cleanness in His sight. With the gracious Thou dost show Thyself gracious; with the upright man Thou dost show Thyself upright; with the pure Thou dost show Thyself pure; and with the perverse Thou dost show Thyself contrary” (vv. 19-26). David is celebrating the perfection of Someone other than himself: “Jehovah hath recompensed Me according to My righteousness, according to My cleanness in His sight.” Christ alone could give

28

His Father a reason for loving Him and for saving Him — but His salvation has become His people's salvation (v. 27).

In the third part of the Psalm (vv. 31-51) David celebrates what God had done for him. God had answered him by delivering him “from the strivings of my people” (which corresponds to 2 Samuel 20 in David's history), by making him “head of the nations” whom he had subjugated (v. 43). The children of Ammon, the Philistines, the Syrians, and Edom had had to bow beneath his yoke. But how all this speaks to us of One who is greater than David! He comes forth from the trial to be acknowledged as King of Israel and Head of the nations. “Strangers come cringing unto [Him]” (v. 45) God avenges Him and brings the peoples under Him (v. 47). He lifts Him up above them that rose up against Him (v. 48; cf. Ps. 2: 2,6).

Nevertheless David could celebrate these things with a heart filled with thanksgiving. Grace rested on him at that time on account of the integrity and perfection of his conduct. He was at the end of his path of difficulties, and this path was the path of a walk with God. With a peaceful rejoicing heart he celebrated the deliverance that grace accorded his faithfulness. On David's side all is joy, liberty, power, and thanksgiving; on God's side all is favor and grace.

What will we find in the following chapter where it is a question of the king's responsibility?

WILLIAM TAYLER, "THE harp of David was his constant companion. When in his early days he followed the sheep upon the slopes of Bethlehem, he beguiled the weary hours with the music of its notes. At the court of Saul he charmed away the evil spirit from that monarch's breast by its soothing strains ; and in all the vicissitudes of his checkered life, his hand, re-sponsive to his heart, drew from his lyre appropriate music, while his voice accompanied its sounds in words which, even apart from the divine inspiration that pervaded them, " the world will not willingly let die." In the cave of Adul-lam, in the wilderness of Judah, at the court of Achish, and in the Valley of the Jordan, on that dismal day when he fled from his capital, before the rebellious Absalom, we have seen how he solaced himself with sacred song; and in the deeper darkness in which he was enveloped by his own shameful sin, he proved that the contrite heart, when swept by the fingers of Jehovah's love, gives forth ever the most thrilling tones.

Nor was it only in times of trial that the Psalmist struck his harp. His joys, as well as his sorrows, found utterance in song ; and when he brought up the ark to Jerusalem, or returned in triumph from some long campaign, he signalized the occasion by a gladsome ode of thanksgiving and praise. Hence we do not wonder that, when he had been delivered from all his enemies, and was enjoying a season of repose in the evening twilight of his life, he gave expression to his feel-ings in the words of this Psalm. His " May of life had fall-en now into the sere and yellow leaf." The snows of sev-enty winters had fallen on his head, but his heart was as fresh, his imagination as brilliant and his piety as fervent as ever; so, as he looked back on the way by which the Lord had led him, and recounted all the deliverances which God had wrought for him, he took his harp once more, and sang to its loved music this Psalm, which for faith, for fervor, for sublimity, and for devout thankfulness, is second to none of his productions.

We have not hitherto gone very minutely into any of his

29

Psalms, and have contented ourselves with indicating in a general way the historical occasions on which some of them were composed, and pointing out the new significance which they acquire when read in the light of the circumstances out of which they sprung ; but as the inspired chronicler has in-corporated this one in the narrative, and means us to regard it as David's "even- song," chanted by him on the retrospect of his life's changeful day, we may profitably spend a short time in a survey of its contents.

With a considerable number of minor variations, the ode before us is reproduced as the eighteenth in the book of Psalms, and it has been said by some that the one is an in-correct copy of the other. But to me it rather seems that in the book of Samuel we have it in the form in which at first the monarch sung it in his closet, as a personal outburst of gratitude to God ; while in the Psalter we have it revised and adapted to public worship, for the general use of the tribes, and so, appropriately addressed to the chief musician. This view is rendered more probable by the fact that we have other cases of a similar sort in the book of Psalms, as, for example, the i4th, the 53d, and the closing strain of the 4oth, which is nearly identical with the yoth. We believe, therefore, that for reasons which have not been explained, David prepared a twofold form of this magnificent produc-tion ; and so, treating the two as separate and independent, we content ourselves with noting the fact that there are vari-ations between them, without attempting either to point out, or to account for, each particular discrepancy.

The mention of Saul in the title does not indicate that the Psalm was composed in David's early life, but rather that, even though thirty years had gone since his persecu-tion by the son of Kish, the deliverances which he then ex-perienced had not faded from his memory, but still stood out before him as the greatest mercies which he had ever received. We are prone to forget past favors. The bene-factors of our youth are not always remembered in our after-years ; and in the crowd and conflict of events in our later history, we have too often little thought to spare, and few thanks to express, for our early mercies. We do not enough consider that, in mounting the ladder of life, it is often more difficult to set our foot on the first round than to take any single step thereafter ; and, therefore, that those who aided us in the beginning have given us by far the most effectual assistance. But it was not so with David, for as he sits here looking back on his career, his first conflicts seem still his greatest ; and much as he blessed God for after-kindness, he places high above all the other favors which he had re-ceived his deliverance out of the hand of Saul. Nor may we neglect to note that in all this David is but the repre-sentative of the believer in Jesus ; for, no matter how many or how great the mercies which he experiences, the first grand "crowning mercy "of salvation from the guilt and pol-lution of iniquity ever comes uppermost ; and to every song of praise which he sings he adds some such doxology as that of John : " Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father, to him be glory and dominion for

30

ever and ever. Amen."

MACLAREN, "THE DYING KING’S LAST VISION AND PSALM

2 Samuel 23:1 - 2 Samuel 23:7.

It was fitting that ‘the last words of David’ should be a prophecy of the true King, whom his own failures and sins, no less than his consecration and victories, had taught him to expect. His dying eyes see on the horizon of the far-off future the form of Him who is to be a just and perfect Ruler, before the brightness of whose presence and the refreshing of whose influence, verdure and beauty shall clothe the world. As the shades gather round the dying monarch, the radiant glory to come brightens. He departs in peace, having seen the salvation from afar, and stretched out longing hands of greeting toward it. Then his harp is silent, as if the rapture which thrilled the trembling strings had snapped them.

I. We have first a prelude extending to the middle of 2 Samuel 23:3. In it there is first a fourfold designation of the personality of the Psalmist-prophet, and then a fourfold designation of the divine oracle spoken through him. The word rendered in 2 Samuel 23:1 ‘saith’ is really a noun, and usually employed with ‘the Lord’ following, as in the familiar phrase ‘saith the Lord.’ It is used, as here, with the genitive of the human recipient, in Balaam’s prophecy, on which this is evidently modelled. It distinctly claims a divine source for the oracle following, and declares, at the outset, that these last words of David were really the faithful sayings of Jehovah. The human and divine elements are smelted together. Note the description of the human personality. First, the natural ‘David the son of Jesse,’ like ‘Balaam the son of Beor’ in the earlier oracle. The aged king looks back with adoring thankfulness to his early days and humble birth, as if he were saying, ‘Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should proclaim the coming King.’ Then follow three clauses descriptive of what ‘the son of Jesse’ had been made by the grace of God, in that he had been raised on high from his low condition of a shepherd boy, and anointed as ruler, not only by Samuel and the people, but by the God of their great ancestor, whose career had presented so many points of resemblance to his own, the God who still wrought among the nation which bore the patriarch’s name, as He had wrought of old; and that, besides his royalty, he had been taught to sing the sweet songs which already were the heritage of the nation. This last designation shows what David counted God’s chief gift to him,-not his crown, but his harp. It further shows that he regarded his psalms as divinely inspired, and it proves that already they had become the property of the nation. This first verse heightens the importance of the subsequent oracle by dwelling on the claims of the recipient of the revelation to be heard and heeded.

Similarly, the fourfold designation of the divine source has the same purpose, and corresponds with the four clauses of 2 Samuel 23:1, ‘The Spirit of the Lord spake in [or “into”] me.’ That gives the Psalmist’s consciousness that in his prophecy he was but the recipient of a message. It wonderfully describes the penetrating power of that inward voice which clearly came to him from without, and as clearly spoke to him within. Words could not more plainly declare the prophetic consciousness of the distinction between himself and the Voice which he heard in the depths of his spirit. It spoke in him before he spoke his lyric prophecy. ‘His word was upon my tongue.’ There we have the utterance succeeding the inward voice, and the guarantee that the Psalmist’s word was a true transcript of the inward voice. ‘The God of Israel said,’ and therefore Israel is concerned in the divine word, which is not of private reference, but meant for all. ‘The Rock of Israel spake,’ and therefore Israel may trust the Word, which rests on His immutable faithfulness and eternal being.

II. The divine oracle thus solemnly introduced and guaranteed must be worthy of such a prelude. Abruptly, and in clauses without verbs, the picture of the righteous Ruler is divinely flashed before the seer’s inward eye. The broken construction may perhaps indicate that he is describing what he beholds in vision. There is no need for any supplement such as ‘There shall be,’ which, however true in meaning, mars the vividness of the presentation of the Ruler to the prophet’s sight. David sees him painted on the else blank wall of the future. When and where the realisation may be he knows not. What are the majestic outlines? A universal sovereign over collective humanity, righteous and God-fearing. In the same manner as he described the vision of the King, David goes on, as a man on some height telling what he saw to the people below, and paints the blessed issues of the King’s coming.

It had been night before He came,-the night of ignorance, sorrow, and sin,-but His coming is like one of

31

these glorious Eastern sunrises without a cloud, when everything laughs in the early beams, and, with tropical swiftness, the tender herbage bursts from the ground, as born from the dazzling brightness and the fertilising rain. So all things shall rejoice in the reign of the King, and humanity be productive, under His glad and quickening influences, of growths of beauty and fruitfulness impossible to it without these.

The abrupt form of the prophecy has led some interpreters to construe it as, ‘When a king over men is righteous. . . then it is as a morning,’ etc. But surely such a platitude is not worthy of being David’s last word, nor did it need divine inspiration to disclose to him that a just king is a great blessing. The only worthy meaning is that which sees here, in words so solemnly marked as a special revelation closing the life of David, ‘the vision of the future and all the wonder that should be,’ when a real Person should thus reign over men. The explanation that we have here simply the ideal of the collective Davidic monarchy is a lame attempt to escape from the recognition of prophecy properly so called. It is the work of poetry to paint ideals, of prophecy to foretell, with God’s authority, their realisation. The picture here is too radiant to be realised in any mere human king, and, as a matter of fact, never was so in any of David’s successors, or in the whole of them put together. It either swings in vacuo, a dream unrealised, or it is a distinct prophecy from God of the reign of the coming Messiah, of whom David and all his sons, as anointed kings, were living prophecies. ‘The Messianic idea entered on a new stage of development with the monarchy, and that not as if the history stimulated men’s imaginations, but that God used the history as a means of further revelation by His prophetic Spirit.

III. The difficult 2 Samuel 23:5, whether its first and last clauses be taken interrogatively or negatively, in its central part bases the assurance of the coming of the king on God’s covenant [2 Samuel 7:1 - 2 Samuel 7:29], which is glorified as being everlasting, provided with all requisites for its realisation, and therefore ‘sure,’ or perhaps ‘preserved,’ as if guarded by God’s inviolable sanctity and faithfulness. The fulfilment of the dying saint’s hopes depends on God’s truth. Whatever sense might say, or doubt whisper, he silences them by gazing on that great Word. So we all have to do. If we found our hopes and forecasts on it, we can go down to the grave calmly, though they be not fulfilled, sure that ‘no good thing can fail us of all that He hath spoken.’ Living or dying, faith and hope must stay themselves on God’s word. Happy they whose closing eyes see the form of the King, and whose last thoughts are of God’s faithful promise! Happy they whose forecasts of the future, nearer or more remote, are shaped by His word! Happy they who, in the triumphant energy of such a faith, can with dying lips proclaim that His promises overlap, and contain, all their salvation and all their desire!

If we read the first and last clauses negatively, with Revised Version and others, they, as it were, surround the kernel of clear-eyed faith, in the middle of the verse, with a husk, not of doubt, but of consciousness how far the present is from fulfilling the great promise. The poor dying king looks back on the scandals of his later reign, on his own sin, on his children’s lust, rebellion, and tragic deaths, and feels how far from the ideal he and they have been. He sees little token of growth toward realisation of that promise; but yet in spite of a stained past and a wintry present, he holds fast his confidence. That is the true temper of faith, which calls things that are not as though they were, and is hindered by no sense of unworthiness nor by any discouragements born of sense, from grasping with full assurance the promise of God. But the consensus of the most careful expositors inclines to take both clauses as questions, and then the meaning would be, ‘Does not my house stand in such a relation to God that the righteous king will spring from it? It is, in this view, a triumphant question, expressing the strongest assurance, and the next clause would then lay bare the foundation of that relation of David’s house as not its goodness, but God’s covenant {‘for He hath made’}. Similarly the last clause would be a triumphant question of certainty, asserting in the strongest manner that God would cause that future salvation for the world, which was wrapped up in the coming of the king, and in which the dying man was sure that he should somehow have a share, dead though he were, to blossom and grow, though he had to die as in the winter, before the buds began to swell. The assurance of immortality, and of a share in all the blessings to come, bursts from the lips that are so soon to be silent.

IV. But the oracle cannot end with painting only blessings as flowing from the king’s reign. If he is to rule in righteousness and the fear of the Lord, then he must fight against evil. If his coming causes the tender grass to spring, it will quicken ugly growths too. The former representation is only half the truth; and the threatening of destruction for the evil is as much a part of the divine oracle as the other. Strictly, it is ‘wickedness’-the abstract quality rather than the concrete persons who embody it-which is spoken of. May we recall the old distinction that God loves the sinner while He hates the sin? The picture is

32

vivid. The wicked-and all the enemies of this King are wicked, in the prophet’s view-are like some of these thorn-brakes, that cannot be laid hold of, even to root them out, but need to be attacked with sharp pruning-hooks on long shafts, or burned where they grow. There is a destructive side to the coming of the King, shadowed in every prophecy of him, and brought emphatically to prominence in his own descriptions of his reign and its final issues. It is a poor kindness to suppress that side of the truth. Thorns as well as tender grass spring up in the quickening beams; and the best commentary on the solemn words which close David’s closing song is the saying of the King himself: ‘In the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather up first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them.’

K&D, "The psalm of thanksgiving, in which David praised the Lord for all the deliverances and benefits that he had experienced throughout the whole of his life, is followed by the prophetic will and testament of the great king, unfolding the importance of his rule in relation to the sacred history of the future. And whilst the psalm may be regarded (2 Samuel 22) as a great hallelujah, with which David passed away from the stage of life, these “last words” contain the divine seal of all that he has sung and prophesied in several psalms concerning the eternal dominion of his seed, on the strength of the divine promise which he received through the prophet Nathan, that his throne should be established for ever (2 Samuel 7). These words are not merely a lyrical expansion of that promise, but a prophetic declaration uttered by David at the close of his life and by divine inspiration, concerning the true King of the kingdom of God. “The aged monarch, who was not generally endowed with the gift of prophecy, was moved by the Spirit of God at the close of his life, and beheld a just Ruler in the fear of God, under whose reign blessing and salvation sprang up for the righteous, and all the wicked were overcome. The pledge of this was the eternal covenant which God had concluded with him” (Tholuck: die Propheten and ihre Weissagungen, p. 166). The heading “these are the last words of David” serves to attach it to the preceding psalm of thanksgiving.

2Sa_23:1-2

1 Divine saying of David the son of Jesse,Divine saying of the man, the highly exalted,Of the anointed of the God of Jacob,And of the lovely one in the songs of praise of Israel.

2 The Spirit of Jehovah speaks through me,And His word is upon my tongue.

This introduction to the prophetic announcement rests, both as to form and substance, upon the last sayings of Balaam concerning the future history of Israel (Num_24:3, Num_24:15). This not only shows to what extent David had occupied himself with the utterances of the earlier men of God concerning Israel's future; but indicates, at the same time, that his own prophetic utterance was intended to be a further expansion of Balaam's prophecy concerning the Star out of Jacob and the Sceptre out of Israel. Like Balaam, he calls his prophecy a נאם, i.e., a divine saying or oracle, as a revelation which he had received directly from God (see at Num_24:3). But the recipient of this revelation was not, like Balaam the son of Beor, a man with closed eye, whose eyes had been opened by a vision of the Almighty, but “the man who was raised up on high” (על, adverbially “above,” is, strictly speaking, a substantive, “height,” used in an adverbial sense, as in Hos_11:7, and probably also 2Sa_7:16), i.e., whom God had lifted up out of humiliation to be the ruler of His people, yea, even to be the head of the nations (2Sa_22:44). Luther's rendering, “who is assured of the Messiah of the God of Jacob,” is based upon the Vulgate, “cui constitutum est de Christo Dei Jacob,” and cannot be grammatically sustained. David was exalted on the one hand as “the anointed of the God of Jacob,” i.e., as the one whom the God of Israel had anointed king over His people, and on the other hand as

33

“the lovely one in Israel's songs of praise,” i.e., the man whom God had enabled to sing lovely songs of praise in celebration of His grace and glory. זמיר זמרה = does not mean a song generally, but a song of praise in honour of God (see at Exo_15:2), like מזמור in the headings to the psalms. As David on the one hand had firmly established the kingdom of God in an earthly and political respect as the anointed of Jehovah, i.e., as king, so had he on the other, as the composer of Israel's songs of praise, promoted the spiritual edification of that kingdom. The idea of נאם is explained in 2Sa_23:2. The Spirit of Jehovah speaks through him; his words are the inspiration of God. The preterite דבר relates to the divine inspiration which preceded the utterance of the divine saying. ב literally to speak into a person, as in Hos_1:2. The saying ,דברitself commences with 2Sa_23:3.

PULPIT, "2Sa_23:1

Now these be the last words of David. A long interval separates this psalm from the preceding. The one was written when David had just reached the zenith of his power, and, when still unstained by foul crime, he could claim God’s favour as due to his innocence. These last words were David’s latest inspired utterance, written, probably, towards the end of the calm period which followed upon his restoration to his throne, and when time and the sense of God’s renewed favour had healed the wounds of his soul. David the son of Jesse said. It was probably this account of the author, and its personal character, which caused the exclusion of this hymn from the Book of Psalms. It seemed to belong rather to David’s private history than to a collection made for use in the public services of the temple. Said. The word is one usually applied to a message coming directly from God. It is used, however, four times in Num_24:1-25. of the words of Balaam, and in Pro_30:1-33. of those of Agur. The solemnity of the word indicates the fatness of its inspiration. The sweet psalmist; literally, he who is pleasant in the psalms of Israel. David might well claim this title, as, under God, we owe the Psalter to him.

2 "The Spirit of the LORD spoke through me; his word was on my tongue.

BARNES, "The last words of David - i. e., his last Psalm, his last “words of song” 2Sa_22:1. The insertion of this Psalm, which is not in the Book of Psalms, was probably suggested by the insertion of the long Psalm in 2 Sam. 22.

David the son of Jesse said ... - The original word for “said” is used between 200 and 300 times in the phrase, “saith the Lord,” designating the word of God in the mouth of the prophet. It is only applied to the words of a man here, and in the strikingly similar passage Num_24:3-4, Num_24:15-16, and in Pro_30:1; and in all these places the words spoken are inspired words. The description of David is divided into four clauses, which correspond to and balance each other.

34

CLARKE, "These be the last words of David - I suppose the last poetical composition is here intended. He might have spoken many words after these in prose, but none in verse. Other meanings are given; this I prefer.

The words of this song contain a glorious prediction of the Messiah’s kingdom and conquests, in highly poetic language.

The sweet psalmist of Israel - This character not only belonged to him as the finest poet in Israel, but as the finest and most Divine poet of the whole Christian world. The sweet psalmist of Israel has been the sweet psalmist of every part of the habitable world, where religion and piety have been held in reverence.

GILL, "The Spirit of the Lord spake by me,.... The psalms and songs he composed were not the fruits of his own genius, but were written by him under the inspiration of the Spirit of God; by whom holy men of God, the penmen of the Scriptures, spoke, even as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, of whom David was one, being a prophet; see Acts 1:16 Acts 2:30; so the Targum here,"David spoke by the spirit of prophecy of the Lord:'or spake "in me"F8; what he spoke was first internally impressed upon his mind by the Spirit of God, and then he expressed it with his tongue, as follows: and his word was in my tongue; not only the matter of his psalms was indited by the Spirit of God, and suggested to his mind; but the very words in which they are delivered were given to him, and he was directed to make use of them, and did.

HENRY 1-3, "We have here the last will and testament of king David, or a codicil annexed to it, after he had settled the crown upon Solomon and his treasures upon the temple which was to be built. The last words of great and good men are thought worthy to be in a special manner remarked and remembered. David would have those taken notice of, and added either to his Psalms (as they are here to that in the foregoing chapter) or to the chronicles of his reign. Those words especially in 2Sa_23:5, though recorded before, we may suppose he often repeated for his own consolation, even to his last breath, and therefore they are called his last words.When we find death approaching we should endeavor both to honour God and to edify those about us with our last words. Let those that have had long experience of God's goodness and the pleasantness of wisdom, when they come to finish their course, leave a record of that experience and bear their testimony to the truth of the promise. We have upon record the last words of Jacob and Moses, and here of David, designed, as those, for a legacy to those that were left behind. We are here told,

I. Whose last will and testament this is. This is related either, or is usual, by the testator himself, or rather, by the historian, 2Sa_23:1. He is described, 1. By the meanness of his original: He was the son of Jesse. It is good for those who are advanced to be corner-stones and top-stones to be reminded, and often to remind themselves, of the rock out of which they were hewn. 2. The height of his elevation: He was raised up on high, as one favoured of God, and designed for something great, raised up as a prince, to sit higher than his neighbours, and as a prophet, to see further; for, (1.) He was the anointed of the God of Jacob, and so was serviceable to the people of God in their civil interests, the protection of their country and the administration of justice among them. (2.) He was the sweet psalmist of Israel, and

35

so was serviceable to them in their religious exercises. he penned the psalms, set the tunes, appointed both the singers and the instruments of music, by which the devotions of good people were much excited and enlarged. Note, The singing of psalms is a sweet ordinance, very agreeable to those that delight in praising God. It is reckoned among the honours to which David was raised up that he was a psalmist: in that he was as truly great as in his being the anointed of the God of Jacob. Note, It is true preferment to be serviceable to the church in acts of devotion and instrumental to promote the blessed work of prayer and praise. Observe, Was David a prince? He was so for Jacob. Was he a psalmist? He was so for Israel. Note, the dispensation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal, and therefore, as every man has received the gift, so let him minister the same.

II. What the purport of it is. It is an account of his communion with God. Observe,

1. What God said to him both for his direction and for his encouragement as a king, and to be in like manner, of use to his successors. Pious persons take a pleasure in calling to mind what they have heard from God, in recollecting his word, and revolving it in their minds. Thus what God spoke once David heard twice, yea often. See here,

(1.) Who spoke: The Spirit of the Lord, the God of Israel, and the Rock of Israel,which some think is an intimation of the Trinity of persons in the Godhead - the Father the God of Israel, the Son the Rock of Israel, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son, who spoke by the prophets, and particularly by David, and whose word was not only in his heart, but in his tongue for the benefit of others. David here avows his divine inspiration, that in his psalms, and in this composition, The Spirit of God spoke by him. He, and other holy men, spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. This puts an honour upon the book of Psalms, and recommends them to our use in our devotions, that they are words which the Holy Ghost teaches.

JAMISON 1-7, "2Sa_23:1-7. David professes his faith in God’s promises.

Now these be the last words of David — Various opinions are entertained as to the precise meaning of this statement, which, it is obvious, proceeded from the compiler or collector of the sacred canon. Some think that, as there is no division of chapters in the Hebrew Scriptures, this introduction was intended to show that what follows is no part of the preceding song. Others regard this as the last of the king’s poetical compositions; while still others consider it the last of his utterances as an inspired writer.

raised up on high — from an obscure family and condition to a throne.

the anointed of the God of Jacob — chosen to be king by the special appointment of that God, to whom, by virtue of an ancient covenant, the people of Israel owed all their peculiar destiny and distinguished privileges.

the sweet psalmist of Israel — that is, delightful, highly esteemed.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:2-3. His word was in my tongue — The following words, and consequently the other words and psalms composed and uttered by me upon the like solemn occasions, are not to be looked upon as human inventions, but both the matter and the words of them were suggested by God’s Spirit, the great teacher of the church. The Rock of Israel — He who is the strength, and defence, and protector of his people; which he manifests by directing kings and rulers so to manage their power, as may most conduce to their comfort and benefit. He that ruleth over men — Here are the two principal parts of a king’s duty,

36

answerable to the tables of God’s law, justice toward men, and piety toward God, both which he is to maintain and promote among his people.

LANGE, "In accordance with this it is said in 2 Samuel 23:2 :—The Spirit of the Lord speaks into me, and his word is on my tongue. These words explain the phrase “divine saying” above, and declare that what follows is given him by God’s Spirit. The old Rabbis and Crusius (as above, p221), connect 2 Samuel 23:2 closely with the preceding, and suppose that David meant herewith to establish the theopneustic authenticity of his psalms, and dying, to put his seal, as it were, on them. The verbs must then be taken as real preterites [spake, said, as in Eng. A. V.], 2 Samuel 23:2 must be understood of all David’s songs and prophecies, and 2 Samuel 23:3 specially of the individual prophecy concerning his seed, which was fulfilled in Christ (sanctio nativitatis Christi e progenie Davidis). That is: “the Spirit of the Lord has always spoken through me, His word has always been on my tongue in all my lays and Song of Solomon, and especially the God of Israel has spoken through me the prophecy of the future Messiah.” But against this Fries (as above, p652) properly remarks, that it would distort the relations to reckon in this especial way, among all David’s direct and indirect prophecies, precisely that one that was in fact given not through him, but through Nathan. The very definite expression of the second member: “and his word on my tongue,” does not permit such a general reference, and is besides to be taken on Present time. Then also the parallel verb in the first member is better taken as Present (speaks), and 2 Samuel 23:2-3 a are the announcement of what follows as the content of the divine inspiration from 2 Samuel 23:3 b on. “The Spirit of Jehovah spake,” not “through me,” which would require the Participle rather than the Perf. (Hengst.), nor “in me,” against which is the meaning of the phrase elsewhere, but “into me,” as in Hosea 1:2. Thereby the origin of the following declaration is affirmed to be divine in-speaking. [The reading “through (by) me” as in Eng. A. V, is allowable, and corresponds very well with the second member.—Tr.]. On the other hand: the “his word is on my tongue” refers to the human expression of this divinely given word. While in 2 Samuel 23:1 the prophetic organ of the divine saying is doubly characterized, 2 Samuel 23:2 sets forth in two-fold expression the twofold divine medium of the inspired prophetic word: the Spirit and the word of God.

3 The God of Israel spoke, the Rock of Israel said to me: 'When one rules over men in righteousness, when he rules in the fear of God,

37

CLARKE, "The Rock of Israel - The Fountain whence Israel was derived.

He that ruleth over men must be just - More literally, מושל באדם צדיק moshel baadam tsaddik, He that ruleth in man is the just one; or, The just one is the ruler among men.

Ruling in the fear of God - It is by God’s fear that Jesus Christ rules the hearts of all his followers; and he who has not the fear of God before his eyes, can never be a Christian.

GILL, "The God of Israel said,.... To David, or by him; he who was the covenant God of Israel literally considered, and is the covenant God and Father of the whole spiritual Israel, and who is owned, believed in, and worshipped by them:

the Rock of Israel spake to me; the same with the God of Israel in other words, who is the strength and security of Israel; or the second divine Person, the Son and Word of God, is meant, who is often called a rock in Scripture; and is the rock on which the Israel or church of God is built, and in whom it remains safe and firm, the gates of hell not being able to prevail against it; and so here is an instance and proof of a trinity of persons in the Godhead; the God of Israel, Jehovah the Father; the Rock of Israel, Jehovah the Son; and the Spirit of Jehovah, as in 2 Samuel 23:2, who is Jehovah the Spirit: now what was said by these three divine Persons to David, and by him, and concerning himself as a type of the Messiah, follows:

he that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God; which is a character every king among men ought to have, administering justice to their subjects; ruling not only according to the laws of the land, but according to the law of God; having his fear before their eyes, and acting with a view to his honour and glory, whose vicegerents they are, and to whom they are accountable; they should rule with gentleness and humanity, considering they are men, and not brutes, they rule over. Agamemnon in Homer is often called "king of men". This character, in all respects, was found in David, 2 Samuel 8:15; and may be here given as an instruction to his son and successor, Solomon; and is in all respects applicable to the Messiah, who is a "ruler" or King by the designation of his father; a ruler "over men", even over all men, yea, over the greatest of men, King of kings, and Lord of lords, and especially, and in an eminent sense, King of saints; and he is "just", a King that reigns in righteousness, righteous in all his ways and works, and particularly just as a King, as well as in all his other characters, see Jeremiah 23:5; and upon whom, as man and Mediator, the Spirit of "the fear of the Lord" rests, and under the influence of which, as such, he has acted, Isaiah 11:1; so the Targum applies these words to the Messiah thus,"the true Judge said, he would appoint to me a King, who is the Messiah, who shall arise and rule in the fear of the Lord:'and they may be rendered, there shall be "a ruler over men, just, ruling in the fear of God"; or ruling, appointing, ordering, and directing the worship of God, and the ordinances of it under the Gospel dispensation, as Christ did, see Matthew 28:18.

38

PULPIT, "He that ruleth, etc. This rendering of the Hebrew is very beautiful, and fit to be graven on the hearts of rulers. There is often almost an inspiration in the renderings of the Authorized Version. Grammatically, nevertheless, the psalm declares the blessedness of the king who is just, and may be translated as follows:—

"He that ruleth over men righteously,

That ruleth in the fear of God—

And as the morning light shall he be,

when the sun riseth,

A morning without clouds;

Yea, as the tender grass from the earth,

from sunshine, from rain."

A king who rules his people justly is as glorious as the sun rising in its strength to drive away the works of darkness, and give men, by precept and example, the light of clear knowledge of their duty. But the last metaphor is especially beautiful. In the summer, vegetation dries up under the burning heat of the sun; all is bare and brown, and a few withered stalks of the coarser plants alone remain. But when the rains come, followed by bright sunshine, nature at one burst flashes into beauty, and the hillsides and plains are covered with the soft green of the reviving grass, through which myriads of flowers soon push their way, and clothe the landscape with bright colours. So a just and upright government calls into being countless forms of human activity, and fosters all that is morally beautiful, while it checks the blighting influences of unregulated passion and selfish greed.

HENRY 3-4, "(2.) What was spoken. Here seems to be a distinction made between what the Spirit of God spoke by David, which includes all his psalms, and what the Rock of Israel spoke to David, which concerned himself and his family. Let ministers observe that those by whom God speaks to others are concerned to hear and heed what he speaks to themselves. Those whose office it is to teach others their duty must be sure to learn and do their own. Now that which is here said (2Sa_23:3, 2Sa_23:4) may be considered, [1.] With application to David, and his royal family. And so here is, First, The duty of magistrates enjoined them. When a king was spoken to from God he was not to be complimented with the height of his dignity and the extent of his power, but to be told his duty. “Must is for the king,” we say. Here is a must for the king: He must be just, ruling in the fear of God; and so must all inferior magistrates in their places. Let rulers remember that they rule over men - not over beasts which they may enslave and abuse at pleasure, but over reasonable creatures and of the same rank with themselves. They rule over men that have their follies and infirmities, and therefore must be borne with. They rule over men, but under God, and for him; and therefore, 1. They must be just, both to those over whom they rule, in allowing them their rights and properties, and between those over whom they rule, using their power to right the injured against the injurious; see Deu_1:16, Deu_1:17. It is not enough that they do no wrong, but they must not suffer wrong to be done. 2. They must rule in the fear of God, that is, they must themselves be possessed with a fear of God, by which they will be effectually restrained from all

39

acts of injustice and oppression. Nehemiah was so (Neh_5:15, So did not I, because of the fear of God), and Joseph, Gen_43:18. They must also endeavor to promote the fear of God (that is, the practice of religion) among those over whom they rule. The magistrate is to be the keeper of both tables, and to protect both godliness and honesty. Secondly, Prosperity promised them if they do, this duty. He that rules in the fear of God shall be as the light of the morning, 2Sa_23:4. Light is sweet and pleasant, and he that does his duty shall have the comfort of it; his rejoicing will be the testimony of his conscience. Light is bright, and a good prince is illustrious; his justice and piety will be his honour. Light is a blessing, nor are there any greater and more extensive blessings to the public than princes that rule in the fear of God. As the light of the morning, which is most welcome after the darkness of the night (so was David's government after Saul's, Psa_75:3), which is increasing, shines more and more to the perfect day, such is the growing lustre of a good government. It is likewise compared to the tender grass, which the earth produces for the service of man; it brings with it a harvest of blessings. See Psa_72:6, Psa_72:16, which were also some of the last words of David, and seem to refer to those recorded here. [2.] With application to Christ, the Son of David, and then it must all be taken as a prophecy, and the original will bear it: There shall be a rule among men, or over men, that shall be just, and shall rule in the fear of God, that is, shall order the affairs of religion and divine worship according to his Father's will; and he shall be as the light to the morning, etc., for he is the light of the world, and as the tender grass, for he is the branch of the Lord, and the fruit of the earth, Isa_11:1-5; Isa_32:1, Isa_32:2; Psa_72:2. God, by the Spirit, gave David the foresight of this, to comfort him under the many calamities of his family and the melancholy prospects he had of the degeneracy of his seed.

JAMISON, "the Rock of Israel — This metaphor, which is commonly applied by the sacred writers to the Almighty, was very expressive to the minds of the Hebrew people. Their national fortresses, in which they sought security in war, were built on high and inaccessible rocks.

spake to me — either preceptively, giving the following counsels respecting the character of an upright ruler in Israel, or prophetically, concerning David and his royal dynasty, and the great Messiah, of whom many think this is a prophecy, rendering the words, “he that ruleth” - “there shall be a ruler over men.”

COKE, "2 Samuel 23:3. He that ruleth over men must be just— We prefer Dr. Grey's translation of this verse, which appears most agreeable to the whole tenor of the prophesy. He observes, that this is the first time that we meet with the Messiah, or great expected Deliverer of the Jews, under this title of the Just One. He is so called, not so much for having fulfilled all righteousness in his own person, and performed an unsinning obedience to the will of God, as because by his righteousness we are justified or accounted righteous before God upon the terms of the Gospel. The prophet Isaiah, Isaiah 53:11 is more explicit upon this point: By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities; i.e. the punishment of them: and Zechariah 9:9. He is just, and bringing or causing [not, as in the English translation, having] salvation, as all the ancient versions agree. Hence it was, that, as the time of his appearance drew nearer, we find the Messiah was frequently spoken of, and expected by the Jews, under that name; (see Acts 3:14; Acts 7:52; Acts 22:14. 1 Peter 3:18.) insomuch that even the Centurion is by some supposed to have applied to him

40

upon the cross; Luke 23:47. Certainly this man was [not a righteous man, but] the Just One, or expected Messiah. The construction of the latter part of this verse in the original is remarkable. It is not in the fear of God, which would rather have expressed the religious character of the ruler, than the spiritual nature of his kingdom; but ruling the fear of God; that is, his rule and dominion should be such as was founded in the fear of God, by turning the hearts of the disobedient to the wisdom of the just.

LANGE, "The first half of 2 Samuel 23:3 : Says the God of Israel, to me speaks the Rock of Israel is identical in form with 2 Samuel 23:2, and expresses in two members the same thought, with special emphasizing of the relation of God (who speaks through David’s mouth) to His people, and particularly of His rock-like faithfulness towards them as the foundation of all manifestations of salvation. There is therefore no tautology here. “Says the God of Israel,” the God that has chosen Israel as His possession, giving them the promises of salvation, whose fulfilment the following revelation announces. “To me speaks the Rock of Israel,” the God that fulfils His promises according to His faithfulness and unchangeableness ( 2 Samuel 22:3; 2 Samuel 22:32; 2 Samuel 22:47). The Present rendering is preferable here also. But if the Past be taken: “spake the Rock of Israel,” what is here said in 2 Samuel 23:3 a cannot belong to the content of the “divine saying” ( 2 Samuel 23:1), “since then David would have derived a very simple, psychologically easily explicable recapitulation of former revelations from present inspiration, and have introduced it with a disproportionate outlay of solemn words” (Fries); rather the Past form is explained by the fact that the act of divine inspeaking preceded the outspeaking of the divine word. The object of the verbs (says, speaks), is not a number of prophecies relating to blessed rule, that were received before by David (Tanchum), or (as Thenius thinks probable) the declaration of a prophet, who uttered 2 Samuel 23:3 b, 4 (here recalled by David) at the beginning of David’s reign (this thought would have been necessarily otherwise expressed), but the now following declaration. What God now, at the moment of His speaking, immediately imparts to him, is declared in what follows: The “to me” stands emphatically first (“to me speaks the rock of Israel”), because David has in view his theocratic relation to the following divine word and its relation to him, and because it will be fulfilled in his seed; he expresses his consciousness (which was connected with his prophetic endowment) of the soteriological significance of his person for the people in respect to the future fulfillment of the glorious promises given to his seed.—The four members in 2 Samuel 23:2-3 a stand in chiasmic relation to one another; the first member of 2 Samuel 23:3 a corresponds to the second of 2 Samuel 23:2, and the second of 2 Samuel 23:3 a to the first of 2 Samuel 23:2.

K&D, "K&D, 2Sa_22:3

As the prophets generally preface their saying with “thus saith the Lord,” so David commences his prophetic saying with “the God of Israel saith,” for the purpose of describing it most emphatically as the word of God. He designates God “the God” and “The Rock” (as in 2Sa_22:3) of Israel, to indicate that the contents of his prophecy relate to the salvation of the people of Israel, and are guaranteed by the unchangeableness of God. The saying which follows bears the impress of a divine

41

oracle even in its enigmatical brevity. The verbs are wanting in the different sentences of 2Sa_23:3 and 2Sa_23:4. “A ruler over men,” sc., “will arise,” or there will be. באדם does not mean “among men,” but “over men;” for ב is to be taken as with the verb משל, as denoting the object ruled over (cf. Gen_3:16; Gen_4:7, etc.). האדםdoes not mean certain men, but the human race, humanity. This ruler is “just” in the fullest sense of the word, as in the passages founded upon this, viz., Jer_23:5; Zec_9:9, and Psa_72:2. The justice of the ruler is founded in his “fear of God.” היםmא יראתis governed freely by מושל. (On the fact itself, see Isa_11:2-3.) The meaning is, “A ruler over the human race will arise, a just ruler, and will exercise his dominion in the spirit of the fear of God.”

MACLAREN, "THE DYING KING’S LAST VISION AND PSALM

THE ROYAL JUBILEE 1

2 Samuel 23:3 - 2 Samuel 23:4.

One of the Psalms ascribed to David sounds like the resolves of a new monarch on his accession. In it the Psalmist draws the ideal of a king, and says such things as, ‘I will behave myself wisely, in a perfect way. I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes. I hate the work of them that turn aside. Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful of the land, that they may dwell with me.’ That psalm we may regard as the first words of the king when, after long, weary years, the promise of Samuel’s anointing was fulfilled, and he sat on the throne.

My text comes from what purports to be the last words of the same king.

He looks back, and again the ideal of a monarch rises before him. The psalm, for it is a psalm, though it is not in the Psalter, is compressed to the verge of obscurity; and there may be many questions raised about its translation and its bearing. These do not need to occupy us now, but the words which I have selected for my text may, perhaps, best be represented to an English reader in some such sentence as this-’If {or when} one rules over men justly, ruling in the fear of God, then it shall be as the light of the morning when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds.’ With such a monarch all the interests of his people will prosper. His reign will be like the radiant dawn of a cloudless day, and his land like the spring pastures when the fresh, green grass is wooed out of the baked earth by the combined influence of rain and sunshine. David’s little kingdom was surrounded by giant empires, in which brute force, wielded by despotic will, ground men down, or squandered their lives recklessly. But the King of Israel had learned, partly by the experience of his own reign, and partly by divine inspiration, that such rulers are not true types of a monarch after God’s own heart. This ideal king is neither a warrior nor a despot. Two qualities mark him, Justice and Godliness. Pharaoh and his like, oppressors, were as the

42

lightning which blasts and scorches. The true king was to be as the sunshine that vitalises and gladdens. ‘He shall come down like rain upon the mown grass, and as showers that water the earth.’

We do not need to ask the question here, though it might be very relevant on another occasion, whether this portraiture is a mere ideal, floating in vacuo, or whether it is a direct prophecy of that expected Messianic king who was to realise the divine ideal of sovereignty. At all events we know that, in its highest and deepest significance, the picture of my text has lived and breathed human breath, in Jesus Christ, who both in His character and in His influence on the world, fulfilled the ideal that floated before the eyes of the aged king.

I do not need to follow the course of thought in this psalm any farther. You will have anticipated my motive for selecting this text now. It seems to me to gather up, in vivid and picturesque form, the thoughts and feelings which to-day are thrilling through an Empire, to which the most extended dominion of these warrior kings of old was but a speck. On such an occasion as this I need not make any apology, I am sure, for diverging from the ordinary topics of pulpit address, and associating ourselves with the many millions who to-day are giving thanks for Queen Victoria.

My text suggests two lines along which the course of our thoughts may run. The one is the personal character of this ideal monarch; the other is its effects on his subjects.

I. Now, with regard to the former, the pulpit is, in my judgment, not the place either for the discussion of current events or the pronouncing of personal eulogiums. But I shall not be wandering beyond my legitimate province, if I venture to try to gather into a few words the reasons, in the character and public life of our Queen, for the thankfulness of this day. Our text brings out, as I have said, two great qualities as those on which a throne is to be established, Justice and Godliness. Now, the ancient type of monarch was the fountain of justice, in a very direct sense; inasmuch as it was his office, not only to pronounce sentence on criminals, but to give decisions on disputed questions of right. These functions have long ceased to be exercised by our monarchs, but there is still room for both of those qualities-the Justice which holds an even balance between parties and strifes, the Righteousness which has supreme regard to the primary duties that press alike upon prince and pauper, and the Godliness which, as I believe, is the root from which all righteousness, as between man and man, and as between prince and subject, must ever flow. Morality is the garb of religion; religion is the root of morality. He, and only he, will hold an even balance and discharge his obligations to man, whose life is rooted in, and his acts under the continual influence of, the fear of God which has in it no torment, but is the parent of all things good.

We shall not be flatterers if we thankfully recognise in our Sovereign Lady the

43

presence of both these qualities. I have spoken of the first inaugural words of the King of Israel, and the resolutions that he made. It is recorded that when, to the child of eleven years of age, the announcement was made that she stood near in the line of succession to the throne, the tremulous young lips answered, ‘It is a great responsibility; but I will be good.’ And all round the world to-day her subjects attest that the aged monarch has kept the little maiden’s vow. Contrast that life with the lives of the other women who have sat on the throne of England. Think of the brilliant Queen, whose glories our greatest poets were not ashamed to sing, with the Tudor masterfulness in her, and not a little of the Tudor grossness and passion, and remember the blots that stained her glories. Think of her sister, the morbidly melancholy tool of priests, who goes down the ages branded with an epithet only too sadly earned. Think of another woman that ruled over England in name, the weak instrument of base intrigues. And then turn to this life which we are looking upon to-day. Think of the nameless scandals, the hideous immorality of the reigns that preceded hers, and you will not wonder that every decent man and every modest woman was thankful that, with the young girl, there came a breath of purer air into the foul atmosphere. I am old enough to remember hearing, as a boy, the talk of my elders as to the probabilities of insurrection if, instead of our Queen, there had come to the throne the brother of her two predecessors. The hopes of those early days have been more than fulfilled.

It is not for us to determine the religious character of others, and that is too sacred a region for us to enter; but this we may say, that in all these sixty years of diversified trial, there has been no act known to us outsiders inconsistent with the highest motive, the fear of the Lord; and some of us who have worshipped in the humble Highland church where she has bowed have felt that on the throne of Britain sat a Christian.

Nor need we forget how, from that root of fear of God, there has come that wondrous patience and faithfulness to duty, the form of ‘Justice’ which is possible for a constitutional monarch. We have little notion of how pressing and numerous and continual the royal duties must necessarily be. They have been discharged, even when the blow that struck all sunshine out of life left an irrepressible shrinking from pageantry and pomp. Joys come; joys go. Duties abide, and they have been done.

Nor can we forget, either, how the very difficult position of a constitutional monarch, with the semblance of power and the reality of narrow restrictions, has been filled. Our Sovereign has never set herself against the will of the people, expressed by its legitimate representatives, even when that will may have imposed upon her the sanction of changes which she did not approve. And that is much to say. We have seen young despots whose self-will has threatened to wreck a nation’s prosperity.

Nor can we forget how all the immense influence of position and personality has

44

been thrown on the side of purity and righteousness. Even we outsiders know how, more than once or twice, she has steadfastly set her face against the admission to her presence of men and women of evil repute, and has in effect repeated David’s proclamation against vice and immorality at his accession: ‘He that worketh wickedness shall not dwell within my house.’

Nor must we forget, either, the simplicity, the beauty, the tenderness of her wedded and family life, her love of rural quiet, and of wholesome communion with Nature, and her eagerness to take her people into her confidence, as set forth in the book which, whatever its literary merits, speaks of her earnest appreciation of Nature and her wish for the sympathy of her subjects.

Then came the bolt from the blue, that sudden crash that wrecked the happiness of a life. Many of us, I have no doubt, remember that dreary December Sunday morning when, while the nation was standing in expectation of another calamity from across the Atlantic, there flashed through the land the news of the Prince’s death; thrilling all hearts, and bringing all nearer to her, the lonely widow, than they had ever been in her days of radiant happiness. How pathetically, silently, nobly, devoutly, that sorrow has been borne, it is not for us to speak. She has become one of the great company of sad and lonely hearts, and in her sadness has shown an eager desire to send messages of sympathy to all whom she could reach, who were in like darkness and sorrow.

Brethren, I have ventured to diverge so far from the ordinary run of pulpit ministrations because I feel that to-day all of us, whatever may be our political or ecclesiastical relationships and proclivities, are one in thanking God for the monarch whose life has been without a stain, and her reign without a blot.

II. Now let me say a word as to the other line of thought which my text suggests, the effect of such a reign on the condition of the subject.

Now, of course, in the narrowly limited domain of that strange creation, a constitutional monarchy, there is far less opportunity for the Sovereign’s direct influence on the Subject than there was in the ancient kingdoms of which David was thinking in his psalm. The marvellous progress of Britain during these sixty years is due, not to our Sovereign, but to a multitude of strenuous workers and earnest thinkers in a hundred different departments, as well as to the evolution of the gifts that come down to us from our ancient inheritance of freedom. But we shall much mistake if, for that reason, we set aside the monarch’s character and influence as of no account in the progress

A supposition, which is a violent one, may be made which will set this matter in clearer light. Suppose that during these sixty years we had had a king on the throne of England like some of the kings we have had. The sentiment of loyalty is not now of such a character as that it will survive a vicious sovereign. If we had

45

had such a monarch as I have hinted at, the loyalty of the good would for all these years have been suffering a severe strain, and the forces that make for evil would have been disastrously strengthened. Dangers escaped are unnoticed, but one twelvemonth of the reign of a profligate would shake the foundations of the monarchy, and would open the floodgates of vice; and we should then know how much the nation owed to the Queen whose life was pure, and who cast all her influence on the side of ‘things that are lovely and of good report.’

Take another supposition. Suppose that during these years of wonderful transition, when the whole aspect of English politics and society has been transformed, we had had a king like George III., who set his opinion against the nation’s will constitutionally expressed. Then no man knows with what storm and tumult, with what strife and injury, the inevitable transition would have been effected. Be sure of this, that the wise self-effacement of our Sovereign during these critical years of change is largely the reason why they have been years of peace, in which the new has mingled itself with the old without revolution or disturbance. It is due to her in a very large degree that

‘Freedom broadens slowly down

From precedent to precedent.’

I need not dilate on the changed Britain that she looks out upon and rules to-day. I need not speak-there will be many voices to do that, in not altogether agreeable notes, for there will be a dash of too much self-complacency in them-about progress in material wealth, colonial expansion, the increase of education, the gentler manners, the new life that has been breathed over art and literature, the achievements in science and philosophy, the drawing together of classes, the bridging over of the great gulf between rich and poor by some incipient and tentative attempts at sympathy and brotherhood.

Nor need I dwell upon the ecclesiastical signs of the times, in which, mingled as they are, there is at least this one great good, that never since the early days have so large a proportion of Christian men been ‘seeking after the things that make for peace,’ and realising the oneness of all believers who hold the Headship of Christ.

All this review falls more properly into other hands than mine. Only I would put in a caution-do not let us mingle self-conceit with our congratulations; and, above all, do not let us ‘rest and be thankful.’ There is much to be done yet. Listening ears can catch on every side vague sounds that tell of unrest and of the stirrings into wakefulness of

‘The spirit of the years to come,

46

Yearning to mix itself with life.’

I seem to hear all around me the rushing in the dark of a mighty current that is bearing down upon us. Great social questions are rapidly coming to the front-the questions of distribution of wealth, abolition of privilege, the relations of labour and capital, and many others are clamant to be dealt with at least, if not solved. There Is much to be done before Jesus Christ is throned as King of England. War has to be frowned down; the brotherhood of man has to be realised, temperance has to be much more largely practised than it is.

I need not go over the catalogue of desiderata, of agenda-things that have to be done-in the near future. Only this I would say-Christian men and women are the last people who should be ready to ‘rest and be thankful,’ for the principles of the Gospel that we profess, which have never been applied to the life of nations as they ought to be, will solve the questions which make the despair of so many in this generation. We shall best express our thankfulness for these past sixty years by each of us taking our part in the great movement which, in the inevitable drift of things to democracy, is going to ‘cast the kingdom old into another mould,’ and which will, I pray, make our people more of what John Milton long ago called them, ‘God’s Englishmen.’ We have taught the nations many things. Our Parliament is called the Mother of Parliaments. Ours is

‘The land where, girt with friends or foes,

A man may say the thing he will.’

It has taught the nations a tempered freedom, and that a monarchy may be a true republic. May we rise to the height of our privileges and responsibilities, and teach our subject peoples, not only mechanics, science, law, free trade, but a loftier morality, and the name of Him by whom kings reign and princes decree justice!

We, members of the free Churches of England, come seldom under the notice of royalty, and have little acquaintance with courts, but we yield to none in our recognition of the virtues and in our sympathy with the sorrows of the Sovereign Lady, the good woman, who rules these lands, and we all heartily thank God for her to-day, and pray that for long years still to come the familiar letters V.R. may stand, as they have stood to two generations, as the symbol of womanly purity and of the faithful discharge of queenly duty.

1 Preached on the occasion of Queen Victoria’s Diamond Jubilee.

47

4 he is like the light of morning at sunrise on a cloudless morning, like the brightness after rain that brings the grass from the earth.'

CLARKE, "He shall be as the light of the morning - This verse is very obscure, for it does not appear from it who the person is of whom the prophet speaks. As the Messiah seems to be the whole subject of these last words of David, he is probably the person intended. One of Dr. Kennicott’s MSS. Supplies the word יהוה Yehovah; and he therefore translates, As the light of the morning ariseth Jehovah (see below) He shall be the Sun of righteousness, bringing salvation in his rays, and shining - illuminating the children of men, with increasing splendor, as long as the sun and moon endure.

As the tender grass - The effects of this shining, and of the rays of his grace, shall be like the shining of the sun upon the young grass or corn, after a plentiful shower of rain.

GILL, "And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds,.... That is, such a ruler that rules in righteousness, and in the fear of God; he is the light and glory of his people, who guides and directs them, makes them cheerful and comfortable; his administrations are pleasant and delightful, and promise a growing and increasing happiness to them, like the morning light and rising sun; and there are no clouds, nor forebodings of dark times, affliction and distress, coming upon them, but all the reverse: and with Christ these metaphors well suit, who is the true light that shines, John 1:9; the morning star, Revelation 22:16; the dayspring from on high, Luke 1:78; the sun of righteousness, Malachi 4:2; and light of the world, John 8:2; his going forth or appearance in human nature, at his incarnation, was as the morning, Hosea 6:3; the first discovery him to Adam, after sin had brought a night of darkness on the world, was as the dawn of the morning; and this light like that of the morning increased, fresh and clearer discoveries of him being made to the patriarchs afterwards; and though as yet the sun was not up, and it was not a morning without clouds, yet the discoveries then made brought joy with them, as to Abraham and others, and were a sure sign of the sun rising. When Christ appeared in the flesh, the sun of righteousness then arose, and scattered the darkness of the night, both in the Jewish and Gentile world; introduced the light of the Gospel to a greater degree than it was under the legal dispensation, and made the Gospel day; which was not only like the morning light, growing and increasing, but was as a morning without clouds, without the darkness of the ceremonial law, the shadows of which now disappeared; and without the storms and tempests of the moral law, its curses being bore and removed by Christ; and

48

without the frowns of divine wrath, reconciliation and satisfaction being made by him: and this is all applicable particularly to the government of Christ, which is delightful and grateful to his people, serviceable and beneficial to them, under which they enjoy great peace and prosperity; and which will more and more increase, and stilt be more glorious and illustrious, see Psalm 72:7. A learned writerF9 has observed, that in an ancient manuscript the word "Jehovah" is inserted and read thus,"and as the light of the morning shall arise Jehovah the sun,'which clearly points to Christ the sun of righteousness; and be it an interpolation, it gives the true sense of the words: a glorious, beautiful, and illustrious person is described in OvidF11 by the same figure as here:

as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain; which springs up the faster, and is more flourishing after a shower of rain, and when upon that the sun breaks out and shines clearly: or "from clear shining from rain"F12; that is, the springing of the tender grass out of the earth is owing partly to the rain which falls in the night, and partly to the sun rising in the morning, and the clear shine of it: this may denote the fruitful and flourishing estate which a good and righteous ruler over men is the happy instrument of bringing his people into; and may be applied both to the incarnation of Christ, when he grew up as a tender plant, or as the tender grass, mean in his original and descent, weak in himself as man; and yet this fruit of the earth was excellent and comely, beautiful and glorious, and the springing of it owing to the favour and good will of God, and his coming was as the latter and former rain to the earth, Hosea 6:3; and to the government of Christ, and the benefits of it to his church and people; who flourish under it the light of his grace and favour, and through rains of Gospel doctrines they are blessed with: or "than clear shining, than rain"; Christ is more beneficial to his people, who are comparable to grass for their meanness, and weakness, and number, than the sun and rain are to the grass in the field.

JAMISON, "as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain — Little patches of grass are seen rapidly springing up in Palestine after rain; and even where the ground has been long parched and bare, within a few days or hours after the enriching showers begin to fall, the face of the earth is so renewed that it is covered over with a pure fresh mantle of green.

K&D, "K&D, 2Sa_23:4

2Sa_23:4 describes the blessing that will proceed from this ruler. The idea that 2Sa_23:4 should be connected with 2Sa_23:3 so as to form one period, in the sense of “when one rules justly over men (as I do), it is as when a morning becomes clear,” must be rejected, for the simple reason that it overlooks Nathan's promise (2 Samuel 7) altogether, and weakens the force of the saying so solemnly introduced as the word of God. The ruler over men whom David sees in spirit, is not any one who rules righteously over men; nor is the seed of David to be regarded as a collective expression indicating a merely ideal personality, but, according to the Chaldee rendering, the Messiah himself, the righteous Shoot whom the Lord would raise up to David (Jer_23:5), and who would execute righteousness and judgment upon earth (Jer_33:15). 2Sa_23:4 is to be taken by itself as containing an independent thought,

49

and the connection between it and 2Sa_23:3 must be gathered from the words themselves: the appearance (the rise) of this Ruler will be “as light of the morning, when the sun rises.” At the same time, the Messiah is not to be regarded as the subject to בקר אור (the light of the morning), as though the ruler over men were compared with the morning light; but the subject compared to the morning light is intentionally left indefinite, according to the view adopted by Luther in his exposition, “In the time of the Messiah it will be like the light of the morning.” We are precluded from regarding the Messiah as the subject, by the fact that the comparison is instituted not with the sun, but with the morning dawn at the rising of the sun, whose vivifying effects upon nature are described in the second clause of the verse. The words שמש יזרח are to be taken relatively, as a more distinct definition of the morning light. The clause which follows, “morning without clouds,” is parallel to the foregoing, and describes more fully the nature of the morning. The light of the rising sun on a cloudless morning is an image of the coming salvation. The rising sun awakens the germs of life in the bosom of nature, which had been slumbering through the darkness of the night. “The state of things before the coming of the ruler resembles the darkness of the night” (Hengstenberg). The verb is also wanting in the second hemistich. “From the shining from rain (is, comes) fresh green out of the earth.” נגה signifies the brightness of the rising sun; but, so far as the actual meaning is concerned, it relates to the salvation which attends the coming of the righteous ruler. ממטר is either subordinate to מנגה, or co-ordinate with it. In the former case, we should have to render the passage, “from the shining of the sun which proceeds out of rain,” or “from the shining after rain;” and the allusion would be to a cloudless morning, when the shining of the sun after a night's rain stimulates the growth of the plants. In the latter case, we should have to render it “from the shining (and) from the rain;” and the reference would be to a cloudless morning, on which the vegetation springs up from the ground through sunshine followed by rain. Grammatically considered, the first view (? the second) is the easier of the two; nevertheless we regard the other (? the first) as the only admissible one, inasmuch as rain is not to be expected when the sun has risen with a cloudless sky. The rays of the sun, as it rises after a night of rain, strengthen the fresh green of the plants. The rain is therefore a figurative representation of blessing generally (cf. Isa_44:3), and the green grass which springs up from the earth after the rain is an image of the blessings of the Messianic salvation (Isa_44:4; Isa_45:8).

In Psa_72:6, Solomon takes these words of David as the basis of his comparison of the effects resulting from the government of the true Prince of peace to the coming down of the rain upon the mown grass.

ELLICOTT, "(4) A morning without clouds.—This description of the blessings of the ideally perfect government is closely connected with the Divine promise made through Nathan (2 Samuel 7). David recognises that the ruler of God’s people must be just, and here, as in Psalms 72, the highest blessings are depicted as flowing from such a government. David knew far too much of the evil of his own heart and of the troubles in his household to suppose that his ideal could be perfectly realised in any other of his descendants than in Him who should “crush the serpent’s head “and win the victory over the powers of evil. The sense of the verse will be made clearer by the following translation: “And as the light of the morning when the sun ariseth, a morning without clouds; as by means of sunlight and by means of rain the tender grass grows from the earth:—is not my house so with God?”

50

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:4. He shall be as the light of the morning — These words are a further description of the king’s duty, which is not only to rule with justice and piety, but also with sweetness, and gentleness, and condescension to the infirmities of his people; to render his government as acceptable to them as is the sunshine in a clear morning, or the tender grass which springs out of the earth by the warm beams of the sun after the rain.

COKE, "2 Samuel 23:4. And he shall be as the light, &c.— Bishop Sherlock suggested that interpretation of this verse which Dr. Grey has given: according to which, says the Bishop, taking the sun to be an image or character of the Just One, the sense will be, "This sun shall be like the kind gentle light of the morning free from clouds, and when the earth, refreshed by kind showers, is putting forth fresh verdure." The passage is beautiful, and gives an idea of a sun that never scorches, but is ever gentle, and shining with a genial heat; a sun with healing under his wings. Dr. Kennicott, in the first volume of his Dissertation, has confirmed this interpretation of the Bishop. He observes, that this song will certainly be determined to contain a prophesy of the Messiah, if a various reading in one of the oldest manuscripts, respecting the words above quoted, should appear to be genuine. It is said in our translation, that he shall be as the light of the morning when the sun riseth. Now is not the sun the light of the morning? Or is not the morning light the certain effect of the sun-rising? And can any thing be compared to itself, or the cause to its effect? The various reading which, if true, not only frees us from this difficulty, but proves this passage to be prophetical, stands thus: and as the light of the morning, Jehovah, the sun shall arise. This word Jehovah is regularly written in the oldest manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, as here expressed, and seems to have been omitted on account of the similitude between the adjoining words יזרח iizrach, shall arise, and יהוה iehovah, Jehovah in the original. It is impossible to read these words without recollecting the allusion to them in Malachi (iv. 2.) Shall the sun of righteousness arise, &c. which words in the original farther confirm the reading in the manuscript; for in Malachi we have the same verb, and the same noun as in this place. Here we read,—shall Jehovah the sun arise:—in Malachi—shall the sun of righteousness arise:—in Jeremiah (Jeremiah 23:6; Jeremiah 33:16.)—Jehovah, our righteousness:—in Isaiah 60:1. Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of JEHOVAH is risen upon thee. 2 Samuel 23:2. For behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but יהוה יזרח iizrach iehovah, JEHOVAH SHALL ARISE upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. 2 Samuel 23:3. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising. I leave the inference to the reader. It should be observed, that the two principal characters of Christ's kingdom are represented to us in the fine image contained in this verse: the first, that light or knowledge, which, when the sun of righteousness should arise, was to fill the earth, and to dispel the clouds of ignorance under which the world had so long sat: the other, that reviving consolation, or peace of mind, which a deliverance from the dominion of sin and death would afford true believers under the Gospel dispensation: a state, which cannot be more fitly represented than by that of the tender grass, when, after rain, it is cherished and invigorated by the kind and genial influence of the sun.

51

LANGE, " 2 Samuel 23:3 b, 4. First part of the divine saying. The thoroughly abrupt, lapidary style corresponds with the solemn announcement of the imparted divine declaration, and with the fact (thereby declared) that the poet is filled with the divine Spirit and word; the words are inspired exclamations, whose pregnant and enigmatic curtness, heightened by the omission of verbs, is in keeping with the condition of the writer’s soul, overpowered by the mighty impulse of the prophetic Spirit, and the immediate view of truth produced by it. Comp. Tholuck, as above, p58. A ruler over men just, a ruler in the fear of God. These words are not to be taken as apposition to the “God of Israel” in 2 Samuel 23:3 a (Vulg, Luth.), nor as object of the verb “say” taken as = “promised” (Maurer: God promised a ruler), or as opposition to “me” [“me a just ruler”], that Isaiah, as David’s praise of himself (Sachs). Nor with Trendelenberg (in Thenius) are we to read “derision” (משל “proverb, byword”) instead of “ruler,” and render: “a byword the righteous may be among men, a byword the fear of God, but as morning light, etc.” Further, the words are not to be understood as an affirmation concerning a pious king: “if among men one rules righteously—he is as morning-light, etc” (Cler, Herder, De W, Ew, Then, Baur), as if they expressed for a parenetic end the ethical-religious significance and mission of the Israelitish royal office in general. Such laudation of the governmental virtues of a king would accord neither with the preceding solemn announcement of a divine oracle, nor the thence naturally to be expected weighty content of the divine saying, would indeed make the prophetic character give way to the didactic. To the view that any pious and righteous king is here meant, by the portraiture of whom David wished to convey an exhortation to his sons, is opposed also the content of the individual statements that follow, picturing a royal form far above the proportions of an ordinary regent, and especially the reference in 2 Samuel 23:5 to 2 Samuel7 as giving the ground of the picture. The “ruler” here spoken of stands to David’s prophetic gaze, in the light of the divine word spoken into him, as the ideal royal form proceeding from his seed, wherein he sees fully realized the idea of a theocratic king according to his religious-moral qualities, and the wielder of a dominion that stretches over all humanity. This last is expressed in the phrase “over[FN4] men.” The “men” are not, however, the people of Israel, for the expression would then be surprisingly weak and flat, nor are they men as subjects in general and necessary appendage to “any ruler” (Then.), which would be a meaningless pleonasm, but “men” in the absolute sense, humanity, the human race (Fries, as above, p656 sq.). If David already sees himself made head and ruler of “the nations,” his royal dominion extended wide over “the strangers,” and praises the Lord’s name before the heathen, so that they acknowledge him and give him the honor ( 2 Samuel 22:44-45; 2 Samuel 22:48; 2 Samuel 22:50), here his prophetic glance takes in all the nations of the earth as embraced in the kingdom of God, wherein the portrayed ruler of the future will bear his universal sway. Comp. Psalm 72:8-17.—This ruler is just, perfectly conformed to the holy will of God, compare Psalm 72:1 sq.; Jeremiah 23:5; Jeremiah 33:15; Zechariah 9:9.—A ruler in the fear of God. His moral integrity combined with religious perfectness; the “fear of God” is not merely the attribute of the Messianic king, but will be seen completely to fill and control him. Compare Isaiah 11:2-3. “A ruler of the fear of God, that Isaiah, a ruler that will be, as it were, the fear of God itself, the bodily fear of God” (Hengst.). [When

52

we compare this song with Psalm 45, 72, Isaiah 11, and similar passages, it seems correcter to regard it as the picture of the ideal theocratic king, than as a vision of a future king. This ideal king Isaiah, in the view of the pious Israelite, invested with all conceivable moral and governmental grandeur, and the picture finds its perfect realization only in Jesus of Bethlehem. The “men,” however, can hardly be said here to mean “all humanity,” but the expression must be taken in the general sense: “a human ruler.”—Tr.]

2 Samuel 23:4. Picture of the blessings that follow the appearance of the future ruler, under the figure of the wholesome effects of the light of the rising sun on a bright morning. And as morning-light, when the sun rises, morning without clouds, from brightness, from rain grass out of the earth (sprouts). These words are not to be connected with the following 2 Samuel 23:5, protasis to it as apodosis [as morning-light, etc., is not my house so?] (Dathe); against this is the “for” at the beginning of 2 Samuel 23:5. Nor are they to be connected syntactically with 2 Samuel 23:3—either by adding the first clause of 2 Samuel 23:4 to complete the preceding sentence: “he is as the light of the morning” (De Wette, Thenius, Sept, which reads: “and in the morning-light of God”)—or by regarding the whole statement about the morning-light as the continuation of the description of the “ruler” in 2 Samuel 23:3 (the Rabbis, Maurer: “and He will come forth as the morning-light shines,” etc.). Against this connection is both the form of 2 Samuel 23:3 b, which is a sharply defined, isolated exclamation, and the form of 2 Samuel 23:4, “which sensibly enough deviates from the sharply-cut, monumental style of the six words compressed in 2 Samuel 23:3 b by a peculiar fulness of lingering description” (Fries, as above, p663). Besides, it is only by isolating 2 Samuel 23:4 on both sides that we can find the ground of its content in 2 Samuel 23:5 (which is introduced by “for”), since the statements of 2 Samuel 23:5 agree only with the content of 2 Samuel 23:4, standing in factual [or real] connection therewith, while 2 Samuel 23:3 b presents the ideal of a person.

2 Samuel 23:4 has the same abrupt, enigmatical, exclamatory tone as 2 Samuel 23:3 b, though it differs from it in its particular statements, a natural result of the fact that here a comparison taken from nature is carried out. As in 2 Samuel 23:3 b, there is not a single verb, and the different statements are unconnected. Even from this formal similarity, 2 Samuel 23:4 is to be regarded as continuation of the immediate divine saying in 2 Samuel 23:3; and not less from its content, which is closely connected with that of 2 Samuel 23:3, describing under the figure of natural light the effect of the light that proceeds from the ruler portrayed in 2 Samuel 23:3, and in similar lapidary style. Fries, however (pp663, 665), separates 2 Samuel 23:4 from the preceding, holding that the “divine saying” ends in the latter, and that in the former ( 2 Samuel 23:4) follows a vision to the ravished eye of the dying David, while at the same time his opened ear heard the revealing word of God; accordingly he translates: “God speaks—: and before me it is as morning-light in sunshine.” But against this view Isaiah 1) that the “divine saying” (confined to 2 Samuel 23:3 b) would be singularly short in comparison with the elaborate announcement [ 2 Samuel 23:1-3 a]; 2) that if David here consciously began to describe a vision (different from the divine saying above), he would have somehow intimated the fact, instead of proceeding

53

with “and as the morning-light;” and3) that the explanation: “before me it is light,” etc., introduces into the text what is not intimated in it, for there is no hint here of any special vision given to David along with the immediate word of God divinely imparted to him. The appearance of the bright glory of a clear life-awakening morning does not now for the first time dawn on the singer, but he sees it from the same height of prophetic contemplation whence he saw the ruler in 2 Samuel 23:3 b. He sees both together, and certifies both by the “divine saying,” which extends over 2 Samuel 23:4; on both sections of this divine saying, 2 Samuel 23:3 b and 2 Samuel 23:4, is stamped the same plastic objectivity of prophetic view, as it is produced by the Spirit of prophecy.

The subject is not the Messiah, as was held by several early expositors (for Exodus, Crusius [and so Wordsworth now]), who took “the sun rises” as principal sentence, and “sun” as figure of the Messiah (after Malachi 3:20): “as the morning-light will the sun rise;” this is forbidden by the collocation of words, and by the fact that this comparison would involve a tautology. It is rather an impersonal expression, the subject being left undetermined: “And it is as morning-light, when the sun rises,” or, its appearance is as morning-light. The “light of morning” stands in contrast with the darkness of the preceding night, and denotes (as the figure of light generally does) the well-being that comes with the ruler after wretchedness and ruin. Comp. Psalm 59:17, 16]. The “when the sun rises,” defining the “morning-light,” indicates its source, and answers to the “ruler over men.” The “without clouds,” parallel to the preceding, strengthens the conception of the well-being as wholly unalloyed. In the “brightness” [Eng. A. V.: clear shining] of the risen sun its light unfolds itself and shows itself active. The “rain” stands in connection with the “without clouds;” after the rain of the night the clouds have dispersed; but from rain and sunshine now sprouts forth the verdure. The expression may be rendered either: “from brightness, from rain comes herb,” where “brightness” and “rain” are both causes, or: “from brightness after rain.” The former rendering is favored by the immediate repetition of the same Preposition. The fact involved [which is the same, whichever rendering be taken] is the morning sunshine, following the night-rain, dispersing the rain-clouds, and making the fresh herb sprout vigorously from the moist soil. On rain as a figure of blessing see Isaiah 44:3. The verdure sets forth the blessings that are the fruit of dispensations from above. Comp. Isaiah 44:4; Isaiah 45:8; especially Psalm 72:6 : “He will come down as rain on the mown field, as showers that water the earth.”—“Here,” says Thenius rightly, “ends the divine saying,” only there is described therein not “the happy work of a ruler, as he ought to be” (Then.), but in general the blessing brought by the definite ideal ruler of the future seen by divine revelation.—The whole figure carries out the thought that the ruler described in 2 Samuel 23:3 will bring weal and blessing in his train.

5 "Is not my house right with God?

54

Has he not made with me an everlasting covenant, arranged and secured in every part? Will he not bring to fruition my salvation and grant me my every desire?

BARNES, "Although my house ... - The sense of this clause (according to the the King James Version) will be that David comparing the actual state of his family and kingdom during the later years of trouble and disaster with the prophetic description of the prosperity of the righteous king, and seeing how far it falls short, comforts himself by the terms of God’s covenant 2Sa_7:12-16 and looks forward to Messiah’s kingdom. The latter clause, “although he make it not to grow,” must then mean that, although at the present time the glory of his house was not made to grow, yet all his salvation and all his desire was made sure in the covenant which would be fulfilled in due time. But most modern commentators understand both clauses as follows: “Is not my house so with God that He has made with me an everlasting covenant,” etc.? “For all my salvation and all my desire, will He not cause it to spring up?” namely, in the kingdom of Solomon, and still more fully in the kingdom of Christ.

CLARKE, "When the waves of death compassed me - Though in a primary sense many of these things belong to David, yet generally and fully they belong to the Messiah alone.

GILL, "Although my house be not so with God,.... So bright, and flourishing, and prosperous as the government of the just ruler before described; or is not "right"F13 with God, meaning his family, in which great sins were committed, and great disorders and confusions brought into it, as the cases of Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah showed; or "not firm" or "stable"F14, through the rebellion of one, the insurrection of another, and the usurpation of a third; yet he believed it would be firm and stable in the Messiah that should spring from him, promised in the everlasting covenant; though the Jewish writers understand this of the firmness and stability of his kingdom and government: "but my house is not so", &c. like the morning light, which increases by little and little, and like the morning, which sometimes is not cloudy, and sometimes is; sometimes the sun shines clearly, and sometimes not; or like the tender grass, which is sometimes flourishing, and after withers; but so is not my kingdom, it is a perpetual one, given and secured by an everlasting covenant; and such certainly is or will be the kingdom of the Messiah:

yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure; or, "forF15 he hath made", &c. the covenant by which the kingdom was settled on David and his seed was a covenant that would continue for ever, and would be kept, "observed", and "preserved"F16 in all the articles of it, and so be

55

sure to his seed, particularly to the Messiah that should spring from him, in whom it was fulfilled, Luke 1:32; and the covenant of grace made with David's antitype, with Christ the head of the church, and the representative of it, and so with all his people in him, is an everlasting one: it was made with Christ from everlasting, as appears from the everlasting love of God, the source and spring of it; the earliness of the divine counsels on which it is formed, and blessings and promises of it, with which it is filled, which were before the world was; and from Christ being set up as the Mediator of it from everlasting: and it will continue to everlasting; it is a covenant that cannot be broken, will never be removed, nor give way to or be succeeded by another: it is "ordered in all things": to promote and advance the glory of all the three Persons in the Godhead, Father, Son, and Spirit; to secure the persons of the saints, and to provide everything needful for them for time and eternity: and it is "sure"; it stands upon a sure basis, the unchangeable will and favour of God, and is in the hands of Christ, the same today, yesterday, and for ever; its mercies are the sure mercies of David, and its promises are yea and amen in Christ, and are sure to all the seed. Though things may not be with them God-ward, as they desire, and could be wished for; though they may be attended with many sins and infirmities, the temptations of Satan, divine desertions, and various afflictions, and be guilty of many backslidings, yet covenant interest always continues; and so, though in the kingdom and interest of Christ in the world, there are, and may be, many things disagreeable; it may be attended with persecutions, heresies, scandals, &c. yet it shall continue and increase, and spread, and be an everlasting kingdom:

for this is all my salvation: all depends upon this covenant; the safety of David's family, and the security of the kingdom in it, and to his seed, till the Messiah came, depended on the covenant made with him respecting that; and the spiritual and eternal salvation of the Lord's people depends upon the covenant of grace; which was contrived, formed, and settled in it, in which the Saviour is provided, and the persons to share in his salvation are taken into it and secured, with all blessings both of grace and glory:

and all my desire; to see it fulfilled; as it is the desire of good men to be led more and more into it, to see their interest in it, to have the blessings and promises of it applied unto them, and to be saved by it, and not by the covenant of works; and there is all that in it that a believer can desire to make him comfortable here, or happy hereafter; and it is what gives him delight and pleasure in all his troubles: it may be supplied he is, as well as "this is", and be applied to Christ, the ruler over men, described, 2 Samuel 23:3; with whom the covenant of grace is made, in whom is the salvation of men; he is the author and the only author of it; in whom it is complete and perfect; "all" salvation is in him, and which they can claim as theirs; to whom is "all their desire"; and in whom is "all their delight", as it may be rendered; on account of the glory of his person, the fulness of his grace, and his suitableness as a Saviour; whom they desire to know more of, and have more communion with:

although he made it not to grow; though there may not be at present any growth

56

of outward prosperity, or of inward grace, or even of the produce of the earth, Habakkuk 3:17; though the horn of David is not yet made to bud, or his family in growing and flourishing circumstances, or the Messiah, the man, the branch, does not yet shoot forth, though he certainly would; or, "for shall he not bud forth" he shall, Jeremiah 23:5.

HENRY, "2. What comfortable use he made of this which God spoke to him, and what were his devout meditations on it, by way of reply, 2Sa_23:5. It is not unlike his meditation on occasion of such a message, 2Sa_7:18, etc. That which goes before the Rock of Israel spoke to him; this the Spirit of God spoke by him, and it is a most excellent confession of his faith and hope in the everlasting covenant. Here is,

(1.) Trouble supposed: Although my house be not so with God, and although he make it not to grow. David's family was not so with God as is described (2Sa_23:3, 2Sa_23:4), and as he could wish, not so good, not so happy; it had not been so while he lived; he foresaw it would not be so when he was gone, that his house would be neither so pious nor so prosperous as one might have expected the offspring of such a father to be. [1.] Not so with God. Note, We and ours are that really which we are with God. This was what David's heart was upon concerning his children, that they might be right with God, faithful to him and zealous for him. But the children of godly parents are often neither so holy nor so happy as might be expected. We must be made to know that it is corruption, not grace, that runs in the blood, that the race is not to the swift, but that God gives his Spirit as a free-agent. [2.] Not made to grow, in number, in power; it is God that makes families to grow or not to grow, Psa_107:41. Good men have often the melancholy prospect of a declining family. David's house was typical of the church of Christ, which is his house, Heb_3:3. Suppose this be not so with God as we could wish, suppose it be diminished, distressed, disgraced, and weakened, by errors and corruptions, yea, almost extinct, yet God has made a covenant with the church's head, the Son of David, that he will preserve to him a seed, that the gates of hell shall never prevail against his house. This our Saviour comforted himself with in his sufferings, that the covenant with him stood firm, Isa_53:10-12. (2.) Comfort ensured: Yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant. Whatever trouble a child of God may have the prospect of, still he has some comfort or other to balance it with (2Co_4:8, 2Co_4:9), and there is none like this of the Psalmist, which may be understood, [1.] Of the covenant of royalty (in the type) which God made with David and his seed, touching the kingdom, Psa_132:11, Psa_132:12. But, [2.] It must look further, to the covenant of grace made with all believers, that God will be, in Christ, to them a God, which was signified by the covenant of royalty, and therefore the promises of the covenant are called the sure mercies of David, Isa_55:3. It is this only that is the everlasting covenant, and it cannot be imagined that David, who, in so many of his psalms, speaks so clearly concerning Christ and the grace of the gospel, should forget it in his last words. God has made a covenant of grace with us in Jesus Christ, and we are here told, First,That it is an everlasting covenant, from everlasting in the contrivance and counsel of it, and to everlasting in the continuance and consequences of it. Secondly, That it is ordered, well ordered in all things, admirably well, to advance the glory of God and the honour of the Mediator, together with the holiness and comfort of believers. It is herein well ordered, that whatever is required in the covenant is promised, and that every transgression in the covenant does not throw us out of covenant, and that it puts our salvation, not in our own keeping, but in the keeping of a Mediator. Thirdly,That it is sure, and therefore sure because well ordered; the general offer of it is sure; the promised mercies are sure on the performance of the conditions. The particular application of it to true believers is sure; it is sure to all the seed. Fourthly, That it is

57

all our salvation. Nothing but this will save us, and this is sufficient: it is this only upon which our salvation depends. Fifthly, That therefore it must be all our desire.Let me have an interest in this covenant and the promises of it, and I have enough, I desire no more.

JAMISON, "Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure — “the light of the morning,” that is, the beginning of David’s kingdom, was unlike the clear brilliant dawn of an Eastern day but was overcast by many black and threatening clouds; neither he nor his family had been like the tender grass springing up from the ground and flourishing by the united influences of the sun and rain; but rather like the grass that withereth and is prematurely cut down. The meaning is: although David’s house had not flourished in an uninterrupted course of worldly prosperity and greatness, according to his hopes; although great crimes and calamities had beclouded his family history; some of the most promising branches of the royal tree had been cut down in his lifetime and many of his successors should suffer in like manner for their personal sins; although many reverses and revolutions may overtake his race and his kingdom, yet it was to him a subject of the highest joy and thankfulness that God will inviolably maintain His covenant with his family, until the advent of his greatest Son, the Messiah, who was the special object of his desire, and the author of his salvation.

ELLICOTT, " (5) Although my house.—This verse is extremely difficult, and admits of two interpretations. That given in the English is found in the LXX., the Vulg., and the Syriac, and if adopted will mean that David recognises how far he and his house have failed to realise the ideal description set forth; yet since God’s promise is sure, this must be realised in his posterity. Most modern commentators, however, prefer to take the clauses interrogatively: “Is not my house thus with God? for He hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all, and sure. For all my salvation and all my desire, shall He not cause it to spring forth?” The Hebrew admits either rendering, but that of the ancient versions gives a higher idea of David’s spiritual discernment.

Ordered in all.—As a carefully drawn legal document, providing for all contingencies and leaving no room for misconstruction.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:5. Although my house be not so with God — Although God knows that neither I nor my children have lived and ruled as we should have done, so justly, and in the fear of the Lord; and therefore have not enjoyed that uninterrupted prosperity which we might have enjoyed. Covenant — Notwithstanding all our transgressions whereby we have broken covenant with God, yet God, to whom all my sins were known, was graciously pleased to make a sure covenant, to continue the kingdom to me, and to my seed for ever, 2 Samuel 7:16, until the coming of the Messiah, who is to be my son and successor, and whose kingdom shall have no end. Ordered in all things — Ordained in all points by God’s eternal counsel, and disposed by his wise and powerful providence, which will overrule all things, even the sins of my house so far, that although he punish them for their sins, yet he will not utterly root them out, nor

58

break his covenant made with me and mine. Sure — Or, preserved, by God’s power and faithfulness in the midst of all oppositions. For this is all my salvation — That is, my salvation consists in, and depends on, this covenant; even both my own eternal salvation, and the preservation of the kingdom to me and mine. Although he make it not, &c. — Although God, as yet, hath not made my house or family to grow; that is, to increase, or to flourish with worldly glory as I expected; yet this is my comfort, that God will inviolably keep this covenant. But this refers also to the covenant of grace made with all believers. This is indeed an everlasting covenant, from everlasting, in the contrivance of it, and to everlasting, in the continuance and consequence of it. It is ordered, well ordered in all things; admirably well, to advance the glory of God, and the honour of the Mediator, together with the holiness and happiness of believers. It is sure, and therefore sure, because well ordered: the promised mercies are sure, on the performance of the conditions. It is all our salvation: nothing but this will save us, and this is sufficient. Therefore it should be all our desire. Let me have an interest in this covenant, and I have enough, I desire no more.

COKE, "2 Samuel 23:5. Although my house be not so with God, &c.— This passage is universally allowed to be extremely difficult and obscure. I have not met with any interpretation which appears preferable to that given by Dr. Grey. But to those, says he, who prefer the common way of pointing, (for I make no alteration in the words of the text,) perhaps the following explanation may not appear unnatural: "Although the present situation of myself and family, and of the people of God, falls so much short of these glorious characters; yet I am fully assured, that such a time will come, according to the covenant he hath renewed with me, and his promise since the world began."

LANGE, "2 Samuel 23:5 gives the ground for the divine revelation in 2 Samuel 23:3-4, by reference to the promise in chap7, which forms the foundation of this prophetic view. The introductory conjunction = simply “for,” not: “is it that my house?” (as if = הכי, Crus, Dathe). The first member is not to be taken as an affirmation: “for not so is my house” [so nearly Eng. A. V.]. Several Rabbis so understood it, putting an artificial and foreign sense into the words: thus in the preceding verse they take the “morning without clouds” as = “not a cloudy morning,”[FN5] and the “from shining after rain,” etc., as defining this “cloudy morning,” when sunshine after rain produces mildew (Isaaki), or only fleeting light breaks through the clouds (R. Levi), or under the capricious alternation of sunshine and rain “nothing better springs up than quickly withering grass” (D. Kimchi), that they may find in contrast therewith the glory of the Davidic House set forth in 2 Samuel 23:5 (comp. Fries, p688). So Luther takes the sentence as an affirmation, but with the exactly opposite contrast with 2 Samuel 23:4, namely, he regards 2 Samuel 23:5 as an humble confession: “it is not such a house as is worthy of such unspeakable honor from God,” that Isaiah, such honor as is pictured in 2 Samuel 23:4. “Here David falls into great humility and astonishment that such great things should come from his flesh and blood.” In accordance with this he takes the following words: “all my salvation and doing is that nothing grows,” that Isaiah, “I am also a king and lord, and have well ordered and established the kingdom; but such kingdom of mine, yea the realm

59

of all kings on earth, Isaiah, in comparison with the dominion of my son Messiah, nothing but a dry branch, that has never grown nor thriven.” Against this view is the absence of the subject assumed in it, or, if this subject be found in the “not” taken as = “nothing,” the absence of the defining term (“earthly”); nor could David possibly have based the thought that his house would not continue on the prophecy in chap7. Rather the first member of 2 Samuel 23:5, as well as the third, is to be taken as a question.[FN6]—For is not my house so with God? As 2 Samuel 23:3 and 2 Samuel 23:4 are in content inseparably connected, the “for” assigns the reason of the whole divine saying, not merely of 2 Samuel 23:4; and the “so”[FN7] refers to the whole of 2 Samuel 23:3-4, that Isaiah, so as is said above of the ruler, the wholesome influence that he brings (light) and its happy effects (verdure). But the thought on which this statement is based is not that David says that his own reign was in accord with the truth ( 2 Samuel 23:3-4), that a pious king is like the morning-light, under whose influence every thing prospers—that God has granted blessing to his house and his house’s future—that he thence infers that he answers to that figure of a pious ruler, the whole being an instance or example (in the form of a question) attached to the preceding general statement about the “ruler” (De Wette, Then.). For (apart from the fact that this interpretation of 2 Samuel 23:3-4, as a statement concerning any pious ruler, whose government diffuses blessing, has been above refuted) against this is that the sentence speaks only of David’s house, not of himself and his government, and that, if David had intended to derive an argument respecting himself from the blessing that came to his house, he must have expressed himself quite differently. And Fries rightly remarks that instead of such self-assertory thoughts, it would be seemlier to put into the dying David’s mouth a “who am I and what is my house?” ( 2 Samuel 7:18).—The sentence is rather to be rendered: “For—stands not my house in such a relation to God?” Hearing and declaring the divine saying ( 2 Samuel 23:3-4), the picture of the ideal theocratic ruler and his attendant blessings, David recalls the promise of imperishable royal dominion that has been given to his house and seed. These two divine declarations he here so combines that the latter (chap7.) is made to confirm and give the ground of the former ( 2 Samuel 23:3-4). The sense Isaiah, then, not merely: Stands not my house in such relation to God that out of it shall arise the righteous ruler? (Keil), but also that the promised blessings will proceed from him? On the connection between this divine saying ( 2 Samuel 23:3-4) and 2 Samuel 23:5, Fries admirably remarks: “This ‘for’ serves as in innumerable cases, to attach a reflection that is meditating an explanation, and we need only put aside the erroneous opinion (that so often makes difficulty in the explanation of Old Testament passages) that sentence on sentence must be taken, as it were, in one breath, and grant the speaker a short pause of quiet thought, and we shall then understand the free transition of ideas here between 2 Samuel 23:4 and 2 Samuel 23:5. The quiet transition lies in the successful, effort of the soul to gird itself to conscious justification of its belief in the offered blessing.” [The connection may be thus indicated: the ruler of men is just and God-fearing, and brings with him all blessings, and this is true of my house, for it is thus in communion with God, for He has made an everlasting covenant with me.—Tr.]—The second “for” gives the reason not merely for the “so” (Böttch, Then.), but also for the whole phrase “so is my house with God,” since the following sentence involves the position of his house towards God: for He has

60

made with me an everlasting covenant. These words refer directly to the promise in 2 Samuel 7:12 sq. It is called a covenant because of the reciprocal relation between God and the seed of David, as set forth in 2 Samuel 23:12-14. It is according to 2 Samuel 23:16 an everlasting covenant: “And sure is thy house and thy kingdom forever before thee, thy throne will be established forever.” The phrase “ordered (arranged) in all things” denotes that the draught of the instrument or deed of covenant is legally correct and exact, is arranged by the declaration of God (Fries). Comp. 2 Samuel 7:14 sqq, where the eventual apostasy of the bearer of the covenant is considered, and in spite of this the maintenance of the covenant is contemplated. The covenant is preserved, secured, guarded against non-fulfillment by the truthfulness of the divine promise. Comp. 1 Kings 8:25, where Song of Solomon, with reference to 2 Samuel 23:12-16, prays: “Preserve to thy servant David, my father, what thou spakest to him.”—As these words (“for a covenant, etc,”) thus undoubtedly refer to chap7 it is inadmissible with Crusius to refer them to 2 Samuel 23:3 sqq.; for in this latter passage the reciprocity involved in the term “covenant” is altogether lacking, and the predicates, ordered and preserved are not applicable to it.—The third “for” now introduces the interrogatory third member (whose reference to the image in 2 Samuel 23:4 : “verdure (sprouts) from the earth” is indubitable), and grounds the writer’s confidence in the sureness of the covenant on the future blessings secured by that covenant. For all my salvation and all pleasure, should He not make it sprout? My salvation, that Isaiah, the salvation promised, assured to me and my seed. The pleasure must be taken (as the salvation is from God) as = what is well-pleasing to God, not as = “what is well-pleasing to me” (Then, Hengst.); the pronoun “my” is not to be repeated with it [as in Eng. A. V. ]. David refers the salvation promised him and his house—not also “the religious and ethical culture of his people” (Then.)—to its source in God’s good pleasure, expressed in the covenant as a divine counsel of salvation. “David will say of the divine resolution of salvation that it, because it has once been lodged as a principle in the bosom of the Davidic house by the divine covenant, cannot be accomplished except by thorough development, elaboration of all its elements, conclusory revelation of its deepest secret” (Fries).—“Should he not[FN8] make it sprout?” The verb is transitive, having “salvation and pleasure” as its object. This corresponds also with the idea of divine causality that controls the whole of 2 Samuel 23:5 and is distinctly expressed in the phrase “made a covenant with me” (lit.: established a covenant to me). Fries would find here “the first example and fundamental passage for the solemn use of this verb ;that occurs afterwards in Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 43:19; Isaiah 44:4 (”sprout“ צמח)Isaiah 45:8; Isaiah 58:8; Isaiah 61:11; Jeremiah 23:5; Jeremiah 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; Zechariah 6:12;” but here the “sprouting” (comp. 2 Samuel 23:4) is affirmed not of the person of the “righteous ruler,” but of the salvation and blessing that accompanies him.[FN9] [Comp. the parallel statement in Isaiah 53:10, where it is said that the “pleasure” of Jehovah shall prosper in the hand of the righteous servant of Jehovah. Possibly there is a connection between this passage and ours, though the verb employed is different. The general declaration here Isaiah, that God in His covenant-mercy will secure all blessing to the writer.—Tr.]

PULPIT, "Although my house, etc. The rendering of the Authorized Version is that of the ancient versions, and is to be retained. David could not but feel that his

61

house was too stained with sin upon sin for him to be able to lay claim to have been in fact that which the theocratic king was in theory, and which David ought to have been as the representative of Christ, and himself the christ, or anointed of Israel’s God. But most modern commentators take the negatives as interrogative, and, therefore, as strong assertions.

"For is not my house so with God?

For he had made with me an eternal covenant,

Ordered in all things, and secure:

For all my salvation and all my desire,

Shall he not make it to grow?"

But surely David had failed in realizing the better purposes of his heart, and it was of God’s good pleasure that the covenant, in spite of personal failure, remained firm and secure.

MACLAREN 5-7, "THE DYING KING’S LAST VISION AND PSALM

2 Samuel 23:1 - 2 Samuel 23:7.

It was fitting that ‘the last words of David’ should be a prophecy of the true King, whom his own failures and sins, no less than his consecration and victories, had taught him to expect. His dying eyes see on the horizon of the far-off future the form of Him who is to be a just and perfect Ruler, before the brightness of whose presence and the refreshing of whose influence, verdure and beauty shall clothe the world. As the shades gather round the dying monarch, the radiant glory to come brightens. He departs in peace, having seen the salvation from afar, and stretched out longing hands of greeting toward it. Then his harp is silent, as if the rapture which thrilled the trembling strings had snapped them.

I. We have first a prelude extending to the middle of 2 Samuel 23:3. In it there is first a fourfold designation of the personality of the Psalmist-prophet, and then a fourfold designation of the divine oracle spoken through him. The word rendered in 2 Samuel 23:1 ‘saith’ is really a noun, and usually employed with ‘the Lord’ following, as in the familiar phrase ‘saith the Lord.’ It is used, as here, with the genitive of the human recipient, in Balaam’s prophecy, on which this is evidently modelled. It distinctly claims a divine source for the oracle following, and declares, at the outset, that these last words of David were really the faithful sayings of Jehovah. The human and divine elements are smelted together. Note the description of the human personality. First, the natural ‘David the son of Jesse,’ like ‘Balaam the son of Beor’ in the earlier oracle. The aged king looks back with adoring thankfulness to his early days and humble birth, as if he were

62

saying, ‘Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should proclaim the coming King.’ Then follow three clauses descriptive of what ‘the son of Jesse’ had been made by the grace of God, in that he had been raised on high from his low condition of a shepherd boy, and anointed as ruler, not only by Samuel and the people, but by the God of their great ancestor, whose career had presented so many points of resemblance to his own, the God who still wrought among the nation which bore the patriarch’s name, as He had wrought of old; and that, besides his royalty, he had been taught to sing the sweet songs which already were the heritage of the nation. This last designation shows what David counted God’s chief gift to him,-not his crown, but his harp. It further shows that he regarded his psalms as divinely inspired, and it proves that already they had become the property of the nation. This first verse heightens the importance of the subsequent oracle by dwelling on the claims of the recipient of the revelation to be heard and heeded.

Similarly, the fourfold designation of the divine source has the same purpose, and corresponds with the four clauses of 2 Samuel 23:1, ‘The Spirit of the Lord spake in [or “into”] me.’ That gives the Psalmist’s consciousness that in his prophecy he was but the recipient of a message. It wonderfully describes the penetrating power of that inward voice which clearly came to him from without, and as clearly spoke to him within. Words could not more plainly declare the prophetic consciousness of the distinction between himself and the Voice which he heard in the depths of his spirit. It spoke in him before he spoke his lyric prophecy. ‘His word was upon my tongue.’ There we have the utterance succeeding the inward voice, and the guarantee that the Psalmist’s word was a true transcript of the inward voice. ‘The God of Israel said,’ and therefore Israel is concerned in the divine word, which is not of private reference, but meant for all. ‘The Rock of Israel spake,’ and therefore Israel may trust the Word, which rests on His immutable faithfulness and eternal being.

II. The divine oracle thus solemnly introduced and guaranteed must be worthy of such a prelude. Abruptly, and in clauses without verbs, the picture of the righteous Ruler is divinely flashed before the seer’s inward eye. The broken construction may perhaps indicate that he is describing what he beholds in vision. There is no need for any supplement such as ‘There shall be,’ which, however true in meaning, mars the vividness of the presentation of the Ruler to the prophet’s sight. David sees him painted on the else blank wall of the future. When and where the realisation may be he knows not. What are the majestic outlines? A universal sovereign over collective humanity, righteous and God-fearing. In the same manner as he described the vision of the King, David goes on, as a man on some height telling what he saw to the people below, and paints the blessed issues of the King’s coming.

It had been night before He came,-the night of ignorance, sorrow, and sin,-but His coming is like one of these glorious Eastern sunrises without a cloud, when everything laughs in the early beams, and, with tropical swiftness, the tender herbage bursts from the ground, as born from the dazzling brightness and the

63

fertilising rain. So all things shall rejoice in the reign of the King, and humanity be productive, under His glad and quickening influences, of growths of beauty and fruitfulness impossible to it without these.

The abrupt form of the prophecy has led some interpreters to construe it as, ‘When a king over men is righteous. . . then it is as a morning,’ etc. But surely such a platitude is not worthy of being David’s last word, nor did it need divine inspiration to disclose to him that a just king is a great blessing. The only worthy meaning is that which sees here, in words so solemnly marked as a special revelation closing the life of David, ‘the vision of the future and all the wonder that should be,’ when a real Person should thus reign over men. The explanation that we have here simply the ideal of the collective Davidic monarchy is a lame attempt to escape from the recognition of prophecy properly so called. It is the work of poetry to paint ideals, of prophecy to foretell, with God’s authority, their realisation. The picture here is too radiant to be realised in any mere human king, and, as a matter of fact, never was so in any of David’s successors, or in the whole of them put together. It either swings in vacuo, a dream unrealised, or it is a distinct prophecy from God of the reign of the coming Messiah, of whom David and all his sons, as anointed kings, were living prophecies. ‘The Messianic idea entered on a new stage of development with the monarchy, and that not as if the history stimulated men’s imaginations, but that God used the history as a means of further revelation by His prophetic Spirit.

III. The difficult 2 Samuel 23:5, whether its first and last clauses be taken interrogatively or negatively, in its central part bases the assurance of the coming of the king on God’s covenant [2 Samuel 7:1 - 2 Samuel 7:29], which is glorified as being everlasting, provided with all requisites for its realisation, and therefore ‘sure,’ or perhaps ‘preserved,’ as if guarded by God’s inviolable sanctity and faithfulness. The fulfilment of the dying saint’s hopes depends on God’s truth. Whatever sense might say, or doubt whisper, he silences them by gazing on that great Word. So we all have to do. If we found our hopes and forecasts on it, we can go down to the grave calmly, though they be not fulfilled, sure that ‘no good thing can fail us of all that He hath spoken.’ Living or dying, faith and hope must stay themselves on God’s word. Happy they whose closing eyes see the form of the King, and whose last thoughts are of God’s faithful promise! Happy they whose forecasts of the future, nearer or more remote, are shaped by His word! Happy they who, in the triumphant energy of such a faith, can with dying lips proclaim that His promises overlap, and contain, all their salvation and all their desire!

If we read the first and last clauses negatively, with Revised Version and others, they, as it were, surround the kernel of clear-eyed faith, in the middle of the verse, with a husk, not of doubt, but of consciousness how far the present is from fulfilling the great promise. The poor dying king looks back on the scandals of his later reign, on his own sin, on his children’s lust, rebellion, and tragic deaths, and feels how far from the ideal he and they have been. He sees little token of growth toward realisation of that promise; but yet in spite of a stained past and a

64

wintry present, he holds fast his confidence. That is the true temper of faith, which calls things that are not as though they were, and is hindered by no sense of unworthiness nor by any discouragements born of sense, from grasping with full assurance the promise of God. But the consensus of the most careful expositors inclines to take both clauses as questions, and then the meaning would be, ‘Does not my house stand in such a relation to God that the righteous king will spring from it? It is, in this view, a triumphant question, expressing the strongest assurance, and the next clause would then lay bare the foundation of that relation of David’s house as not its goodness, but God’s covenant {‘for He hath made’}. Similarly the last clause would be a triumphant question of certainty, asserting in the strongest manner that God would cause that future salvation for the world, which was wrapped up in the coming of the king, and in which the dying man was sure that he should somehow have a share, dead though he were, to blossom and grow, though he had to die as in the winter, before the buds began to swell. The assurance of immortality, and of a share in all the blessings to come, bursts from the lips that are so soon to be silent.

IV. But the oracle cannot end with painting only blessings as flowing from the king’s reign. If he is to rule in righteousness and the fear of the Lord, then he must fight against evil. If his coming causes the tender grass to spring, it will quicken ugly growths too. The former representation is only half the truth; and the threatening of destruction for the evil is as much a part of the divine oracle as the other. Strictly, it is ‘wickedness’-the abstract quality rather than the concrete persons who embody it-which is spoken of. May we recall the old distinction that God loves the sinner while He hates the sin? The picture is vivid. The wicked-and all the enemies of this King are wicked, in the prophet’s view-are like some of these thorn-brakes, that cannot be laid hold of, even to root them out, but need to be attacked with sharp pruning-hooks on long shafts, or burned where they grow. There is a destructive side to the coming of the King, shadowed in every prophecy of him, and brought emphatically to prominence in his own descriptions of his reign and its final issues. It is a poor kindness to suppress that side of the truth. Thorns as well as tender grass spring up in the quickening beams; and the best commentary on the solemn words which close David’s closing song is the saying of the King himself: ‘In the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather up first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them.’

K&D, 2Sa_23:5

In 2Sa_23:5, the prophecy concerning the coming of the just ruler is sustained by being raced back to the original promise in 2 Samuel 7, in which David had received a pledge of this. The first and last clauses of this verse can only be made to yield a meaning in harmony with the context, by being taken interrogatively: “for is not my house so with God?” The question is only indicated by the tone (לא כי הלא = _2Sa :כי19:23), as is frequently the case, even before clauses commencing with לא (e.g., Hos_11:5; Mal_2:15 : cf. Ewald, §324, a.). לא־כן (not so) is explained by the following clause, though the כי which follows is not to be taken in the sense of “that.” Each of the two clauses contains a distinct thought. That of the first is, “Does not my house stand in such a relation to God, that the righteous ruler will spring from it?” This is

65

then explained in the second: “for He hath made an everlasting covenant with me.” David calls the promise in 2Sa_7:12., that God would establish his kingdom to his seed for ever, a covenant, because it involved a reciprocal relation-namely, that Jehovah would first of all found for David a permanent house, and then that the seed of David was to build the house of the Lord. This covenant is בכל equipped“ ,ערוכה (or provided) with all” that could help to establish it. This relates more especially to the fact that all eventualities were foreseen, even the falling away of the bearers of the covenant of God, so that such an event as this would not annul the covenant (2Sa_ and preserved,” i.e., established by the assurance that even in that“ ,ושמורה .(7:14-15case the Lord would not withdraw His grace. David could found upon this the certainty, that God would cause all the salvation to spring forth which had been pledged to his house in the promise referred to. כל־ישעי, “all my salvation,” i.e., all the salvation promised to me and to my house. כל־חפץ, not “all my desire,” but “all the good pleasure” of God, i.e., all the saving counsel of God expressed in that covenant. The כי before לא is an energetic repetition of the כי which introduces the explanatory thought, in the sense of a firm assurance: “for all my salvation and all good pleasure, yea, should He not cause it to spring forth?”

6 But evil men are all to be cast aside like thorns, which are not gathered with the hand.

CLARKE, "But the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns - There is no word in the text for sons; it is simply Belial, the good-for-nothing man, and may here refer - first to Saul, and secondly to the enemies of our Lord.

As thorns thrust away - A metaphor taken from hedging; the workman thrusts the thorns aside either with his bill or hand, protected by his impenetrable mitten or glove, till, getting a fair blow at the roots, he cuts them all down. The man is fenced with iron, and the handle of his bill is like the staff of a spear. This is a good representation of the dubbing-bill, with which they slash the thorn hedge on each side before they level the tops by the pruning-shears. The handle is five or six feet long. This is a perfectly natural and intelligible image.

GILL, "But the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns thrust away,.... Not like the tender grass that springs up, and flourishes after rain, and the sunshine upon that; but like thorns, useless, hurtful, and pernicious, and fit only for burning: this is true of wicked men in general, that cast off the yoke of the Lord, and become unprofitable, as Belial signifies; and of wicked governors in particular, who, instead of being helpful, are harmful to a commonwealth; and instead of being the joy and comfort of their subjects, and of giving pleasure to them, and making them cheerful and prosperous, give pain and trouble, and cause grief and sorrow; and are, if

66

possible, to be thrust away, and deposed from government:

because they cannot be taken with hands; thorns cannot be handled and gently dealt with, but some instrument must be used to put them away with force; so wicked men, and especially wicked rulers, are untractable, and not to be managed in a gentle way, and therefore violent ones must be taken.

HENRY 6-7, ". Here is the doom of the sons of Belial read, 2Sa_23:6, 2Sa_23:7. (1.) They shall be thrust away as thorns - rejected, abandoned. They are like thorns, not to be touched with hands, so passionate and furious that they cannot be managed or dealt with by a wise and faithful reproof, but must be restrained by law and the sword of justice (Psa_32:9); and therefore, like thorns, (2.) They shall, at length, be utterly burnt with fire in the same place, Heb_6:8. Now this is intended, [1.] As a direction to magistrates to use their power for the punishing and suppressing of wickedness. Let them thrust away the sons of Belial; see Psa_101:8. Or, [2.] As a caution to magistrates, and particularly to David's sons and successors, to see that they be not themselves sons of Belial (as too many of them were), for then neither the dignity of their place nor their relation to David would secure them from being thrust away by the righteous judgments of God. Though men could not deal with them, God would. Or, [3.] As a prediction of the ruin of all the implacable enemies of Christ's kingdom. There are enemies without, that openly oppose it and fight against it, and enemies within, that secretly betray it and are false to it; both are sons of Belial, children of the wicked one, of the serpent's seed; both are as thorns, grievous and vexatious: but both shall be so thrust away as that Christ will set up his kingdom in despite of their enmity, will go through them (Isa_27:4), and will, in due time, bless his church with such peace that there shall be no pricking brier nor grieving thorn. And those that will not repent, to give glory to God, shall, in the judgment-day (to which the Chaldee paraphrast refers this), be burnt with unquenchable fire. See Luk_19:27.

JAMISON, "But the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns — that is, the wicked enemies and persecutors of this kingdom of righteousness. They resemble those prickly, thorny plants which are twisted together, whose spires point in every direction, and which are so sharp and strong that they cannot be touched or approached without danger; but hard instruments and violent means must be taken to destroy or uproot them. So God will remove or destroy all who are opposed to this kingdom.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:6-7. But the sons of Belial — Having in the foregoing verses described the nature and stability of that kingdom which God had, by a sure covenant, settled upon him and his seed; and especially upon the Messiah, who was to be one of his posterity; he now describes the nature and miserable condition of all the enemies of this holy and blessed kingdom. Shall be all as thorns — Which men do not use to handle, but thrust them away. And so will God thrust away from himself, and from his people and kingdom, all those who shall either secretly or openly set themselves against it. That shall touch them must be fenced — He must arm himself with some iron weapon, whereby he may cut them down; or, with the staff of a spear, or some such thing, whereby he may thrust them away from himself, that they do him no hurt. They shall be utterly burned — Or, if men do not cut them down or thrust them away, they will burn and consume them. The place — Or, in their place, where they grow or stand.

ELLICOTT, "(6) The sons of Belial.—According to the Masoretic punctuation, Belial is not here

67

in the common form, but in the stronger abstract form=worthlessness. The coming in of Divine righteousness leads not only to the assimilation of that which is holy, but also to the rejection of that which is evil, by a law as necessary and immutable as that of action and reaction in the material world. The figures used are to show that, although the wicked injure whatever touches them, means will yet be found by which they may safely be put out of the way.

LANGE, " 2 Samuel 23:6-7. From the form of the righteous ruler, and in the light of the blessing that proceeds from Him, David sees in prophetic perspective, on the basis of the promise given him, not only the salvation and blessing of the everlasting covenant under the dominion of the future everlasting king, but also the judgment (which will come with Him) on the ungodly and the enemies of the Messianic theocracy. But the wicked—as cast-away thorns are they all.—The abstract worthlessness (for the concrete worthless, Deuteronomy 13:14) designates the ungodly in their general character, in contrast with the abstract fear of God ( 2 Samuel 23:3), which forms the religious-moral nature and character of the righteous ruler; as in him only fear of God, so in them only worthlessness. The thorns set forth the hurtful and dangerous enemies of God’s people and kingdom, Numbers 33:55; Isaiah 27:4; Nahum 1:10; Ezekiel 28:24. The thorns, considered as representing enemies, are said (literally) to be “hunted, driven away;”[FN10] when the thing itself (the thorns) is had in view, this meaning is modified into “put, cast away.” The basis of the figure is the field (comp. the “verdure out of the earth,” 2 Samuel 23:3), whose yield is obstructed by thorns. The rapid, prophetic glance, not pausing at the details of the process, but hastening to the end, sees the enemy already overpowered, and now tarries by the final act of destruction, which makes the enemy harmless. While the production of blessing under the righteous ruler is represented (by the figure of sprouting, growing) as a gradual process, the judgment on the ungodly is set forth as final judgment (the burning of the thorns). The thorns are no longer hurtful; they appear to David “already as thorns torn up, with which one may no longer hurt his hands, since all kindness to them has been in vain” (Herder).—For they are not taken with the hand, that Isaiah, one does not grasp them with naked, unarmed hand in order to throw them into a heap for burning, but he that touches them for this purpose, provides,[FN11] arms himself with iron and shaft. The poetical discourse names the various parts of the implement with which the thorns are seized and thrown into a heap (not: “torn out of the earth,” Then.). The expression refers not to the attacking and overcoming of the ungodly, but to their final destruction, set forth by the burning of the thorns, to which this seizing and heaping up is preparatory.—And with fire are they utterly consumed; the fire is symbol of the divine wrath; the expressions indicate the indubitable certainty and completeness of destruction in this final catastrophe (the same figure in Matthew 3:10; Matthew 13:30).—The concluding word (בשבת)[FN12] is to be rendered: “so that there is an end to them” [Eng. A. V.: “in the same place”]. Not “at the seat,” as euphemistic expression for the place where trash and filth are thrown (Böttcher, Deuteronomy 23:12 sqq.)—why should the thorns be first brought to this place? not: “in the place of dwelling,” the place where they grow (Kimchi, Keil), for the term “dwelling” would be here unsuitable, and the thorns are burnt not where they grow, but where they are cast; and so not: “at the seat,” = “on the spot,” “burnt straight-way,” because no other use can be made of them than to manure the fields with their ashes (Then. [Eng. A. V.]); not: “at home” (Cler, Buns.), for one does not take the trouble to carry them home, nor: “at length” (Dathe). The word = “in ceasing,” not, however: “as the extirpation is ended” (Thenius formerly), but: “in that they cease;” the burning proceeds so that a complete ceasing, disappearance takes place. “They are there only for burning, and this end awaits them, that not even the place where they stood is seen” (Herder). The complete cessation or annihilation of the thorns follows naturally on the “burning” as its final result. “This figure also … is taken from the promise in 2 Samuel 7:10. Israel is there represented as a vineyard, his family is to be its guardian, and so the rebels are hurtful, unfaithful thorns” (Herder).—The Prep, “in” serves to supplement the verbal statement by the substantive-idea, as in Psalm 65:6 : I have heard thee in or with salvation, that Isaiah, so that I gave thee salvation; so here: they are burned in ceasing, so that they cease.

[Condensed, paraphrase of David’s last words: “God said to me: The righteous theocratic king dispenses blessings as the rain and sunshine. God, in His covenant, has assured me salvation; but the ungodly shall be destroyed.” The neum or oracle is thus first, a description of the ideal theocratic king, and then the expression of the writer’s personal relation to God, with the implication that godliness is the basis of the divine procedure. This conception of the true

68

theocratic king is realized perfectly only in Jesus Christ, and may thus be termed a typical conception, that Isaiah, one that was partially realized for the contemporaries, and destined hereafter to be completely realized.—The versions here are not very useful; the Chaldee paraphrases throughout, and interprets the passage directly of the Messiah, the text of the Sept. differs from that of the Hebrews, but Vulg. and Syr. conform in general in text and rendering to the masoretic text.—Tr.]

K&D, "The development of salvation under the ruler in righteousness and the fear of God is accompanied by judgment upon the ungodly. The abstract בליעל, worthlessness, is stronger than בליעל the worthless man, and depicts the godless ,אישas personified worthlessness. מנד, in the Keri the Hophal ,מנד of נוד or נדד, literally “scared” or hunted away. This epithet does not apply to the thorns, so well as to the ungodly who are compared to thorns. The reference is to thorns that men root out, not to those which they avoid on account of their prickles. כלהם, an antiquated form for כלם (see Ewald, §247, d.). To root them out, or clean the ground of them, men do not lay hold of them with the bare hand; but “whoever would touch them equips himself with iron, i.e., with (to 'fill the hand' with anything: 2Ki_9:24 ,ידו ,.sc ,ימלא)iron weapons, and spear-shaft” (vid., 1Sa_17:7). This expression also relates to the godless rather than to the thorns. They are consumed בשבת, “at the dwelling,” i.e., as Kimchi explains, at the place of their dwelling, the place where they grow. For בשבתcannot mean “on the spot” in the sense of without delay. The burning of the thorns takes place at the final judgment upon the ungodly (Mat_13:30).

PULPIT 6-7, "The sons of Belial; Hebrew, belial; not a proper name, but a word signifying "worthlessness," and especially vicious worthlessness (see note on 1Sa_1:16). It is from this worthlessness that opposition arises to the just king, and he recognizes it as that which thwarts his efforts. The words may be rendered ―

"But the ungodly are as thorns, to be all of them thrust away;

For they may not be taken hold of with the hand.

And the man that would touch them

Must arm himself with iron and the staff of a spear;

And they shall be utterly burned with fire unto nothingness."

The vicious worthlessness which opposes righteous government must be treated like thorns, too prickly and sharp pointed for gentle dealing. They must be torn up by an iron hook fixed to the end of a spear-handle, and then burnt. The word translated in the same place in the Authorized Version is rendered by Jerome "even to nothing;" and it is just the sort of phrase for which his authority is greatest; for he went to Palestine, and remained there several years, to study the language under Hebrew teachers on the spot. The Septuagint must have had a different reading, as it translates "their shame."

69

7 Whoever touches thorns uses a tool of iron or the shaft of a spear; they are burned up where they lie."

GILL, "But the man that shall touch them must be fenced with iron and the staff of a spear,.... To remove these thorns, or sons of Belial, out of the way, or to defend himself against them; or weapons of war must be made use of to conquer and destroy them, according to the sense of Ben Gersom, and which De Dieu follows; a man that meddles with them must expect to be as much hurt and wounded by them, all over the body, as if not only the point or iron head of a spear, but the wood or handle of the spear, were thrust up in him; but the former sense seems best:

and they shall be utterly burnt with fire in the same place: where the thorns grew, or whither they are removed, or are sitting; where persons are sitting to warm themselves by them: and this may be understood of the destruction of wicked rulers, when their kingdom is taken from them, and they are consumed root and branch; and was true not only of Saul, and his posterity, as some apply it, and of Jeroboam, and those like to him, as the above Jewish writer; but of the wicked Jews, and their rulers, those sons of Belial, who rejected the yoke of Christ, and would not have him to rule over them; to whom the Lord sent the Roman armies fenced with swords and spears, and burnt their city, and destroyed them in the same place; and may take in antichrist, and antichristian states, those sons of Belial, of the wicked ανομος, and lawless one, the son of perdition, whose city, Rome, shall be burnt with fire; and even all wicked men, at the great day of judgment, to which the Targum refers these words; when they, whose end, like thorns, is to be burnt, will be cast into the lake which burns with fire and brimstone.

COKE, "2 Samuel 23:7. They shall be utterly burned with fire— The Chaldee paraphrase gives us the following exposition of the first words of this song: "These are the words of the prophesy of David, which he prophesied concerning the consummation of all things, in the day of consolation which is to come." And it expounds the last words thus: "Their punishment is in the hand of man, but they shall be burnt up utterly, when the house of the great judgment appears, that they may sit on the throne of judgment to judge the world." It may be proper just to observe, that several commentators understand these words primarily of David, and secondarily only as referring to the Messiah. But we have followed that interpretation of them which seems most consistent with the text, and, for the better understanding of the whole, subjoin the following paraphrase: "Thus spoke the Lord, the God of the son of Jesse, the Lord mighty and powerful, who took me from the dust, to lift me up to a throne! Thus spoke

70

the Spirit of the Lord, which animateth David, and dictateth to him those harmonious songs, so pleasing to his nation! It is He, it is the divine Spirit who openeth my mouth, the Spirit of that God whose protection is my happiness and my glory, who inspireth me with new accents. I declare, as the monarch of the universe, the JUST ONE, by way of eminence; a king whose spiritual government will subject the nations to him, only to cause the fear of God to flourish among them. As we behold the bright morning dispel the clouds by its splendour, and recal nature into joy, causing heat to spring up in it with the day; as a gentle shower, by opening the womb of the earth, fertilizes the fields, and causes the plant to shoot, and the green herb to spring forth; so shall be the rising of the Sun of righteousness: so shall Christ bring from heaven salvation to the world, and by illuminating mortals with his light, and vivifying them by the influence of his Spirit, cause the faithful to walk surely under his laws, in the path of perfection and immortality. By promising me that this great king shall issue from one of my descendants, what hath not the great God done for my house? What a covenant is that which he hath condescended to make with me, to assure the glory of my family, and to make it flourish for ever! A covenant immutable and eternal; a covenant, in which his promises, being gradually accomplished, will from age to age have their full effect exactly at the time appointed; a covenant, which is the sure basis of my salvation, the support of my hopes, the source of all my happiness, even in the hour of death. But how different will be the fate of the wicked, obstinately bent to reject or to break the yoke of Christ! Like thorns, which are good for nothing but to tear those who touch them, they shall be approached only to be destroyed. With a destructive sword and a sure hand, they shall most terribly be smitten, shall be crushed, shall be extirpated, and utterly burned in in eternal fire."

ELLICOTT, " (7) Fenced with iron.—The thorns are to be handled with an iron hook on the end of a spear staff. The phrase, “in the same place,” is used only here, and its meaning is quite uncertain. The Vulg. translates, to nothing, meaning to utter destruction; the LXX. substitutes the word shame. The English rendering is as well sustained as any.

The Chaldee Targum upon these verses is very interesting, as giving the ancient Jewish interpretation of the prophecy. It is a much enlarged paraphrase, but gives a Messianic application to the whole. The following is a close translation of 2 Samuel 23:1-3 : “(1) These are the words of the prophecy of David, which he prophesied concerning the end of the age, concerning the days of consolation which are to come. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was exalted to the kingdom said, the anointed by the word of the God of Jacob, and appointed that he might preside over the sweetness of the praises of Israel. (2) David said, In the spirit of prophecy of the Lord I speak these things, and the words of His holiness do I order in my mouth. (3) David said, The God of Israel spake concerning me, the Strong One of Israel who ruleth over the sons of men, the true Judge, said that He would appoint for me a king; He is the Messiah, who shall arise and rule in the fear of the Lord.”

71

David's Mighty Men 8 These are the names of David's mighty men: Josheb-Basshebeth, [2] a Tahkemonite, [3] was chief of the Three; he raised his spear against eight hundred men, whom he killed [4] in one encounter.

BARNES, "The duplicate of this passage is in 1 Chr. 11, where it is in immediate connection with David’s accession to the throne of Israel, and where the mighty men are named as those by whose aid David was made king. The document belongs to the early part of David’s reign. The text of 2Sa_23:8-9 is perhaps to be corrected by comparison with 1Ch_11:11-12.

Chief among the captains - There is great doubt about the exact meaning of this phrase.

(1) the title is given to two other persons, namely, to Abishai in 2Sa_23:18; 1Ch_11:20, and to Amasa in 1Ch_12:18.

(2) the word translated “captain,” is of uncertain meaning, and the orthography repeatedly fluctuates throughout this and the duplicate passage in 1 Chr. 11, between “Shalish” a captain, and “Sheloshah” three.

(3) if, however, the text of Chronicles be taken as the guide, then the sense of “captain” will not come into play, but the word will be a numeral throughout, either “three” or “thirty,” and will describe David’s band of thirty mighty men, with a certain triad or triads of heroes who were yet more illustrious than the thirty.

In the verse before us, therefore, for “chief among the captains,” we should render, “chief of the thirty.”

Eight hundred - The parallel passage in 1 Chronicles has “three hundred,” as in 2Sa_23:18. Such variations in numerals are very frequent. Compare the numbers in Ezra 2 and Neh. 7.

CLARKE, "These be the names of the mighty men - This chapter should be collated with the parallel place, 1 Chronicles 11:11-47; and see Kennicott’s First Dissertation on the printed Hebrew text, pages 64-471.

The Tachmonite that sat in the seat - Literally and properly, Jashobeam the Hachmonite. See 1Ch_11:11.

The same was Adino the Eznite - This is a corruption for he lift up his spear. See 1Ch_11:11.

Eight hundred, whom he slew at one time - Three hundred is the reading in Chronicles, and seems to be the true one. The word חלל chalal, which we translate slain, should probably be translated soldiers, as in the Septuagint, στρατιωτας; he withstood three hundred Soldiers at one time. See the note on David’s lamentation over Saul and Jonathan, 2Sa_1:21 (note), and Kennicott’s First Dissertation, p. 101. Dr. Kennicott observes: “This one verse contains three great corruptions in the

72

Hebrew text:

1. The proper name of the hero Jashobeam is turned into two common words, rendered, that sat in the seat.

2. The words, he lift up his spear, הואעורר את חניתו hu orer eth chanitho, are turned into two proper names wholly inadmissible here: הוא עדינו העצני hu Adino haetsni, he was Adino the Eznite; it being nearly as absurd to say that Jashobeam the Hachmonite was the same with Adino the Eznite, as that David the Beth-lehemite was the same with Elijah the Tishbite.

3. The number eight hundred was probably at first three hundred, as in 1Ch_11:11.”

See Kennicott, ubi supr.

GILL, "These be the names of the mighty men whom David had,.... Besides Joab his general, who is not mentioned; for these were all military men under him, which are distinguished into three classes; the first and highest consisted of three only, who were general officers; and the second also of three, who perhaps were colonels of regiments; and the third of thirty, who were captains of thousands and hundreds:

the Tachmonite that sat in the seat, the chief among the captains: not in the chief seat in the sanhedrim, and was the head of that, and so had the name of Tachmonite, from his wisdom, as the Jewish writers say; but in the council of war, where he presided under the general, or in his absence, and was, perhaps, lieutenant general, and so over all the captains; and therefore was neither David nor Joab, to whom some of the Rabbins apply these words, as observed by Kimchi; or rather he was the chief of the three to whom he belonged; his name, in 1 Chronicles 11:11, is Jashobeam, an Hachmonite, or the son of an Hachmonite, the same as in 1 Chronicles 27:2; and here it may be as well read Josheb-bashebeth the Tachmonite, the same name, with a little variation; which seem to be names given him, taken from his character and office; for his proper name was as follows:

the same was Adino the Eznite: so called either from the family he was of, or from the place of his birth; though a learned man thinks it should be read as in the following supplementF17:

he lifted up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time; which, though a very extraordinary exploit, yet not more strange, or so strange as that of Shamgar's slaying six hundred men with an ox goad, Judges 3:31, or as that of Samson's killing a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass, Judges 15:15, in 1 Chronicles 11:11, the number is only three hundred, which some attempt to reconcile by observing, that not the same person is meant in both places; here he is called Joshebbashebeth, there Jashobeam; here the Tachmonite, there the son of an Hachmonite; nor is he there called Adino the Eznite; but yet it seems plain

73

that in both places the chief of the three worthies of David is meant, and so the same man: others observe, that he engaged with eight hundred, and slew three hundred of them, when the rest fled, and were pursued and killed by his men; and he routing them, and being the occasion of their being slain, the slaying of them all is ascribed to him; or he first slew three hundred, and five hundred more coming upon him, he slew them also: but what Kimchi offers seems to be best, that there were two battles, in which this officer was engaged; at one of them he slew eight hundred, and at the other three hundred; for so what is omitted in the books of Samuel, and of the Kings, is frequently supplied in the books of Chronicles, as what one evangelist in the New Testament omits, another records. The above learned writerF18 conjectures, that ש being the first letter of the words for three and eight, and the numeral letter being here reduced to its word at length, through a mistake in the copier, was written שמנה, "eight", instead of שלש, "three": the Septuagint version is,"he drew out his spear against eight hundred soldiers at once,'and says nothing of slaying them; and seems to be the true sense of the word, as the same learned writerF19 has abundantly shown

HENRY, "I. The catalogue which the historian has here left upon record of the great soldiers that were in David's time is intended, 1. For the honour of David, who trained them up in the arts of exercises of war, and set them an example of conduct and courage. It is the reputation as well as the advantage of a prince to be attended and served by such brave men as are here described. 2. For the honour of those worthies themselves, who were instrumental to bring David to the crown, settle and protect him in the throne, and enlarge his conquests. Note, Those that in public stations venture themselves, and lay out themselves, to serve the interests of their country, are worthy of double honour, both to be respected by those of their own age and to be remembered by posterity. 3. To excite those that come after to a generous emulation. 4. To show how much religion contributes to the inspiring of men with true courage. David, both by his psalms and by his offerings for the service of the temple, greatly promoted piety among the grandees of the kingdom (1Ch_29:6), and, when they became famous for piety, they became famous for bravery.

II. Now these mighty men are here divided into three ranks: -

1. The first three, who had done the greatest exploits and thereby gained the greatest reputation - Adino (2Sa_23:8), Eleazar (2Sa_23:9, 2Sa_23:10), and Shammah, 2Sa_23:11, 2Sa_23:12. I do not remember that we read of any of these, or of their actions, any where in all the story of David but here and in the parallel place, 1 Chr. 11. Many great and remarkable events are passed by in the annals, which relate rather the blemishes than the glories of David's reign, especially after his sin in the matter Uriah; so that we may conclude his reign to have been really more illustrious than it has appeared to us while reading the records of it. The exploits of this brave triumvirate are here recorded. They signalized themselves in the wars of Israel against their enemies, especially the Philistines. (1.) Adino slew 800 at once with his spear. (2.) Eleazar defied the Philistines, as they by Goliath, had defied Israel, but with better success and greater bravery; for when the men of Israel had gone away, he not only kept his ground, but arose, and smote the Philistines, on whom God struck a terror equal to the courage with which this great hero was inspired. His hand was weary, and yet it clave to his sword; as long as he had any strength remaining he held his weapon and followed his blow. Thus, in the service of God, we should keep up the willingness and resolution of the spirit, notwithstanding the weakness and weariness of the flesh - faint, yet pursuing (Jdg_8:4), the hand weary, yet not quitting the sword.

74

JAMISON, "2Sa_23:8-39. A catalog of his mighty men.

These be the names of the mighty men whom David had — This verse should be translated thus: He who sits in the seat of the Tachmonite (that is, of Jashobeam the Hachmonite), who was chief among the captains, the same is Adino the Eznite; he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time. The text is corrupt in this passage; the number eight hundred should be three hundred [Davidson, Hermeneutics]. Under Joab he was chief or president of the council of war. The first or highest order was composed of him and his two colleagues, Eleazar and Shammah. Eleazar seems to have been left to fight the Philistines alone; and on his achieving the victory, they returned to the spoil. In like manner Shammah was left to stand alone in his glory, when the Lord, by him, wrought a great victory. It is not very easy to determine whether the exploits that are afterwards described were performed by the first or the second three.

K&D, "The following list of David's heroes we also find in 1 Chron 11:10-47, and expanded at the end by sixteen names (1Ch_11:41-47), and attached in 1Ch_11:10 to the account of the conquest of the fortress of Zion by the introduction of a special heading. According to this heading, the heroes named assisted David greatly in his kingdom, along with all Israel, to make him king, from which it is evident that the chronicler intended by this heading to justify his appending the list to the account of the election of David as king over all the tribes of Israel (1Ch_11:1), and of the conquest of Zion, which followed immediately afterwards. In every other respect the two lists agree with one another, except that there are a considerable number of errors of the text, more especially in the names, which are frequently corrupt in both texts, to that the true reading cannot be determined with certainty. The heroes enumerated are divided into three classes. The first class consists of three, viz., Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah, of whom certain brave deeds are related, by which they reached the first rank among David's heroes (2Sa_23:8-12). They were followed by Abishai and Benaiah, who were in the second class, and who had also distinguished themselves above the rest by their brave deeds, though they did not come up to the first three (2Sa_23:18-23). The others all belonged to the third class, which consisted of thirty-two men, of whom no particular heroic deeds are mentioned (vv. 24-39). Twelve of these, viz., the five belonging to the first two classes and seven of the third, were appointed by David commanders of the twelve detachments into which he divided the army, each detachment to serve for one month in the year (1 Chron 27). These heroes, among whom we do not find Joab the commander-in-chief of the whole of the forces, were the king's aides-de-camp, and are called in this respect השלשי (2Sa_23:8), though the term השלשים (the thirty, 2Sa_23:13, 2Sa_23:23, 2Sa_23:24) was also a very customary one, as their number amounted to thirty in a round sum. It is possible that at first they may have numbered exactly thirty; for, from the very nature of the case, we may be sure than in the many wars in which David was engaged, other heroes must have arisen at different times, who would be received into the corps already formed. This will explain the addition of sixteen names in the Chronicles, whether the chronicler made us of a different list from that employed by the author of the books before us, and one belonging to a later age, or whether the author of our books merely restricted himself to a description of the corps in its earlier condition.

2Sa_23:8-12

Heroes of the first class. - The short heading to our text, with which the list in the Chronicles also beings (1Ch_11:11), simply gives the name of these heroes. But

75

instead of “the names of the mighty men,” we have in the Chronicles “the number of the mighty men.” This variation is all the more striking, from the fact that in the Chronicles the total number is not given at the close of the list as it is in our text. At the same time, it can hardly be a copyist's error for מבחר (selection), as Bertheau supposes, but must be attributable to the fact that, according to 2Sa_23:13, 2Sa_23:23, and 2Sa_23:24, these heroes constituted a corps which was named from the number of which it originally consisted. The first, Jashobeam, is called “the chief of the thirty” in the Chronicles. Instead of ישבעם (Jashobeam), the reading in the Chronicles, we have here בשבת ישב (Josheb-basshebeth), unquestionably a spurious reading, which probably arose, according to Kennicott's conjecture, from the circumstance that the last two letters of ישבעם were written in one MS under בשבת in the line above (2Sa_23:7), and a copyist took בשבת from that line by mistake for עם. The correctness of the reading Jashobeam is established by 1Ch_27:2. The word תחכמני is also faulty, and should be corrected, according to the Chronicles, into בן־חכמוני (Ben-hachmoni); for the statement that Jashobeam was a son (or descendant) of the family of Hachmon (1Ch_27:32) can easily be reconciled with that in 1Ch_27:2, to the effect that he was a son of Zabdiel. Instead of השלשים ראש (head of the thirty), the reading in the Chronicles, we have here השלשי ראש (head of the three). Bertheau would alter our text in accordance with the Chronicles, whilst Thenius proposes to bring the text of the Chronicles into accordance with ours. But although the many unquestionable corruptions in the verse before us may appear to favour Bertheau's assumption, we cannot regard either of the emendations as necessary, or even warrantable. The proposed alteration of השלשי is decidedly precluded by the recurrence of השלשי ראש in 2Sa_23:18, and the alteration of השלשים in the Chronicles by the repeated allusion to the שיםmש, not only in 2Sa_23:15, 42; 2Sa_12:4, and 1Ch_27:6 of the Chronicles, but also in 2Sa_23:13, 2Sa_23:23, and 2Sa_23:24 of the chapter before us. The explanation given of שלשי and שלשים, as signifying chariot-warriors, is decidedly erroneous;

(Note: This explanation, which we find in Gesenius (Thes. and Lex.) and Bertheau, rests upon no other authority than the testimony of Origen, to the effect that an obscure writer gives this interpretation of τριστάτης, the rendering of שליש, an authority which is completely overthrown by the writer of the gloss in Octateuch. (Schleussner, Lex. in lxx t. v. p. 338), who gives this explanation of τριστάτας: τους παρα χειaρα τουa βασιλέως αaριστεραν τρίτης μοίραςαaρχοντας. Suidas and Hesychius give the same explanation (s. v. τριστάται). Jerome also observes (ad Ezek 23): “It is the name of the second rank next to the king.”)

for the singular השליש is used in all the passages in which the word occurs to signify the royal aide-de-camp (2Ki_7:2, 2Ki_7:17, 2Ki_7:19; 2Ki_9:25; 2Ki_15:25), and the plural שלישים the royal body-guard, not only in 2Ki_15:25, but even in 1Ki_9:22, and Exo_14:7; Exo_15:4, from which the meaning chariot-warriors has been derived. Consequently השלשי ראש is the head of the king's aides-de-camp, and the interchange of השלשי with the השלשים of the Chronicles may be explained on the simple ground that David's thirty heroes formed his whole body of adjutants. The singular שלשי is to be explained in the same manner as הכרתי (see at 2Sa_8:18). Luther expresses the following opinion in his marginal gloss with regard to the words which follow (העצנועדינו We believe the text to have been corrupted by a writer, probably from“ :(הוא עדינוsome book in an unknown character and bad writing, so that orer should be substituted for adino, and ha-eznib for eth hanitho:” that is to say, the reading in the Chronicles, “he swung his spear,” should be adopted (cf. 2Sa_23:18). This supposition is certainly to be preferred to the attempt made by Gesenius (Lex.) and v. Dietrich (s. v. to find some sense in the words by assuming the existence of a (עדין

76

verb עדן and a noun עצן, a spear, since these words do not occur anywhere else in Hebrew; and in order to obtain any appropriate sense, it is still necessary to resort to alterations of the text. “He swung his spear over eight hundred slain at once.” This is not to be understood as signifying that he killed eight hundred men at one blow, but that in a battle he threw his spear again and again at the foe, until eight hundred men had been slain. The Chronicles give three hundred instead of eight hundred; and as that number occurs again in 2Sa_23:18, in the case of Abishai, it probably found its way from that verse into this in the book of Chronicles.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:8. These be the names of the mighty men whom David had — Who helped to raise David to his dignity, and to preserve him in it, being continually with him in all his wars. There is a list of them also 1 Chronicles 11., different from this in several particulars. But Abarbinel thinks this creates no difficulty, if we do but observe that there he distinguishes them into three classes. Those that had always been with him; those that came to him at Ziklag, a little before he was made king of Judah; and those that came to him in Hebron, after he was made king of all Israel. It was proper that the memories of all these should be preserved. But here, in this book, the writer intended only to mention the most excellent of his heroes, who were always with him in his wars; and for whose sake he composed the preceding song of praise to God. Add to this, that this catalogue, though placed here, was taken long before many of the preceding events, as is manifest from hence, that Asahel and Uriah are named in it. It must be observed also, that it was very common for one person to have divers names, and that as some of the worthies died, and others arose in their stead, a great alteration must of course take place in the latter catalogue from the former. We may learn from hence, how much religion tends to inspire men with true courage. David, both by his writings and example, greatly promoted piety among the grandees of his kingdom. And when they became famous for piety, they became famous for bravery.

The Tachmonite that sat in the seat — He sat in the counsel of war, next to Joab, being, it is thought, his lieutenant-general. Chief among the captains — The principal commander after Joab. The same was Adino — This was his proper name, and he probably was of the family of the Eznites. He lifted up his spear — These words are properly supplied out of 1 Chronicles 11:11, where they are expressed. Against eight hundred — In the above-mentioned place of 1 Chronicles it is only three hundred. Whom he slew at one time — In one battle, which, though it be strange, cannot be incredible, supposing him to be a person of extraordinary strength and activity, and his enemies to be discouraged and fleeing away.

PULPIT, "These be the names. A similar list is given in 1Ch_11:10-47, with several variations, and sixteen more names. It is given there in connection with David’s elevation to the throne of all Israel, and the conquest of Jerusalem. Such catalogues might possibly be revised from time to time, and new names inserted as there were vacancies caused by death. And this seems to have been the ease with the list in Chronicles, which contains the names of all who were admitted during David’s reign into the order of the mighties. The present is the actual list of the order as it

77

existed on the day when David, at Hebron, was anointed king over all the twelve tribes. And we can well conceive that, on so grand an occasion, David founded this, the first order of chivalry, and gave his thirty knights, as they would be now called, their special rank and high privileges. The Tachmonite. This verse is extremely corrupt. A man could not be a Tachmonite and an Eznite at the same time. In the Revised Version the corruption is confessed in the mildest terms, but there is something painfully ludicrous in giving Josheb-basshebeth as the man’s name. The reading "Jashobeam the son of a Hachmonite," in 1Ch_11:11, is confirmed by 1Ch_12:6, where Jashobeam is mentioned among those who joined David at Ziklag, and by 1Ch_27:2, where we find him appointed commander of the first brigade of twenty-four thousand men. The error in the present text arose from the scribe’s eye being misled by catching sight of basshebeth in the line above, it being the word translated "in the same place" in the Authorized Version. He Adino the Eznite. These unmeaning words are a corruption of the right reading preserved in Chronicles, "he lifted up his spear." The number of men whom he slew at one time is there stated as having been three hundred; but, as Abishai accomplished this feat, and yet held only inferior rank, eight hundred is probably right. And possibly it is not meant that he slew them all with his own hand, though that is quite possible. He was chief of the captains. The word for "captain," shalish, is derived from the numeral "three;" and probably it was the title of the three who formed the first rank of the mighties. But in course of time it seems to have been applied to the commanders of the body guard (2Ki_10:25); and we find Bidcar so styled when in personal attendance upon Jehu (2Ki_9:25); and Pekah used the opportunities afforded by this office for the murder of Pekahiah (2Ki_15:25). It is not used of military officers generally. Those admitted to the list were evidently the outlaws who had been with David in his wanderings and at Ziklag. They now received their reward, and became, moreover, the stay of David’s throne. It is their past history which accounts for the strange composition of the list. A large number came from Judah, and especially from Bethlehem. Several are David’s own relatives. Seven towns or families furnish sixteen out of the whole list. We find a father and his son, and pairs of brothers. There are, moreover, numerous foreigners—Hittites, Ammonites, Moabites, a Syrian from Zobah, and Gideonites, descended from the aboriginal inhabitants of the land. Such a list would have been sorely resented had it not been formed out of men who had earned it by their past services and their fidelity to David.

ELLICOTT, " (8) These be the names.—Here, in the summary at the close of David’s reign, is very naturally given a list of his chief heroes. A duplicate of this list, with several variations, and with sixteen more names, is given in 1 Chronicles 11:10-47, which is useful in correcting such clerical errors as have arisen in both. The list in Chronicles is given in connection with David’s becoming king over all Israel; but in both cases the list is not to be understood as belonging precisely to any definite time, but rather as a catalogue of the chief heroes who distinguished themselves at any time in the life of David.

The Tachmonite that sat in the seat.—The text of this verse has undergone several alterations, which may be corrected by the parallel passage in Chronicles. This clause should read, “Jashobeam the Hachmonite,” as in 1 Chronicles 11:11. Jashobeam came to David at Ziklag (1 Chronicles 12:1; 1 Chronicles 12:6), and afterwards became the general of the first division of the army (1 Chronicles

78

27:2), being immediately followed by Dodo. One of the same family was tutor to David’s sons (1 Chronicles 27:32).

The captains.—The word for captain and the word for three are much alike, and the text here and in Chronicles perpetually fluctuates between the two. Probably the sense here is that Jashobeam was the chief of the three who stood highest in rank among the heroes.

No mention is made in either list of Joab, because, as commander-in-chief, he stood in a rank by himself.

The same was Adino the Eznite.—It is difficult to attach any meaning to these words in their connection, and they are generally considered as a corruption of the words in 1 Chronicles 11:11, “he lifted up his spear,” which are required and are inserted here in the English. For “eight hundred” Chronicles has “three hundred,” as in 2 Samuel 23:18. Variations in numbers are exceedingly common, but the probability is in favour of the correctness of the text here. This large number was slain by Jashobeam and the men under his command in one combat.

LANGE, "8These be [are] the names of the mighty men whom David had: The Tachmonite that sat in the seat [margin, Josheb-basshebeth the Tachmonite], chief among the captains [margin, head of the three], the same was Adino the Eznite [om. the same was A. the E.]; he lift up his spear [write without italics] against eight hundred whom he slew [slain] at one time 9 And after him was Eleazar the son of Dodo the Ahohite, one of the three mighty men with David, when they defied the Philistines that were there gathered together [probably: he was with David at Pasdammim, and the P. were there assembled] to battle, and the men of Israel were 10 gone away [went up]. He arose and smote the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand clave unto the sword; and the Lord [Jehovah] wrought a great victory [deliverance] that day, and the people returned after him only to spoil 11 And after him was Shammah the son of Agee the Hararite. And the Philistines were gathered together into a troop [or, to Lehi], where was [and there was there] a piece of ground full of lentiles, and the people fled from the Philistines 12 But [And] he stood in the midst of the ground, and defended [saved] it, and slew [smote] the Philistines; and the Lord [Jehovah] wrought a great victory [deliverance].

COFFMAN, "A LIST OF DAVID'S MIGHTY MEN; THE TOP THREE LEADERS

"These are the names of the mighty men whom David had: Josheb-basshe-beth a Tahchemonite; he was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against eight hundred whom he slew at one time. And next to him among the three mighty

79

men was Eleazar the son of Dodo, son of Ahohi. He was with David when they defied the Philistines who were gathered there for battle, and the men of Israel withdraw. He rose and struck down the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand cleaved to the sword; and the Lord wrought a great victory that day; and the men returned after him only to strip the slain. And next to him was Shammah, the son of Agee the Hararite. The Philistines gathered together at Lehi, where there was a plot of ground full of lentils; and the men fled from the Philistines. But he took his stand in the midst of the plot, and defended it, and slew the Philistines; and the Lord wrought a great victory."

"And the Lord wrought a great victory" (2 Samuel 23:9,12). The Scriptures do not fail to make it dear that, great as the ability and bravery of David's mighty men assuredly was, it was the Lord himself who protected and blessed them and gave them the victory.

"He wielded his spear against eight hundred whom he slew at one time" (2 Samuel 23:9). It would be interesting to know more of the details of how that happened. He certainly must have found some means of protecting himself from multiple attacks simultaneously.

"A plot of ground full of lentils" (2 Samuel 23:11). This line reveals that the purpose of the Philistine raid was that of robbing Israel of their crops ready to be harvested.

COKE, "2 Samuel 23:8. These be the names of the mighty men— As there are variations between this list of David's mighty men, and that in 1 Chronicles 11:10 we shall omit our remarks upon those variations till we come to that chapter of the Chronicles; referring our reader in the mean time to the first volume of Kennicott's Dissertation. Note; Every faithful believer is one of the worthies of Israel, fighting under the banners of Jesus, strong in the Lord and in the power oh his might, victorious over the powers of sin and Satan; and written great, not in the annals of time indeed, but in the annals of eternity, in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Lord, may my name be found written there!

9 Next to him was Eleazar son of Dodai the Ahohite. As one of the three mighty men, he was with David when they taunted the Philistines gathered at Pas Dammim [5] for battle. Then the men of Israel retreated,

80

BARNES, "Gone away - Rather, went up to battle (2Sa_5:19; 2Ki_3:21, etc.) against them. These words and what follows as far as “troop” 2Sa_23:11 have fallen out of the text in Chronicles. The effect of this is to omit EIeazar’s feat, as here described, to attribute to him Shammah’s victory, to misplace the flight of the Israelites, and to omit Shammah altogether from the list of David’s mighty men.

CLARKE, "When they defied the Philistines that were there gathered -This is supposed to refer to the war in which David slew Goliath.

GILL, "And after him was Eleazar the son of Dodo the Ahohite,.... Or the son of Ahohi, perhaps the same with Ahoah, a descendant of Benjamin, 1 Chronicles 8:4; this Eleazar was the next to the Tachmonite, the second worthy of the first class:

one of the three mighty men with David; the second of the three valiant men that were with David in his wars, and fought with him, and for him:

when they defied the Philistines; clapped their hands at them, gloried over them, daring them to come and light them; so did David and his mighty men, as Goliath had defied them before:

that were there gathered together to battle; at Pasdammim, as appears from 1 Chronicles 11:13,

and the men of Israel were gone away; fled when they saw the Philistines gather together to fight them, notwithstanding they had defied them; and so David, and his three mighty men, were left alone to combat with the Philistines.

HENRY 9-11, "Now that Eleazar had beaten the enemy, the men of Israel, who had gone away from the battle (2Sa_23:9), returned to spoil, 2Sa_23:10. It is common for those who quit the field, when any thing is to be done to hasten to it when any thing is to be gotten. (3.) Shammah met with a party of the enemy, that were foraging, and routed them, 2Sa_23:11, 2Sa_23:12. But observe, both concerning this exploit and the former, it is here said, The Lord wrought a great victory. Note, How great soever the bravery of the instruments is, the praise of the achievement must be given to God. These fought the battles, but God wrought the victory. Let not the strong man then glory in his strength, nor in any of his military operations, but let him that glories glory in the Lord.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:9-10. The men of Israel were gone away — Had fled from before the Philistines, as it is explained, 1 Chronicles 11:13, being dismayed at the sight of them. And his hand clave unto the sword — Being all besmeared

81

with blood. The Lord wrought a great victory that day — Like that of Shamgar and of Samson; God inspiring him with wonderful courage, and striking a terror into the Philistines. The people returned after him only to spoil — They that had fled, rallied again when they saw the wonders he did; and followed after him, not to fight, but only to partake of the spoil.

LANGE, "2 Samuel 23:9 sqq. After him, next him in the list, was Eleazar … with David; comp. 2 Samuel 23:11. “The son of Dodai,” as the text reads (pointed according to 1 Chronicles 27:4). The margin has Dodo, 1 Chronicles 11:12 [so Eng. A. V. here]. “The son of an Ahohite,” in Chron. “the Ahohite.” “Among the three heroes,”[FN18] that Isaiah, the renowned trio, Jashobeam, Eleazar and Shammah ( 2 Samuel 23:11).—Instead of our text[FN19] read with Chron.: “with David (Chron.: he was with David) at Pas-dammim, and the Philistines, etc.” Pas-dammim is probably the same place with “ Ephesians -dammim,” 1 Samuel 17:1.—And the Philistines had there assembled to battle. The words from “and the men of Israel went up” ( 2 Samuel 23:9) to “and the Philistines were gathered together to Lehi [Eng. A. V.: into a troop]” ( 2 Samuel 23:11) have fallen out of the text of Chron.[FN20] so that the name of the third hero Shammah” is there wanting, as his deed ( 2 Samuel 23:11-12) falls to Eleazar.—The verb “went up” [Eng. A. V. wrongly: were gone away] denotes simply the marching of the men of Israel against the Philistines; it is unnecessary to add: “in flight” (Then.). The flight or holding back of the Israelites (involved in the “and the people returned,” 2 Samuel 23:10), inasmuch as it occurred after the advance to battle (wherefore Eleazar undertook the contest with the Philistines alone), is not expressly mentioned in the concise narrative, but is first indicated by the “returned.” If the word “went up” had been intended to indicate “flight to higher positions earlier occupied” (Then.), then necessarily a corresponding additional statement would have been made, such as Böttcher too boldly conjectures: “they went up on the mountain and lost heart.” A correct explanation of the “returned” is given by Josephus [Ant. 7, 12, 4]: “when the Israelites fled, he alone remained,” and by the Vulgate, in its addition in 2 Samuel 23:10 : “and the people, who had fled, returned.” [There is not necessarily any hint in the text that the people had fled; the “returned” might refer to the withdrawal from pursuit of the defeated enemy. Bib-Com., suggests that this view (as in Eng. A. V.: “gone away”) may have arisen from the misapplication in 1 Chronicles 11:13 of the phrase “the people fled” to this battle, whereas it belongs to Shammah’s exploit.—Tr.]

ELLICOTT, " (9) Dodo the Ahohite.—So in the Hebrew margin here, and so also in 1

Chronicles 11:12; the text here has Dodai, as in 1 Chronicles 27:4, where he is mentioned

as the general for the second month. The name is the same under slightly differing forms.

“Ahohite” is a patronymic derived from Ahoah, son of Bela, Benjamin’s son (1 Chronicles

8:4).

When they defied . . . there gathered.—The words “there gathered” require the mention

of some place, and the construction of the word for “defied” is unusual. The parallel

passage in Chronicles reads, “He was with David at Pas-dammim, and there the

82

Philistines,” &c. The difference between the two readings is not great in the original, and

the latter is better. Pas-dammim is the Ephes-dammim of 1 Samuel 17:1, where Goliath

defied the armies of Israel, and was slain by David.

Were gone away—Rather, were gathered to battle. So it is translated in the LXX., Vulg.,

and Syriac, and so the Hebrew requires. The error is a curious one, and seems to have

arisen in this way: In 1 Chronicles 11:13 the mention of the battle in which Shammah was

engaged (2 Samuel 23:11) is altogether omitted, and the expression “the people fled from

before the Philistines” therefore becomes connected with this battle. Josephus follows

that text, and our translators were probably misled by him. Several lines have dropped

out from the text in Chronicles.

PULPIT, "Dodo. The Hebrew has Dodai, and "Dodo" is a mere correction of the Massorites to bring the name into verbal agreement with 1Ch_11:12; but in 1Ch_27:4 he is called Dodai, and we there find him in command of the second division of the army. For "Dodai," however, we ought to read there "Eleazar the son of Dodai." Ahohite; Hebrew, the son of an Ahohite, and probably a member of the family descended from Ahoah, a son of Benjamin (1Ch_8:4). He would thus belong to the most warlike tribe of Israel, though not mentioned among the Benjamites who joined David at Ziklag (1Ch_12:1-7). He joined him, apparently, at an earlier date. That were there gathered together. The word "there" implies the previous mention of some place, and though the text in the parallel passage in Chronicles is more corrupt than that before us, it has, nevertheless, preserved the name of the spot where the encounter took place. In Chronicles the name of Shammah is omitted, and his achievement is mixed up in a strange fashion with that of Eleazar. Here the two heroes have each his separate record, and it is only on minor matters that the text there is more correct. Restored from the readings in Chronicles, the narrative is as follows: "He was with David at Pas-dammim, and the Philistines were gathered there to battle, and the men of Israel were gone up: and he stood (that is, made a stand) and smote," etc. Pas-dammim is called Ephes-dammim in 1Sa_17:1. It was situated in the valley of Elah, and, as being upon the border, was the scene of numerous conflicts, whence its name, "the boundary of blood." It was there that David slew Goliath. Were gone away; Hebrew, went up; that is, to battle. The idea that the Israelites had fled is taken from the parallel place in Chronicles, where, however, it refers to Shammah’s exploit. In 1Sa_17:9 and 1Sa_17:11 there, the phrase, "the Philistines were gathered together," occurs twice, and the scribe, having accidentally omitted the intervening words, has confused together the exploits of Eleazar and Shammah. In this battle Eleazar withstood the Philistine onset, and smote them till his hand clave to his sword hilt. Many such instances of cramp are recorded, and Mr. Kirkpatrick, in his commentary, quotes one in which the muscles of a warrior’s hand could be relaxed, after hard

83

fighting, only by fomentations of hot water.

K&D 9-10, "2Sa_23:9-10

“After him (i.e., next to him in rank) was Eleazar the son of Dodai the Ahohite, among the three heroes with David when they defied the Philistines, who had assembled there, and the Israelites drew near.” The Chethib דדי is to be read דודי, Dodai, according to 1Ch_27:4, and the form דודו (Dodo) in the parallel text (1Ch_11:12) is only a variation in the form of the name. Instead of בן־אחחי (the son of Ahohi) we find העחחי (the Ahohite) in the Chronicles; but the בן must not be struck out on that account as spurious, for “the son of an Ahohite” is the same as “the Ahohite.” For גברים בשלשה we must read הגברים according to the Keri ,בשלשה and the Chronicles. שלשה is not to be altered, since the numerals are sometimes attached to substantives in the absolute state (see Ges. §120, 1). “The three heroes” are Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah (2Sa_23:11), who reached the first rank, according to 2Sa_23:19, among the heroes of David. Instead of בפלשתים רפם בח (when they defied the Philistines), we find in the Chronicles והפלשתים דמים at Pas-dammim,” i.e., most“ ,בפסprobably Ephes-dammim (1Sa_17:1), where the Philistines were encamped when Goliath defied the Israelites. Thenius, Bertheau, and Böttcher therefore propose to alter our text so as to make it correspond to that of the Chronicles, and adduce as the reason the fact that in other passages חרף is construed with the accusative, and that which follows, presupposes the previous mention of the place referred to. But the ,שםreasons are neither of them decisive. חרף .evisiced is not construed with the accusative alone, but also with ל (2Ch_32:17), so that the construction with ב is quite a possible one, and is not at variance with the idea of the word. שם again may also be understood as referring to the place, not named, where the Philistines fought with the Israelites. The omission of אשר before נעספו is more difficult to explain; and .בפלשתים which we find in the Chronicles, has probably dropped out after ,והפלשתיםThe reading in the Chronicles דמים בפס is probably only a more exact (באפס)description of the locality, which is but obscurely indicated in our text by בפלשתיםרפם for these words affirm that the battle took place where the Israelites had once ;בחbeen defied by the Philistines (1Sa_17:10), and where they repaid them for this defiance in a subsequent conflict. The Philistines are at any rate to be regarded as the subject to נעספו, and these words are a circumstantial clause: the Philistines had assembled together there to battle, and the Israelites had advanced to the attack. The heroic act of Eleazar is introduced with “he arose.” He arose and smote the Philistines till his hand was weary and clave to his sword, i.e., was so cramped as to be stiffened to the sword. Through this Jehovah wrought a great salvation for Israel on that day, “and the people (the soldiers) turned after him only to plunder,” sc., because he had put the enemy to flight by himself. אחריו שוב does not mean to turn back from flight after him, but is the opposite of מאחרי to turn away from a person ,שוב(1Sa_15:11, etc.), so that it signifies “to turn to a person and follow behind him.” Three lines have dropped out from the parallel text of the Chronicles, in consequence of the eye of a copyist having wandered from נעספו פלשתים in 2Sa_23:9 to פלשתים ויעספוin 2Sa_23:11.

10 but he stood his ground and struck down the Philistines till his hand grew tired and froze to the

84

sword. The LORD brought about a great victory that day. The troops returned to Eleazar, but only to strip the dead.

GILL, "He arose, and smote the Philistines until his hand was weary,.... He rose up when the Israelites fled, and stood his ground alone, and fought with the Philistines, and smote them with his sword, until his hand was weary with smiting:

and his hand clave unto the sword; which was contracted by holding it so long, and grasping it so hard, that it could not easily be got out of it; or through the quantity of blood which ran upon his hand, as it was shed, so JosephusF20; and which being congealed, and dried, caused his hand to stick to the hilt of his sword, so that they were, as it were, glued together by it; or the sense may be only, that though weary, he did not drop his sword, but held it fast till he had destroyed the enemy:

and the Lord wrought a great victory that day; for to him it must be ascribed, and not to the strength and valour of the man:

and the people returned after him only to spoil; they that fled, when they saw what a victory was obtained by him, returned and came after him; not to help him in smiting, but to spoil those that were slain, and strip them of what they had.

LANGE, "2 Samuel 23:10. He arose, that Isaiah, when the others had fallen back. Josephus: “he alone remained.” And smote the Philistines till his hand clave to the sword, his hand was cramped around the sword-hilt by weariness. “Jehovah wrought great deliverance,” that Isaiah, a great victory [observe the theocratic form of the Heb. expression: a victory is a deliverance or salvation from God.—Tr]. And the people returned after him.[FN21] After this exploit the people had nothing to do but to follow for the purpose of plundering, to strip the slain (Sept.).

PULPIT, "Victory; Hebrew, salvation; and so also in 2Sa_23:12 and 1Sa_11:13; 1Sa_19:5. Returned after him. This does not imply that they had fled, but simply that they turned in whichever way he turned, and followed him. Battles in old time depended very much upon the prowess of the leaders.

85

BI, "His hand clave unto the sword.

A heroic sword-grasp

In the roll of honour of King David’s army, there was one, Eleazor by name, who was counted worthy to stand with the first three mighty men of David, because “he arose and smote the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand clave unto the sword, and the Lord wrought a great victory that day, and the people returned after him only to spoil.” In this account we see that his heroic sword-grasp was looked upon as a proof of his valour, and was made the mark of his honour and of his reward.

I. We observe that Eleazar’s grasp shows his appreciation of the sword as a weapon both for defence and for aggression.

1. We cannot do much with a weapon in which we have little or no confidence.

2. The sword of the Spirit is the only weapon by which we can gain a great victory.

3. The efficiency of God’s Word does not consist in the mere letter, but in the doctrines and duties which it teaches, and in the virtues which it commends such as truthfulness, justice, purity, benevolence, holiness. Our grasp of these shows cur appreciation of them.

II. Eleazar grasped his sword firmly, and did not relax his hold.

1. The enemy, knowing the power of the sword, will seek to wrest it from one’s grasp. If the grasp be weak, a sly thrust at the “Mistakes of Moses,” or a bold, materialistic blow at the “Miracles of Jesus,” may break the grasp, and then we are helpless.

2. Worldliness, or avarice, or appetite, or lust, or malice, may so loosen our grasp upon the principles of the Word that we shall be compelled to surrender.

3. It requires true heroism to hold on to principle when “the men of Israel are gone away,” and “the Philistines are arrayed against” us.

4. A true soldier will die rather than lose his sword.

III. Eleazar’s grasp was made firmer by the conflict.

1. Heroic conflict requires and produces an heroic sword-grasp.

2. A true hero does not stop to count the enemy nor to consider a compromise, nor to hide himself through fear of ridicule or other evil weapons; but putting his strength into his sword he rushes on to victory.

3. Christian conflict is not controversy, but an heroic Christian life which requires and produces a firm grasp on the words and the principles of the Gospel.

4. Jesus With this sword met and repulsed Satan. (Mat_4:10.)

5. When we are alone, as Jesus was and as Eleazar was, we can gain our greatest victories.

IV. Eleazar’s firmness of grasp, and fierceness of conflict, made his sword cleave unto his hand.

1. Whatever we cling to, shapes the grasp, and will, in proportion to the strength of the grasp, cleave unto the hand.

86

2. The more firmly we grasp, and the more efficiently we use, the words and the principles of the Word, the more deeply will they be impressed into our nature and cleave unto us.

3. When the sword cleaves unto the hand, and the hand grows weary, we can still fight on.

4. The sword of the Spirit has adhered so firmly to the hand of many a hero in God’s army that even death could not break the grasp.

V. Eleazar’s heroic sword-grasp was made the mark of his heroism and of his reward.

1. The true marks of honour are obtained through conflict and suffering.

2. The cleaving of the sword unto the hand is the mark of God’s greatest heroes: the prophets, apostles, martyrs, reformers, missionaries, and others.

3. Clinging to the true and the right until the true and the right cleave unto us, is as heroic in the peculiar temptations of our day as was Eleazar’s conflict.

4. The marks of our sword-grasp will be our badge of honour in eternity. Let us, then, be assured that if we rightly appreciate the sword of the Spirit, grasp it firmly, and use it efficiently until it cleave unto the hand, we also shall gain a great victory in the conflicts of life, and in the kingdom of heaven a glorious reward. (J. Saxtell.)

The warrior’s scars

I want you to hold the truth with undetachable grip, and I want you to strike so hard for God that it will react, and while you take the sword, the sword will take you. Soldiers coming together are very apt, to recount their experiences, and to show their scars. Here is a soldier who pulls up his sleeve and says, “There I was wounded. I have had no use of that limb since the gunshot fracture.” Oh, when the battle of life is over, and the resurrection has come, and our bodies rise from the dead, will we have on us any scars of bravery for God? Christ will be there all covered with scars. And all heaven will shout aloud as they look at those scars. Ignatius will be there, and he will point out the place where the tooth and the paw of the lion seized him in the Coliseum; and John Huss will be there, and he will show where the coal first scorched the foot on that day when his spirit took wing of flame from Constance. McMillan, and Campbell, and Freeman, American missionaries in India, will be there—the men who with their wives and children went down in the awful massacre at Cawnpore, and they will show where the daggers of the Sepoys struck them. The Waldenses will be there, and they will show where their hones were broken on that day the Piedmontese soldiery pitched them over the rocks. And there will be those there who took care of the sick and who looked after the poor, and they will have evidences of earthly exhaustion. And Christ, with His scarred hand waving over the scarred multitude, will say, “You suffered with Me on earth; now be glorified with Me.” (T. De Witt Talmage.)

The sword of the valiant

Of the old hero the minstrel sung, “With his Yemen sword for aid, ornament it carried none but the notches on the blade.” What nobler declaration of honour can any good man seek after than his scar of service, his losses for the cross, his reproaches for Christ’s sake, his being worn out in the Master’s service. (C. H.

87

Spurgeon.)

The sword for use

The glittering sword with its keen edge and jewelled hilt is an object of beauty as a work of art, yet it is harmless. But in the muscular grip of a soldier’s hand and swung with a purpose and an aim, it is a dread weapon. So with truth wielded with skill and power by the consecrated preacher.

Hitting hard

It is told of Abraham Lincoln that once, when quite a young man, he saw men and women put on the block, exhibited for sale, and bought like cattle. He saw the humbling and degrading familiarities which the buyers took with file human chattels, saw the looks of dumb and piteous agony which stole across the poor black faces as wives were sold away from their husbands, and children torn from their mother’s arms; and he forced his way out the ring and with flaming eyes, and voice husky with suppressed passion, said to a companion, gripping him by the arm, “If ever I get a chance to hit at this thing I’ll hit hard, by the Eternal God.” “My chance has come,” he exclaimed, later in life, “and I mean to hit hard.”

11 Next to him was Shammah son of Agee the Hararite. When the Philistines banded together at a place where there was a field full of lentils, Israel's troops fled from them.

BARNES, "Hararite - Interpreted to mean “mountaineer,” one from the hill country of Judah or Ephraim.

CLARKE, "He rode upon a cherub, and did fly - he was seen upon the things of the wind - In the original of this sublime passage, sense and sound are astonishingly well connected. I shall insert the Hebrew, represent it in English letters for the sake of the unlearned reader, and have only to observe, he must read from the right to the left.

רוח כנפי על וירא ויעף כרוב על וירכב ruach canphey al vaiyera vaiyaoph kerub al vayirkab wind the of wings the upon seen was he and; fly did and cherub upon rode he

The clap of the wing, the agitation and rush through the air are expressed here

88

in a very extraordinary manner.

Other beauties of this kind will be noted in the exposition of the Psalm alluded to above.

I now subjoin Dr. Kennicott's remarks on this chapter: -

"The very sublime poetry contained in this chapter is universally admired, and yet it cannot be perfectly understood, till it is known Who is the speaker, who the person thus triumphant over mighty enemies, whose Sufferings occasioned such a dreadful convulsion of nature, and, who, upon his deliverance, inflicted such vengeance on his own people, and also became thus a king over the heathen. Should we be told that this person was David, it will be very difficult to show how this description can possibly agree with that character: but if it did in fact agree, yet would it contradict St. Paul, who quotes part of it as predicting the conversion of the Gentiles under Christ the Messiah. Romans 15:9; Hebrews 2:13; and see Peirce's Commentary, p. 50. Now if the person represented as speaking through this Divine ode be David only, the Messiah is excluded. In consequence of the difficulties resulting from each of these suppositions, the general idea has been that it relates both to David and to the Messiah as a prophecy of a double sense; first, as spoken by David of himself, and yet to be understood in a secondary sense, of the Messiah. But it must be remarked here, that if spoken only of David, it is not a prediction of any thing future, but a thanksgiving for favors past, and therefore is no prophecy at all. And farther, it could not be a prophecy descriptive of David unless the particulars agreed to David, which they evidently do not. If then David be here necessarily excluded from the single sense, he must be excluded also from the double sense, because nothing can be intended by any sacred writer, to relate to two persons, unless it be True of both; but it not being the case here as to David, we must conclude that this song relates only to the Messiah; and on this subject an excellent Dissertation, by the late Mr. Peirce, is subjoined to his comment on the Epistle to the Hebrews. It may be necessary to add here two remarks: the twenty-fourth verse now ends with, I have kept myself from mine iniquity, which words, it is objected, are not proper, if applied to the Messiah. But this difficulty is removed, in part, by the context, which represents the speaker as perfectly innocent and righteous; and this exactly agrees with the proof arising from the Syriac and Arabic versions, and also the Chaldee paraphrase, that this word was anciently מעונים ab iniquitatibus; consequently, this is one of the many instances where the ם final mem is improperly omitted by the Jewish transcribers. See my General Dissertation. Lastly, the difficulty arising from the title, which ascribes the Psalm to David, and which seems to make him the speaker in it, may be removed, either by supposing that the title here, like those now prefixed to several Psalms, is of no sufficient authority; or rather, by considering this title as only meant to describe the time when David composed this prophetic hymn, that when delivered from all his other enemies as well as from the hand of Saul, he then consecrated his leisure by composing this sublime prophecy concerning Messiah, his son, whom he represents here as speaking, (just as in Psalm 22, 40, and other

89

places), and as describing,

His triumph over death and hell;

The manifestations of Omnipotence in his favor, earth and heaven, trembling at God's awful presence;

The speaker's innocence thus divinely attested;

The vengeance he was to take on his own people the Jews, in the destruction of Jerusalem; and,

The adoption of the heathen, over whom he was to be the head and ruler.

"Another instance of a title denoting only the time of a prophecy, occurs in the very next chapter; where a prophecy concerning the Messiah is entitled, The Last words of David; i.e., a hymn which he composed a little before his death, after all his other prophecies. And perhaps this ode in 2 Samuel 22, which immediately precedes that in 2 Samuel 23, was composed but a little while before; namely, when all his wars were over. Let it be added, that Josephus, immediately before he speaks of David's mighty men, which follow in this same chapter of Samuel, considers the two hymns in 2 Samuel 22 and 23, as both written after his wars were over - Jam Davides, bellis et periculis perfunctus, pacemque deinceps profundam agitans, odas in Deum hymnosque composuit. Tom. i., page 401."

GILL, "And after him was Shammah the son of Agee the Hararite,.... One who was of the mountainous country, as the Targum, the hill country of Judea, of Hebron, or the parts adjacent; this was the third of the first three; there was one of this name among the thirty, 2 Samuel 23:33,

and the Philistines were gathered together into a troop; but so they were no doubt at first; R. Isaiah takes it to be the name of a place called Chiyah; as the Targum, Chayatha; and which Kimchi says was a village, an unwalled town; and Ben Melech observes, that it is said in the Arabic language, a collection of houses is called Alchai: it may be the same with Lehi, where Samson slew a thousand with the jawbone of an ass, Judges 15:17, whence it had its name; and JosephusF21 says, the place where the Philistines were gathered together was called "the Jawbone": but perhaps the sense of Ben Gersom may be best of all, that they gathered together in this place for provision, for food and forage, to support the life of them and their cattle: since it follows:

where was a piece of ground full of lentiles; a sort of pulse, which was eaten in those countries, and the pottage of which was delicious food, see Genesis 25:30,

and the people fled from the Philistines; as they did before under Eleazar, 2 Samuel 23:9.

90

HENRY, " Shammah met with a party of the enemy, that were foraging, and routed them, 2Sa_23:11, 2Sa_23:12. But observe, both concerning this exploit and the former, it is here said, The Lord wrought a great victory. Note, How great soever the bravery of the instruments is, the praise of the achievement must be given to God. These fought the battles, but God wrought the victory. Let not the strong man then glory in his strength, nor in any of his military operations, but let him that glories glory in the Lord.

2. The next three were distinguished from, and dignified above, the thirty, but attained not to the first three, 2Sa_23:23. All great men are not of the same size. Many a bright and benign star there is which is not of the first magnitude, and many a good ship not of the first rate. Of this second triumvirate two only are named, Abishai and Benaiah, whom we have often met with in the story of David, and who seem to have been not inferior in serviceableness, though they were in dignity, to the first three. Here is,

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:11. After him was Shammah — Who, although not expressly mentioned in the parallel place, 1 Chronicles 11:14, yet is plainly implied to have been engaged in this great action. For it is said, that they set themselves, &c., that is, Shammah and Eleazar, who joined in this enterprise. But this place, in Samuel, teaches us that Shammah had the chief hand in it, and therefore it is ascribed to him. Ground full of lentils — In 1 Chronicles 11:13 it is, full of barley: in which there is no difficulty, one part of the field having probably been sown with lentils and the other with barley. The people fled from the Philistines — Fearing to defend the place.

ELLICOTT, " (11) Into a troop.—Josephus, using different vowels, read “to Lehi,” the scene of Samson’s exploit (Judges 15:9; Judges 15:19); but as the same word recurs in 2 Samuel 23:13, clearly in the sense of “troop,” the English reading should be retained.

Lentiles.—Chronicles has “barley.” The two words might easily be confounded in the Hebrew, and it is quite immaterial which is correct; the point is that the Philistines had made a foray to gather the ripe crops, the Israelites were terrified and fled, while Shammah, by his courage and valour, turned the tide of battle, and won a great victory.

PULPIT, "Into a troop. Josephus renders it "to Lehi," the scene of Samson’s exploit. The word is rare, but occurs again in 2Sa_23:13, where, however, we find in Chronicles the ordinary name for a host substituted for it. The Revisers have retained in the margin, "or, for foraging:" but its occurrence in Psa_68:10, where it is tendered "thy congregation," and in the margin of the Revised Version," troop" makes it probable that" troop" is the right rendering here. Lentiles. In 1Ch_11:13, "barley." The difference is probably caused by a transposition of letters. The Philistines seem to have made this incursion in order to carry off or destroy the crops of the Israelites.

91

LANGE, "2 Samuel 23:11 sqq. The third principal hero, Shammah. Another of this name (not to mention the incorrect reading in 2 Samuel 23:33) is given in 2 Samuel 23:25, and called the Harodite. Here “a Hararite” is no doubt to be taken as the same with “the Hararite,” 2 Samuel 23:33, since in the parallel passage, 1 Chronicles 11:34, the same name Agee is given. Therefore we read: “Shammah the son of Agee, the Hararite.”—“And the Philistines were assembled at Lehi.”[FN22] So we must render [and not: into a troop], because the words “there” and “assembled” both presuppose the name of a place (Then, Ewald). Chron. has: “to battle,” no doubt from 2 Samuel 23:9.—Lehi (= “jaw-bone”) = Ramath Lehi, where Samson smote the Philistines with the jaw-bone of an ass, Judges 15:9; Judges 15:14; Judges 15:17; Judges 15:19. In Josephus’ time the place was still called Siagon (Σιαγών, “jaw-bone,” Ant. 5, 8, 8, 9). The Philistines had encamped in a lentil-field, because they found provision there (instead of “lentils,” Chron. has “barley” [probably both barley and lentils were found there.—Tr.]). The Israelites had fallen back. Then Shammah planted himself in the field, took it from the Philistines and smote them. A situation like that of 2 Samuel 23:9-10, is here described in short, sharp strokes, and the hero’s victory extolled as the immediate gift of God.

BI, "Shammah the son of Agee the Hararite.

Shammah

I wish you to look at the deed of this man Shammah, who stood in the midst of the plot of lentils and defended it, and slew the Philistines. The one idea that leaps up from this narrative is that which you often find through Scripture, that in the clay of defeat and disaster all God wants is one whole-hearted man. If the Lord can only get a beginning made, if He can, amidst all the disgraceful stampede and rout, get but one man to stop running, one to stop flying, one soul to cease from unbelief and panic and fear, and begin to trust in Him, there and then the tide of battle shall be turned. Shammah did, that is to say, the unexpected. Fleeing had been the order of the day for Israel, and pursuing;had been the order of the day for Philistia. A very pretty game, truly! We shout and you run. We appear, and you disappear. You sow in the spring—it was very kind of you, Israelites—and we step in in the autumn and take the harvest. It is a wonderfully nicely arranged system for Philistia, whatever it may be for Israel. And, just so; don’t we seem to make nothing of our Christianity (meaning by that, Christ), as against the powers of Philistia? Look at them in London to-day. What are we doing? Where are we gaining? Speaking broadly, it is invisible. Where are we defeated? Everywhere. The world laughing at us, scandal upon scandal, tale upon tale, wreck upon wreck, ruin upon ruin. Drink, lust, uncleanness, commercial dishonour, everything that belongs to the Devil, strong and vigorous, successful and sweeping; and everything that belongs to Jesus Christ, like those dispirited Israelites, weak and scattering as a flock of sheep. It is bad enough. But just as then, so I believe still, if here and there some man would only understand that in all this there is a trumpet being blown for rallying, times for the individual and for the community might be mightily changed. There is Shammah, and what seems to be sweeping through the breast of—I was going to say the poor man, the noble man—was this: “This is too bad! I am sick and tired of this. Are we for ever to sow in the spring, and are these Philistines to reap our crop in the autumn? Are we for ever to be at their mercy? Are we for ever to be trodden underfoot and scattered like sheep?

92

Death is preferable to this running and running and running; and in God’s great name I stand to-day—Death or Victory! If some of us would do that we would be big Christians before night. Just where you have always yielded, my hardly beset brother or sister, try how it will work to stand to-day. Resist this onset that always before has made a clean sweep of you, and what will happen? It will be what always happens: “Resist the devil, and he will flee from you”—he is a bigger coward than you are. “Whom resist steadfast in the faith.” Then, it was a big fight for very little. “He defended a plot of lentils.” Not much to fight for, a plot of lentils! But, coarse horse-feed after all, as I believe it was, it was Israel’s lentils, and Philistia had no right to them. It was God’s, and not theirs; and little as it seemed to be to make a fight for, Shammah stepped into the middle of the plot, like one who would say, “It is mine, it is my countrymen’s, it is my God’s, and ye shall not have it if one man can prevent it.” I wish come one here, young or old man, would, like Shammah, stand in the middle of the wreck that is left, and have one fight for it. Although what is left may have no more proportion to what used to be or what might have been than a patch of lentils has to a broad-acred farm, yet in God’s name stand in the middle of the wreck, and see what will happen. That is all God asks: Stand, stand in the midst, and then see! If the Church of Christ would only get possessed of Shammah’s spirit, and in all the howling wreck that is at home and abroad, if she would stand and fight, there would be such a central victory as would tell to the furthermost circumference. I think I see him. He is a sight for dispirited Christians, a sight for all poor backsliders. You are defeated, overcome, overborne. Old sins, like Philistines, have come back on you; redeemed though you call yourself, old sins have come back fore the last month or year and more, and they have been driving you before them pitiably, somewhat contemptuously—secret sins, or open sins, or both combined. You have lost heart, the roaring flood in its strength has swept you away, especially the weakest thing that ever dared to call itself Christian man, believing man, redeemed man. Now, what are you to do? In God’s name let us all try it, let us all do what Shammah did—stand in the middle of what is left. What shall you do? My brother, late in the day as it is, and although night is coming near, although you are not now the man you used to be, and a hundred voices in your ear say to you, “It is too late to retrieve the past,” those hundred voices are a hundred lies and liars. It is not too late: stand in the middle of the wreck left, in God’s great name. Stand, stand! you might die more than conqueror yet. Over you, there may yet be heard in Heaven the shout of victory: Stand! Shammah stood in the midst of it, and though it wee not worth two half-crowns of any man’s money, he defended it, and slew the Philistines, and God came down from heaven to win a patch of lentils! For the Lord loves victory, and the Lord hates defeat, and the only thing He wants is to get at His adversary through some faithful, upright, believing soul. (John McNeill.)

12 But Shammah took his stand in the middle of the field. He defended it and struck the Philistines down, and the LORD brought about a great victory.

93

GILL, "But he stood in the midst of the ground,.... The field of lentiles:

and defended it; the field, so that the Philistines could not ravage it, and get food and forage from it:

and slew the Philistines; made a great slaughter among them, entirely routed them, so that they that escaped his sword were obliged to flee:

and the Lord wrought a great victory; to whom the glory of it belonged; a similar fact is ascribed to Eleazar before mentioned in 1 Chronicles 11:13; and, indeed, it seems to be the same, and in which they were both concerned; for it is plain from the account that there were more than one engaged in this action, since it is there said, "and they set themselves in the midst of that parcel"; and though that parcel of ground is said there to be full of barley, it may easily be reconciled by observing, that one part of it might be sowed with barley, and the other part with lentiles; so the Targum in 1 Chronicles 11:13; for it was half lentiles and half barley; and Eleazar might be placed to defend the one, and Shammah the other; from whence it appears it was about March when this action was, at the latter end of which barley harvest began.

ELLICOTT, "Verse 13

(13) Three of the thirty.—For “three” the Hebrew text reads “thirty” by a manifest error, which is corrected in the margin. These are not the same three (since there is no definite article) with those just mentioned, but were another three more eminent than the rest of the thirty, two of them being, no doubt, Abishai and Benaiah (2 Samuel 23:18; 2 Samuel 23:23). “The thirty” seems to have been a common name for this band of heroes (comp. 2 Samuel 23:23-24, &c), who were perhaps originally exactly thirty, but whose number varied from time to time, being here given (2 Samuel 23:39) as thirty-seven.

In the harvest time.—“The preposition does not mean in, and the reading in 1 Chronicles 11:15 ‘to the rock’ is perhaps the true one” (Kirkpatrick). On “the valley of Rephaim,” see Note on 2 Samuel 5:18.

13 During harvest time, three of the thirty chief men came down to David at the cave of Adullam, while a band of Philistines was encamped in the Valley of Rephaim.

BARNES, "The feat at Bethlehem by three of the thirty was the occasion of their

94

being formed into a distinct triad; Abishai 2Sa_23:18, Benaiah 2Sa_23:20, and a third not named, were probably the three.

In the harvest time - An error for “to the rock” (compare the marginal reference).

The troop of the Philistines - The word rendered “troop” occurs in this sense only here (and, according to some, in 2Sa_23:11), and perhaps in Psa_68:11. In 1 Chr. 11, as in 2Sa_23:16 the reading is “host” or “camp,” which may be the true reading here.

Pitched - The same Hebrew word as “encamped” in 1Ch_11:15.

Valley of Rephaim - Or Giants. See 2Sa_21:16 note.

CLARKE, "And three of the thirty - The word שלשים shalishim, which we translate thirty, probably signifies an office or particular description of men. Of these shalishim we have here thirty-seven, and it can scarcely be said with propriety that we have thirty-seven out of thirty; and besides, in the parallel place, 1 Chronicles 11:11-47, there are sixteen added. The captains over Pharaoh’s chariots are termed .shalishim, Exo_14:7 שלשים

The Philistines pitched in the valley of Rephaim - This is the same war which is spoken of 2Sa_5:17, etc.

GILL, "And three of the thirty chiefs went down,.... Or three that were chief of the thirty, superior to them; which some understand of the three before mentioned, so JosephusF23; and that having related some particular exploits of theirs, here observes one, in which they were all concerned; and others think the three next are meant, of whom Abishai was the chief, Benaiah the next, and the third Asahel; but the first sense is best:

and came to David in the harvest time, unto the cave of Adullam; not when he was there, upon his flight from Saul, 1 Samuel 22:1; but after he was king, when engaged in war with the Philistines; perhaps wheat harvest is here meant:

and the troop of the Philistines pitched in the valley of Rephaim; the army of the Philistines, as the Targum; of the valley of Rephaim; see Gill on Joshua 15:8.

HENRY 13-14, "2. The next three were distinguished from, and dignified above, the thirty, but attained not to the first three, 2Sa_23:23. All great men are not of the same size. Many a bright and benign star there is which is not of the first magnitude, and many a good ship not of the first rate. Of this second triumvirate two only are named, Abishai and Benaiah, whom we have often met with in the story of David, and who seem to have been not inferior in serviceableness, though they were in dignity, to the first three. Here is,

(1.) A brave action of these three in conjunction. They attended David in his troubles, when he absconded, in the cave of Adullam (2Sa_23:13), suffered with him, and therefore were afterwards preferred by him. When David and his brave men who attended him, who had acted so vigorously against the Philistines, were, by the

95

iniquity of the times, in Saul's reign, driven to shelter themselves from his rage in caves and strong holds, no marvel that the Philistines pitched in the valley of Rephaim, and put a garrison even in Bethlehem itself, 2Sa_23:13, 2Sa_23:14. If the church's guides are so misled as to persecute some of her best friends and champions, the common enemy will, no doubt, get advantage by it. If David had had his liberty, Bethlehem would not have been now in the Philistines' hands. But, being so, we are here told, [1.] How earnestly David longed for the water of the well of Bethlehem. Some make it a public-spirited wish, and that he meant, “O that we could drive the garrison of the Philistines out of Bethlehem, and make that beloved city of mine our own again!” the well being put for the city, as the river often signifies the country it passes through. But if he meant so, those about him did not understand him; therefore it seems rather to be an instance of his weakness. It was harvest-time; the weather was hot; he was thirsty; perhaps good water was scarce, and therefore he earnestly wished, “O that I could but have one draught of the water of the well of Bethlehem!” With the water of that well he had often refreshed himself when he was a youth, and nothing now will serve him but that, though it is almost impossible to come at it. He strangely indulged a humour which he could give no reason for. Other water might quench his thirst as well, but he had a fancy for that above any. It is folly to entertain such fancies and greater folly to insist upon the gratification of them. We ought to check our appetites when they go out inordinately towards those things that really are more pleasant and grateful than other things (Be not desirous of dainties), much more when they are thus set upon such things as only please a humour. "

K&D, "2Sa_23:13-15

To this deed there is appended a similar heroic feat performed by three of the thirty heroes whose names are not given. The Chethib שלשים is evidently a slip of the pen for שלשה (Keri and Chronicles). The thirty chiefs are the heroes named afterwards. As שלשה has no article either in our text or the Chronicles, the three intended are not the three already mentioned (Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah), but three others out of the number mentioned in 2Sa_23:24. These three came to David in the harvest time unto the cave of Adullam (see at 1Sa_22:1), when a troop of the Philistines was encamped in the valley of Rephaim, and David was on the mountain fortress, and a Philistian post was then in Bethlehem. And David longed for water, and said, “Oh that one would bring me water to drink out of the well of Bethlehem at the gate!” The encampment of the Philistines in the valley of Rephaim, and the position of David on the mountain fortress (במצודה), render it probable that the feat mentioned here took place in the war with the Philistines described in 2Sa_5:17. Robinson could not discover any well in Bethlehem, “especially none 'by the gate,' except one connected with the aqueduct on the south” (Palestine, vol. ii. p. בשער .(158 need not be understood, however, as signifying that the well was in or under the gate; but the well referred to may have been at the gate outside the city. The well to which tradition has given the name of “David's well” (cisterna David), is about a quarter of an hour's walk to the north-east of Bethlehem, and, according to Robinson's description, is “merely a deep and wide cistern or cavern now dry, with three or four narrow openings cut in the rock.” But Ritter (Erdk. xvi. p. 286) describes it as “deep with clear cool water, into which there are three openings from above, which Tobler speaks of as bored;” and again as a cistern “built with peculiar beauty, from seventeen to twenty-one feet deep, whilst a house close by is pointed out to pilgrims as Jesse's house.”

PULPIT, "And three. The Hebrew text has "thirty," for which both the Authorized

96

Version and the Revised Version silently substitute "three," as is correctly given in Chronicles. The absence of the article shows that these three were not Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah, but probably Abishai, Be-naiah, and another whose name and exploits have been purposely omitted both here and in Chronicles. Apparently this narrative, so interesting as showing the fascination which David exercised over his men, is given as having led to the institution of this second order of three in the brotherhood of the mighties. In the harvest time. The Hebrew is "to harvest," but in 1Ch_11:15 "to the rock." As the preposition used here cannot mean "in," this is probably the right reading. In this ease, also, it is the similarity of the words that has led to the con. fusion. Is it possible that these lists were taken from very old and worn catalogues, which it was very difficult to decipher?

COFFMAN, "WATER FROM THE WELL OF BETHLEHEM

"And three of the thirty chief men went down, and came about harvest time and came to David at the cave of Adullum, when a band of the Philistines was encamped in the valley of Rephaim. David was then in the stronghold; and the garrison of the Philistines was then at Bethlehem. And David said longingly, "O that someone would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem which is by the gate"! Then the three mighty men broke through the camp of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem which was by the gate, and took and brought it to David. But he would not drink of it; he poured it out to the Lord, and said, "Far be it from me, O Lord, that I should do this. Shall I drink the blood of the men who went at the risk of their lives"? Therefore, he would not drink it. These things did the three mighty men."

"Three of the thirty chief men ... These things did the three mighty men" (2 Samuel 23:13,17). There is a difference of opinion among scholars as to whether or not the "three mighty men" who brought David the water from the well at Bethlehem were the same as "the three" mentioned in 2 Samuel 23:9. The mention of a total of thirty-seven men in 2 Samuel 23:39 favors the view of Smith that, "The number 37 is exact, there being thirty ordinary members; and, since Asahel was deceased, we have a replacement mentioned, giving thirty-one names in the list of the thirty, plus three chiefs of the first class, and three chiefs of the second class."[13]

Cook also agreed, "This reckoning is correct; although only 36 names are given, the names of only two of the second triad being given; but 31 names are given in 2 Samuel 23:24-39, which, added to the two triads of six, makes 37."[14] Thus there were two companies of "the three"; and it was that second group who brought the water from Bethlehem.

This leaves unexplained why "the three" are said to be of "the thirty chief men" (2 Samuel 23:13), but it might mean that they were closely associated with them as also were the first triad.

97

This touching story of David's refusal to drink water which had been procured for him at the personal risk of the lives of his men is one of the most beautiful in the Bible and stresses the deeply religious nature of King David. This story also emphasizes the contrast in David's life before and after his fall. Here he would not drink the blood of the men who had risked their lives for him; but after his fall, "At a later time, under different circumstances, he did not hesitate to have one of the thirty killed on the battlefield in order to get his wife and (in a vain attempt) to cover his own adultery."[15]

"Water from the well at Bethlehem" (2 Samuel 23:15). "Today, Bethlehem is supplied with water by an aqueduct; and the wells close to the city no longer exist. There is a cistern called David's Well three quarters of a mile north of Bethlehem, too far away to be the well that David meant."[16]

LANGE, "13And three of the thirty chief went down, and came to David in the harvest-time unto the cave of Adullam; and the troops of the Philistines pitched [encamped] in the valley of Rephaim 14 And David was then in an hold, and the [a] garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem 15 And David longed and said, Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate! 16And the three mighty men broke through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it and brought it to David; nevertheless [and] he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord [Jehovah], 17And he said [And said], Be it far from me, O Lord [Jehovah forbid] that I should do this; is not this [shall I drink] the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore [and] he would not drink it.

These things did these [the] three mighty men.

BI 13-17, "And three of the thirty chiefs went down.

The dear-bought draught

I do not think that this was what you might call a mere sentimental longing. David was strong in true and real sentiment; but I do not think that when we have him pictured here longing and sighing, that he was, as some have supposed, merely suffering from passing home-sickness. Some take that view, and imagine that he just momentarily gave way to one of those whims or morbidities that come across the spirits of otherwise brave and earnest men, and make them as weakly sentimental as their neighbours. When I read that “David longed,” and I hear his longing set forth, I like to think of him as showing here something of his deepest and best. The Spirit of God would make us know that He understands us when we are like David. There is a depth in us; a deep below, perhaps, what we ourselves, in our commonplaces, were unaware of. The hard-beaten bottom or floor of our soul sometimes gives way. Many a time and oft, when we are not thinking, or ever we are aware, these common, ordinary, worldly hearts of ours are cleft as by a great chasm and depth, through which there comes, like the breath of the mountain wind sighing through a gorge, a

98

great, inexhaustible “Oh!” Like David, we long! “Oh, for youth; oh for renewal; oh for freshness; oh to get rid of what, is making me tame, and flat, and dull; of the earth, earthy; and of the world, worldly!” You see, there was a great deal in that water. There is no water like the water we drank at home, when we were young. Is that sentimental? Is not that feeling derived from something deep and true within the soul? It is more than ordinary water. What memory brings into mind of all the years that have come and gone between! And this “water of the well” is the type, and symbol, and picture of it—the rush of the spring, with the sheen and the bubble of the water, We are not so utterly dead, and dark, and given up as we seem to-day. God can open rivers in dry places. He can pierce down, down through all the mortification and all the corruption; through all the sand and sawdust; all that is earthly and carnal—clown to the quick. Then up there comes that burdened sigh—“Oh for living water! oh for cooling streams!” Rightly used, it leads the longing soul back to more than original purity. And this is also a type of the cry of the backslider who once knew the joys of salvation; who once lived in Bethlehem, the House of Bread; and drank of the well that bubbles up from beneath its walls. Ah, yes, we repeat it again, there is a great deal in a drink, in what it suggests. Oh, may you get that suggestion and the satisfaction of it to-day. “Oh! that I could get back to God, the living God!” Do not go easily over that word: David longed. Oh that God would give us to-day longing hearts, to find Him out. For you will never find out God by greater intellect; never by wider reading and deeper study. This is the road to God; this is the “new organ” by which we receive the truth that alone can satisfy. “As the hart panteth after the water-brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God.” May it be given us to-day to taste, and see that God is good. David’s desire was gratified. The three mighty men said, “He shall have it.” Shall I say one had wisdom, and the other love, and the other power; and these three together scattered the powers of Philistia? Oh! don’t you see how the Gospel breaks out upon us? You yearn for something the possession of which would be the renewing of your youth; the lack of which is decay; and your longing is heard, and your prayer answered before you know it. The Three Mighties, the Blessed and Glorious Three, Wisdom, Love, Might, have broken the host of the Philistines, and liars brought to us—right to our parched lips—before our sighing is done, that bubbling spring for lack of which we die. I knew the Gospel was there. I knew it when I read the story. I felt it more deeply the longer I studied it. Do not accuse me of dragging things in—of putting the Gospel where it is not. The grand key to open the Old Testament is Christ—put Him in wherever He will fit, and certainly He will fit here. Still further, the story deepens in interest. “Nevertheless, he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord.” Here we have the very crown and flower of Gospel teaching. What ought this great love of God to produce in our hearts? What did this great love of these three mighty men produce in David’s heart? It begot in him a like spirit again. They flung themselves away for him; he flung himself, and them with him, back Upon God, the Fount and Spring of all. So with us: Christ has brought us pardon, and peace, and everlasting life. But let Christ’s sacrifice produce a self-sacrificing spirit in you—as Christ flung Himself away for you, so fling your life away for God—and you will enjoy it. It has been brought to you; lay yourself, body, soul, and spirit, on the altar—it is your reasonable sacrifice. Give now your money, for money is a covenant blessing. It is one rill of the fountain that comes from the well—the spring of Bethlehem. (J. McNeill.)

Longing for the water of the well of Bethlehem

It must have been a rare and imposing assembly that came to crown David king of all Israel. The Chronicles record the names and numbers of the principal contingents

99

that were present on that memorable occasion. The Philistines, however, were watching the scene with profound dissatisfaction. So long as David was content to rule as a petty king in Hebron, leaving them free to raid the northern tribes at their will, they were not disposed to interfere; but when they heard that they had anointed David king over all Israel, all the Philistines went down to seek David. They probably waited until the august ceremonial was over, and the thousands of Israel had dispersed to ‘their homes, and then poured over into Judah in such vast numbers—spreading themselves in the Valley of Ephraim, and cutting off David’s connection with the northern tribes—that he was forced to retire with his mighty men and faithful six hundred to the hold, which, by comparison of passages, must have been the celebrated fortress-cave of Adullam (2Sa_5:17; 2Sa_22:13-14.)

I. A sudden reversal of fortune. It was but as yesterday that David was the centre of the greatest assembly of warriors that his land had seen for many generations. With national acclaim he had been carried to the throne of a united people. He realised that he was fondly enshrined in the hearts of his countrymen; but to-day he is driven from Hebron, where for more than seven years he had dwelt in undisturbed security, back to that desolate mountain fastness, in which years before tie had taken refuge from the hatred of Saul. It was a startling reversal of fortune, a sudden overcasting of a radiant noon, a bolt out of a clear sky. Such sudden reversals come to us all—to wean us from confidence in men and things; to stay us from building our nest on any earth-grown tree; to force us to root ourselves in God alone. Child of mortality, such lessons will inevitably be set before thee to learn. In the hour of most radiant triumphs, thou must remember Him who has accounted thee fit to be his steward; thou must understand that thy place and power are thine only as His gift, and as a trusteeship for His glory. This contrast between the anointing of Hebron and the conflict of Adullam presents a striking analogy to the experiences of our Lord, who, after His anointing at the banks of the Jordan, was driven by the Spirit into the wilderness of Judaea to be forty days tempted of the devil. It is the law of the spiritual life. The bright light of popularity is too strong and searching for the perfect development of the Divine life. Loneliness, solitude, temptation, conflict—these are the flames that burn the Divine colours into our characters; such the processes through which the blessings of our anointing are made available for the poor, the broken-hearted, the prisoners, the captives, and the blind.

II. Gleams of light. The misty gloom of these dark hours was lit by some notable incidents. The mighty men excelled themselves in single combats with the Philistine champions. What marvels may be wrought by the inspiration of a single life! We cannot but revert in thought to that hour when, hard by that Very spot, an unknown youth stepped forth from the affrighted hosts of Israel to face the dreaded Goliath. Thus the lives of great men light up and inspire other lives. They mould their contemporaries. The inspiration of a Wesley’s career raises a great army of preachers. The enthusiasm of a Carey, a Livingstone, a Paten stirs multitudes of hearts with missionary zeal. Those who had been the disciples of. Jesus became his apostles and martyrs. His own life of self-sacrifice for men has become the beacon-fire that has summoned myriads from the lowland valley of selfishness to the surrender, the self-denial, the anguish of the Cross, if only they might be permitted to follow in his steps.

III. A touching incident.

Adullam was not far from Bethlehem. One sultry afternoon he was a semi-prisoner in the hold. Over yonder, almost within sight, a garrison of Philistines held Bethlehem. Suddenly an irresistible longing swept across him to taste the water of the well of Bethlehem, which was by the gate. Almost involuntarily he gave expression to the wish. How often we sigh: for the waters of the well of Bethlehem! We go back on our past, and dwelt longingly on never-to-be-forgotten memories. Oh to see again that

100

face; to feel the touch of that gentle hand; to hear that voice! Oh to be again as in those guileless happy years, when the forbidden fruit had never been tasted! Oh for that fresh vision of life, that devotion to the Saviour’s service, that new glad outburst of love! Oh that one would give us a drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem’, which is beside the gate! They are vain regrets; there are no, mighties strong enough to break through, the serried ranks of the years, and fetch back the past. But the quest of the soul may yet be satisfied by what awaits it in Him who said, “He that drinketh of this water shall thirst again; but he that drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst: but it shall be in him a spring of water, rising up to everlasting life.” Not in Bethlehem’s well, but in Him who was born there, shall the soul’s thirst be quenched for ever.

IV. The overthrow of the Philistines.—Prosperity had not altered the attitude of David’s soul, in its persistent waiting on God. As he was when first he came to Hebron, so he was still; and in this hour of perplexity; he inquired of the Lord, saying, “Shall I go up against the Philistines? Wilt Thou deliver them into mine hand?” In reply, he received the Divine assurance of certain victory; and when the battle commenced, it seemed to him as if the Lord Himself were sweeping them before Him like a winter flood, which, rushing down the mountain-side, carries all before it in its impetuous rush. Again the Philistines came up to assert their olden supremacy, and again David waited on the Lord for direction. It was well that he did so, because the plan of campaign was not as before. Those that rely on God’s co-operation must be careful to be in constant touch with Him. The aid which was given yesterday in one form, will be given to-morrow in another. In the first battle the position of the Philistines was carried by assault; in the second it was turned by ambush. Sometimes we have to march, sometimes to halt; now we are called to action, again to suffering; in this battle to rush forward like a torrent; in the next to glide stealthily to ambush and wait. We must admit nothing stereotyped in our methods. What did very well in the house of Dorcas will not suit in the stately palace of Cornelius. Let there be living faith in God. Then shall we know what God can do as a mighty co-operating force in our lives, making a breach in our foes, and marching his swift-stepping legions to our succour. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.)

The well of Bethlehem

This incident, which is strangely unlike the ordinary records of history, and has about it the air of an old-world romance, is here narrated, not in chronological order, but in a review of David’s life, when that life had well-nigh reached its close and its leading events stood out in their true proportions. It occurred immediately after David had been made king at Hebron, where there was war between him and the Philistines, who had pushed their way to Bethlehem, and threatened still further advance. In times of deprivation and danger, in great crises, which life itself is hanging in the balance, the mind reverts to early and familiar scenes, and invests them with a strong and pathetic charm. The man, whose boyhood was spent at the seaside, longs for a breath of its bracing air. The Swiss mountaineer, far away from home, listens to the songs of his early days, and is seized with a restless impulse to return. The old Highland woman, dying in the Red River settlements, surrounded by miles of prairies, can find no comfort save in remembering the bens and glens which she loved so well. “Oh, doctor dear, for a wee bit of a hill!” Surely we can understand it. Heaven lay about us in our infancy, and, from the rough world in which we dwell it is pleasant to look back and revive the vanished glory. David’s wish seemed foolish and vain, for the foe was encamped between him and the well. To reach it was all but impossible. David no doubt knew that, and his longing was the keener in

101

consequence. We often fail to value our privileges until we have lost them. We know their worth only when they are beyond our reach. But the expression of the king’s longing was heard. They listened to his faintest wish and made it their law. It was a noble and heroic act, a deed of splendid daring, the mere recital of which rebukes our selfishness and covers our cowardice with contempt.

1. The incident affords a remarkable instance of David’s power to inspire devotion. He could have been no sordid, common-place, self-seeking usurper for whom they did this; no slave of greedy ambition, swayed only by the lust of power. He was manly, trustful, and chivalrous, as a king should be, and the enthusiasm and fidelity of his soldiers were but the answering reflection of his own nobility and grace.

2. The incident exemplifies the power and inventiveness of love. Love will laugh at impossibilities. It is quick to devise means of fulfilling its desires, and though it be tender it is also courageous. It is gentle, but full of power, and can set its face like a flint against all opposition. Love to Christ will make us pure, strong, brave and victorious. We shall scorn to serve Him with that which costs us nothing, arid for His sake we shall count all things as loss. When David had in his hand the water, which only love strong as death could have secured, he refused to drink it, and poured it on the ground unto the Lord. How fickle and capricious! we have heard men say. Not so! Far other feelings prompted the refusal. There is a higher law than self-gratification. David was the very soul of chivalry, and felt that he had no right to the water which had been brought as by priestly hands and in a cup that had on it the marks of sacrifice. To have drunk it himself would have been sacrilege. There was but One Being worthy of it—He who had inspired the heroism and devotion which secured it. David saw in the act of the captains who had jeopardised their lives for him a love, a courage, and a self-surrender of which no mortal was the fitting object.

4. The action of David’s friends is a witness on both its sides to the unselfishness and grandeur of our nature. It shows that we have other than material instincts to satisfy, that we live not by bread alone. Physical gratification, bodily ease and comfort, prosperity in all its forms leave untouched vast spaces of our worldly thought and aspiration and need; and if we possess only what they can yield, the noblest elements of our nature will be feeble and impoverished, aye, and will become the means of our acutest suffering and most dreaded retribution. When the depths of our being are stirred, we think of God and our relation to Him. We live by admiration, love, and hope. There is something dearer than material pleasure, personal safety, and even life itself to the man who has been entranced by the vision of the Divine. He reveres the majesty of truth and duty, fidelity, honour, God. It is not necessary that we should be at ease, with an abundance of pleasure and of wealth. It is not even necessary that we should continue to live, but, it is necessary that we should be true, pure, upright, godly; and to fulfil this great law of our being there is absolutely no sacrifice which we should not be prepared to make. (J. Stuart.)

Courage

When the brave and ill-fated English envoy, Cavagnari, was warned by the Ameer of Afghanistan that his life was not safe at Cabul, he coolly replied that if he were shot down, there were others ready to take his place. Whilst one cannot but honour the courage of such a man, and feel a desire to throw a wreath upon his grave, it would be the greatest possible error to imagine that the commonest spheres of civil end

102

prosaic life, do not, many and many a time, yield instances of an equally noble, though less showy heroism. (J. Thain Davidson, D. D.)

Energetic Men

We love upright, energetic men. Pull them this way, and then that way, and the other, and they only bend, but never break. Knock them down, and in a trice they are on their feet. Bury them in the mud, and in an hour they will be out and bright. They are not ever yawning sway existence, or walking about the world as if they had come into it with only half their soul; you cannot keep them down, you cannot destroy them. But for these the world would soon degenerate. They are the salt of the earth. Who but they start any noble project? They build our cities and rear our manufactories; they whiten the ocean with their sails, and they blacken the heavens with the smoke of their steam vessels and furnace fires; they draw treasures from the mine; they plough the earth. Blessings on them! Look to them, young men, and take courage; imitate their example; catch the spirit of their energy and enterprise, and you will deserve, and no doubt command, success. (Christian Weekly.)

14 At that time David was in the stronghold, and the Philistine garrison was at Bethlehem.

BARNES, "In an hold - In “the hold” 1Ch_11:16 close to the cave of Adullam (marginal reference note). It shows the power and daring of the Philistines that they should hold a post so far in the country as Bethlehem.

GILL, "And David was then in an hold,.... In a strong hold; the strong hold of Zion, as JosephusF24, or one on a rock near the cave of Adullam, see 1 Chronicles 11:15,

and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem; which was about six miles from Jerusalem; the valley of Rephaim lay between that and Bethlehem; so far had they got into the land of Judea, and such footing in it, as to have a garrison so near its metropolis.

15 David longed for water and said, "Oh, that someone would get me a drink of water from the well

103

near the gate of Bethlehem!"

BARNES, "A cistern of deep, clear, cool water, is called by the monks, David’s Well, about three-quarters of a mile to the north of Bethlehem. Possibly the old well has been filled up since the town was supplied with water by the aqueduct.

CLARKE, "The water of the well of Bethlehem - This was David’s city, and he knew the excellence of the water which was there; and being near the place, and parched with thirst, it was natural for him to wish for a draught of water out of that well. These three heroes having heard it, though they received no command from David, broke through a company of the Philistines, and brought away some of the water. When brought to David he refused to drink it: for as the men got it at the hazard of their lives, he considered it as their blood, and gave thereby a noble instance of self-denial. There is no evidence that David had requested them to bring it; they had gone for it of their own accord, and without the knowledge of David.

GILL, "And David longed, and said,.... It being harvest time, the summer season, and hot weather, and he thirsty:

oh, that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem,

which is by the gate! which he was well acquainted with, being his native place; and which might make it the more desirable, as well as its waters might be peculiarly cool and refreshing, and very excellent, as Kimchi suggests. This well was about a mile from Bethlehem, now called David's well, as some travellers sayF25. It is said to be a very large well, with three mouths, and lies a little out of the roadF26; and that there is now near Rachel's grave a good rich cistern, which is deep and wide; wherefore the people that go to dip water are provided with small leathern buckets, and a line, as usual in those countriesF1; but Mr. MaundrellF2 says it is a well, or rather a cistern, supplied only with rain, without any excellency in its waters to make them desirable; but it seems, he adds, David's spirit had a further aim. Some think he meant by this to get Bethlehem out of the hands of the Philistines, and obtain the possession of it; others, as Jarchi, that he intended to ask some question of the sanhedrim that sat there; and others, that his desire was after the law of God, called waters, as in Isaiah 55:1; and some Christian writers, both ancient and modernF3, are of opinion, that not literal but spiritual water was desired by him, and that he thirsted after the coming of the Messiah, to be born at Bethlehem, and the living water which he only can give, John 4:10.

JAMISON 15-16, "the well of Beth-lehem — An ancient cistern, with four or five holes in the solid rock, at about ten minutes distance to the north of the eastern corner of the hill of Beth-lehem, is pointed out by the natives as Bir-Daoud; that is,

104

David’s well. Dr. Robinson doubts the identity of the well; but others think that there are no good grounds for doing so. Certainly, considering this to be the ancient well, Beth-lehem must have once extended ten minutes further to the north, and must have lain in times of old, not as now, on the summit, but on the northern rise of the hill; for the well is by or (1Ch_11:7) at the gate. I find in the description of travelers, that the common opinion is, that David’s captains had come from the southeast, in order to obtain, at the risk of their lives, the so-much-longed-for water; while it is supposed that David himself was then in the great cave that is not far to the southeast of Beth-lehem; which cave is generally held to have been that of Adullam. But (Jos_15:35) Adullam lay “in the valley”; that is, in the undulating plain at the western base of the mountains of Judea and consequently to the southwest of Beth-lehem. Be this as it may, David’s men had in any case to break through the host of the Philistines, in order to reach the well; and the position of Bir-Daoud agrees well with this [Van De Velde].

PULPIT, "An hold; Hebrew, the hold. The definite article here and in 2Sa_5:17, and the mention of the Philistines as being in the valley of Rephaim, seem to indicate that David had abandoned Jerusalem upon the invasion of the Philistines, and sought refuge at Adullam (see note on 2Sa_5:17). In its neighbourhood is an isolated hill, on which, probably, was a frontier fortress, in which David prepared to defend himself.

SBC 15-17, "We see in this instance how hard work, the sweat of toilsome labour, risk of life, weariness, wounds, and heroic endurance may all be accepted of God, may be poured out unto the Lord, though in the first instance shown to man. Every work done for others costing self-denial, weariness, and anxiety is like the water brought from the well of Bethlehem by the three valiant men of David. It does not rest with the immediate object; it is poured out in sacrifice to the Lord.

Unselfishness confers on him who is adorned with it a sort of priesthood. He is ever offering up sacrifices of his time, his comforts, his conveniences, to others, and though these be offered to others, they are in reality libations to God. There is special merit in such acts if they be done with a right intent, and in such a way that Christ may be seen in all we do for others.

S. Baring-Gould, Village Preaching for a Year, p. 194.

MACLAREN, "A LIBATION TO JEHOVAH

2 Samuel 23:15 - 2 Samuel 23:17.

David’s fortunes were at a low ebb. He was in hiding in his cave of Adullam, and a Philistine garrison held Bethlehem, his native place. He was little different from an outlaw at the head of a band of ‘broken men,’ but there were depths of chivalry and poetry in his heart. Sweltering in his cave in the fierce heat of harvest, he thought of his native Bethlehem; he remembered the old days when he had watered his flock at the well by its gate, or mingled with the people of the little town, in their evening assemblies round it. The memories of boyhood rose up radiant before him, and as he was immersed in the past, the grim present, the

105

perils that threatened his life, the savage, gaunt rocks without a trace of greenness that girded him, the privations to which he was exposed, were all forgotten, and he longed for one more draught of the water that tasted so cool and sweet to memory. Three of his ‘mighty men,’ bound to him by loyal devotion and unselfish love, were ready to die to win for their chief a momentary gratification. So they slipped away from Adullam, ‘brake through the host of the Philistines,’ and brought back the longed-for draught. David’s reception of the dearly-bought, sparkling gift was due to a noble impulse. The water seemed to him to be dyed with blood, and to be not water so much as ‘lives of men.’ It had become too precious to be used to satisfy his longing. It would be base self-indulgence to drink what had been won by such self-forgetting devotion. God only had the right to receive what men had risked their lives to obtain, and therefore he ‘poured it out unto the Lord.’

The story gleams out of the fierce narratives in which it is embedded, like a flower blooming on some grim cliff. May we not learn lessons from it?

I. David’s longing.

David, a fugitive in the cave, haunted by the ‘nostalgia’ that made Bethlehem seem so fair and dear, may stand for us as an example of the longings and thirsts that sometimes force themselves into consciousness in every soul. Below the bustle and strife of daily life, occupied as it must be with material and often ignoble things, below the hardness into which the world has compressed men’s surface nature, there lies a yearning for the cool water that rises hard by the gate of our native home. True, it is with many of us overlaid for the most part by coarser desires, and may be as unlike our usual dominant longings and aims, as David’s tender outbreak of sentiment was to the prevailing tenor of his life, in those days when he was an outlaw and a freebooter. But the longing, though often stifled, is not wholly quenched. It is misinterpreted by the man who is conscious of it, and far too often he tries to slake the thirst by fiery and drugged liquors which but make it more intense. Happy are they who know what it is that their parched palates crave, and have learned, while yet the knowledge avails, to say, ‘My soul thirsteth for God, for the living God’! ‘Blessed are they who thirst after’ the water of the well of Bethlehem, ‘for they shall be filled!’

II. The three heroes’ devotion.

These three rough soldiers, lawless and fierce as they were, had been so mastered by their chief that they were ready to dare anything to pleasure him. Who would have looked for such delicacy of feeling and such enthusiastic self-surrender in such men?

They stand as grand instances of the height of devotion of which the rudest

106

nature is capable, when once its love and loyalty to the Beloved are evoked.

How such deeds ennoble the lowest types of character, and make us think better of men, and more sadly of the contrast between their habitual characteristics and the possibilities that lie slumbering in their ignoble lives! There are sparks in the hard cold flint, if only they could be struck out. There is water in the rock, if only the right hand, armed with the wonder-working rod, smites it.

Let us not judge men too harshly by what they do and are, but let us try to bring their sleeping possibilities into conscious exercise.

Let us remember that love and self-sacrifice, which is the very outcome and natural voice of love, ennoble the most degraded.

But these heroic three may suggest to us a sadder thought. They were ready to die for David; would they have been as ready to die for God? These noble emotions of love, leading to glad flinging away of life to pleasure the beloved, are freely given to men, but too often withheld from God, We lavish on our beloveds or on our chosen leaders, a devotion that ought to shame us, when contrasted with the scantiness of our grudging devotion and self-surrender to Him. If we loved God a tenth part as ardently as we love our wives or husbands or parents or children, and were willing to do and bear as much for Him as we are willing to bear for them, how different our lives would be! We can love utterly, enthusiastically, self-forget-tingly, absorbed in the beloved, and counting all surrender of self to, and the sacrifice of life itself for, him or her a delight. Many of us do love men so. Do we love God so?

But these heroic three may suggest another thought. Their self-sacrificing love was illustrious; but there is a nobler, more wonderful, more soul-subduing instance of such love. They broke through the ranks of the Philistines to bring David a draught from the well of Bethlehem. Jesus has broken through the ranks of our enemies to bring us the water of which ‘if a man drink, he shall live for ever.’ If we would see the highest example of self-sacrificing love, we must turn to look, not on the instances of it that shine through the ages on the page of history, and make men thrill as they gaze, and think better of the human nature that can do such things, but on the Christ hanging on the Cross because He loved those who did not love Him, and giving His life a ransom for sinners.

III. David’s reception of the water.

The chivalrous devotion of the three touched an answering chord in their chivalrous chief. His heart filled at the thought of what they had risked, and revolted from employing what had been thus won for no higher use than to gratify a piece of sentiment in himself. The sparkling water was too sacred to be

107

taken for any baser use than as a libation to Jehovah. And who can doubt that the three were more fully repaid for their devotion, as David poured it out unto the Lord, than if he had drunk it eagerly up? His feeling and his act indicate beautiful delicacy of instinct, and swiftness of perception of how to requite the devotion of the three.

We may separate into its two parts the generous impulse which sprang as one whole in David’s breast. There was the shrinking from using the water to slake his thirst merely, and there was the resolve to pour it out as a libation to God. Both parts of that whole may yield us profitable thoughts.

To risk their lives for the water was noble in the three; to have quaffed it as if it had been drawn like any other water from a well, would have been ignoble in David. There are things that it may be noble to give and ignoble to accept. There are sacrifices which we are not entitled to allow others to make for our sakes. Gratifications which can only be procured at the hazard of men’s lives are too dearly bought.

Would not a civilisation, that draws much of its comforts and appliances from ‘sweated industries,’ and is languidly amused by seeing men and women performers peril their lives nightly, and lose them too, for its gratification, be the better for copying David’s recoil from drinking ‘the blood of men that went in jeopardy of their lives’? Is there not ‘blood’ on many a woman’s ball-dress, on many an article of luxury, on many an amusement?

There are sacrifices which we have no right to accept from others. The three had no right to risk life for such a purpose, and David would have been selfish if he had drunk the water. Do not such thoughts lead us by contrast to Him who has done what none other can do? ‘None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give his life a ransom for him’; but Jesus can and Jesus does, and what it would be impossible, and wrong if it were possible, for one man to do for another, He has done for us all, and what it would be base for a man to accept from another if that other could give it, it is blessed and the beginning of all nobleness of character for us to accept from Him. David would not drink because the cup seemed to him to be red with blood. Jesus offers to us a cup, not of cold water only but of ‘water and blood,’ and bids us drink of it and remember Him.

The generous devotion of the three kindled answering emotions in David’s breast. It would be a churlish soul that was not warmed into some faint replica of such self-sacrifice, and most of us would be ashamed of ourselves if we were unmoved by such love. But does the supreme example of it affect us as much as the lesser examples of it do? How many of us stand before it like the peaks of the Alps that front full south, and lift an unmelted breastplate of snow to the midday sun! How many of us have lived all our lives in presence of Jesus’ infinite love and self-surrender for us each, and never have felt one transient touch of

108

answering love!

The other part of David’s impulse was to offer to God what was too precious for his own use. That is the fitting destination of our most precious and prized possessions. And whatever is thus offered becomes more precious by being offered. The altar sanctifies and enhances the worth of the gift. What we give to God is more our own than if we had kept it to ourselves, and develops richer capacities of ministering to our delight. It is so with our greatest surrender, the surrender of ourselves. When we give ourselves to Jesus, He renders us back to ourselves, far better worth having than before. We are never so much our own as when we are wholly Christ’s. And the same thing is true as to all our riches of mind, heart, or worldly wealth. If we wish to taste their most delicate and refined sweetness, let us give them to Jesus, and the touch of His hand, as He accepts them and gives them back to us, will leave a lingering fragrance that nothing else can impart. Was not the water from the well of Bethlehem sweeter to David as he poured it out unto the Lord than if he had greedily gulped it down?

GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, “The Well by the Gate

And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me water to drink of the well of Beth-lehem, which is by the gate!—2 HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/ HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"2 HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"Sa/ HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"23 HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"/ HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"15 HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"" HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15" HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"Sa_ HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/ HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"2 HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"Sa/ HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"23 HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"/ HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"15 HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"" HYPERLINK "https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15" HYPERLINK

"https://bible.prayerrequest.com/bible/2Sa/23/15"23:15.

There are stories in the Bible which we are almost afraid to touch for fear of spoiling them. Although we cannot exactly say that they teach us any lesson, the mere reading of them makes us feel better. They lift us into a region high above our ordinary life, and make us breathe a purer atmosphere than that which is generally around us. Like a fine piece of music or a fine autumn evening, they take us out of ourselves and awaken in us vague, big thoughts and lofty feelings, and touch us with a sense of the grandeur and sacredness of our destiny. Such a story is this of David and the Well of Bethlehem. It makes an irresistible appeal to our better feelings, makes us think more worthily of man, and brings us nearer to God.

David was a fugitive, hiding in caves and lurking in woods, with a rather disorderly and disreputable troop of followers, in constant peril of his life, and in constant risk of

109

being caught by his deadly enemy, king Saul. He was still a comparatively young man; yet he was outlawed. From the jealousy of Saul he had sought shelter at the court of Achish at Gath; but there, too, he had found himself surrounded by danger, and, having feigned madness, he had fled to the cave of Adullam, and after that to the hold on the hill above the cave.

As he now looked forth, the whole country round was full of rich memories. Just at the foot of the hill he had fought the famous battle with Goliath which had marked him out as the future monarch of Israel. At no great distance was Bethlehem, the village in which he had been born and bred, and almost within sight were the slopes where David as a shepherd lad had watched his father’s sheep; while down between the summits of those distant hills was the gate of Bethlehem, near which was the well where David had quenched his thirst a thousand times in those early and happy days. Now he was a hated outlaw. Saul and Achish alike sought his life. Moreover, between him and the well was the camp of the Philistines, who had just invaded that rich, fertile plain, as was their wont at harvest-time, to plunder it of the grain which was now ripe for the sickle.

I

David Longed

There came upon David a consuming desire for a taste of that water which was at the gate-side of the little town, so few miles away, where once had been his home. He was looking down upon scenes familiar since his boyhood; he suffered from the burning thirst of an Oriental summer day. Overpoweringly he remembered the days when his now bronzed face was ruddy, the evenings when he piped the sheep to their fold—all that dear domestic life, with its rural duties and its untroubled faith. The burning sun, the excitement of the hour, and the contiguity of the well increased his thirst; all the memories of his boyhood connected with that well now crowded upon him. And, thinking of it all, “David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me water to drink of the well of Beth-lehem, which is by the gate!” It was the cry of a homesick heart, and the incident is the sweetest thing in David’s life. Never was David more manly or more truly human than when he longed for a drink from the old well of his boyhood.

1. This is the longing of an essentially good man for the things of his childhood. David was no disappointed worldling. But the troubles and trials, sorrows and disappointments of life had begun to close around him. The days of youth were over for him. He was a grown man, a marked man, a famous captain, the pride of Israel, one on whom the eyes of the nation were fixed. But he was a wanderer, driven from place to place by the moody temper and the jealousy of king Saul, insecure of his life from day to day, hunted, as he himself said, “like a partridge on the mountains.” The beautiful boy, the youth of a ruddy countenance, was now a bearded, careworn man, tried by watchings, fastings, and perils alike in the city and in the wilderness. Then, it seems, in an hour when the heart of David was probably burdened with the sense of life’s disillusionments, when “days were dark and friends were few,” when experience had brought to him a feeling of the mystery that covers the ways of God, and of the sorrow that haunts the steps of man—then, we are told, the thoughts of David went back, with a great tenderness and yearning to the far-off days of youth and the scenes of childhood, and the cry broke from his lips—“Oh that one would give me water to drink of the well of Beth-lehem, which is by the gate!”

Tears, idle tears, I know not what they mean,

Tears from the depth of some divine despair

Rise in the heart, and gather to the eyes,

110

In looking on the happy Autumn-fields,

And thinking of the days that are no more.1 [Note: Tennyson.]

2. It is the longing of a successful man. David was not one of life’s failures, who had run the race of life in vain aud now looked back sadly to the promising start. He had run the race well; he had outstripped all his rivals, and he had risen higher than the most venturesome hopes of boyhood dared to soar. All of honour and wealth and power the world had to give, it had given to him, for he had been taken from following his father’s sheep to sit upon the throne of Israel; and no forsaken outcast, but a king, is he who in the cave of Adullam longs for water from the well of Bethlehem. The world had given to this man all it has to give—given what it can give but seldom and only to a few—and he had longings still. For there in the cave of Adullam he thought not of the shouts of the army of Israel or of the rejoicing songs with which he was welcomed by Israel’s daughters; nor did he think there of the honour to which he had been raised, or of the house of cedar he had built for himself. His weary spirit fled away for rest back to the days when he drank of the well of Bethlehem; and all of his life that the world would have thought worth living he would willingly have unlived, and all his honours, his rank, and his possessions he would willingly have laid aside for the light heart and the cloudless days of youth.

A friend told the writer of a visit he made one summer to the home of his childhood. He had not been back for many years. The old place had passed into the hands of strangers. The present occupant took him from room to room until he had reached the attic. There, draped in cobwebs, stood an old spinning-wheel. At sight of it his heart went to his throat. “It is my mother’s spinning-wheel,” he said. “If you will look just there you will a blood mark. One day, when a little boy, I cut my finger and the blood trickled down on the spot while my mother tied up the wound. You must let me have this old wheel to take to my home and to my children. It brings back to me my mother and my childhood as nothing else has done.”

3. It is a longing we can all more or less understand. David, like a true poet, felt and experienced the thoughts and feelings that stir in hundreds and thousands of minds, though only the one man has the gift of putting them into speech.

There is no man or woman who does not say occasionally or feel with Job, “Oh that I were as in months past!” We have visions of happy wells of which we drank in the dear old days, and from which we are now inevitably separated. We think of the time when everything was new to us and the world crammed with glory, when perfect health was in our veins and our heartbeats were all music, and we had no heavy burden of care to carry, and sorrow had not brought the shadows, and we hardly knew what it was to be weary, and no day was ever too long, and we wanted no heaven beyond because it was

all heaven below.”1 [Note: J. I. Vance, Royal Manhood, 159.]

Four ducks on a pond,

A grass bank beyond,

A blue sky of spring,

White clouds on the wing.

What a little thing

To remember for years,

To remember with tears!

111

II

What did He Long for?

1. David thirsted, and he longed for water. But any water would not satisfy him. He longed for water from a particular well—“from the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate.” The traditional “David’s Well” is half a mile N.N.E. of Bethlehem. Ritter speaks of its “deep shaft and clear cool water.” A picture of it rose before David now—the sweet, cold water which he used to drink when he was a boy—and he longed for it. But why did he long for it? Was there no other fountain in all the neighbourhood from which there might have been brought for the weary king a draught as pure and cool, no other fountain whose waters could have quenched his thirst? What possible difference could it make to David whether he drank water from the well by the gate of Bethlehem, or from the spring by the cave where he lay? Thirst is thirst, and water is water. If you drink the water you slake your thirst—and that is all there is in it. What difference is there?

2. What David really desired was not mere water, or even water from the well of Bethlehem, but to drink its water as he had done in other days—to drink it with the feelings of childhood. He wished to be again the shepherd boy passing in and out at the gate of Bethlehem, free from care as in the days of other years. It was natural, but it was vain. When he longed for the water of the well of Bethlehem he forgot to consider how, though the well might be the same, he was changed; how, even if its waters were given him clear and cool as in days long ago, he must drink of it now no longer as the light-hearted boy of Bethlehem, but as a careworn man.

3. David wanted, not what he thought he wanted and asked for so importunately, but his childhood. We easily read enough between the lines of the incident to comprehend that the thirst was not so much in this man’s throat as in his heart. Amid these deeds of arms his spirit was wounded and parched. Near his native place, within sight of the hills on which he kept his father’s sheep, he was thinking of his boyhood, and his longing for the dear old well was a home-sickness. Worn out with his manifold troubles and anxieties, he wished to be a child again, and the well round which he used to play seemed a kind of fountain of youth. If he could only drink of its water, all the heavy weight of the years would fall off his spirit and he would become young again, with all the fresh hopes that animated him in life’s morning.

Ye see me now an ould man, his work near done,

Sure the hair upon me head’s gone white;

But the things meself consated ’or the time that I could run,

They’re the nearest to me heart this night.

Just the daisies down in the low grass,

The stars high up in the skies,

The first I knowed of a mother’s face

Wi’ the kind love in her eyes,

Och, och!

The kind love in her eyes.1 [Note: Moira O’Neill, Songs of the Glens of Antrim.]

112

III

Why did He Long for it?

1. David was feeling the strong pressure of memory, the strength of association with a happy past; the force of that strongest of all the associations which bind a man with unalterable piety to the scene of a happy boyhood. It was merely a sentiment; there were other wells as refreshing, other waters as cool, as that which trickled forth at Bethlehem. But the well of Bethlehem surely reminded him of the early days, with all their glad, free innocent ways, when he was a simple-hearted, God-fearing child, knowing little of evil and nothing of fighting and sorrow and life’s rough work. Now his hands had shed blood; his heart had been torn with fierce passions. It was not as in the olden days. He had lost much. He had gained much also, but it was the loss that he thought of now.

2. Why is it that men turn back thirsty and weary to the streams of their boyhood, and lighten up the darkness of their cave with the glory of memory? Because there are losses connected with the passing of youth which can never be repaired and made good. Other good gifts may come in the place of the gifts of youth; but David showed in that cry for “the water of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate,” that he was conscious of the loss of something which was absolutely past recovery. The feeling has been expressed in most beautiful verse by Wordsworth. He says that with youth something was gone from him which could never be restored.

Nothing can bring back the hour

Of splendour in the grass, of glory in the flower.

(1) David was thinking of his lost enthusiasms. He had not reached his prime, yet life seemed to be closing in. There were withdrawals and impoverishments about his life which perplexed that large spirit within him, as it yearned for wider scope, fuller liberty, and nobler attainments. He yearned for the ampler liberties of youth, the wild free play of childhood. He longed for those days when mankind appeared as one brotherhood; when the thought of hating, or being hated, had never crossed his mind, but when all men appeared to be one loving confederacy.

How strong the memory of victorious enthusiastic youth was in David! The first encounter with the lion and the bear—what strength it gave him! What a force it was! That great encounter with the Philistines, when in his generous, boy-like ardour he could not understand how men who believed in God could cower before a bully giant, or acquiesce in a living degradation! See again how this lived with him into darker years! See him take the sword of Goliath from the sacred precinct where it had been laid up as a consecrated relic, and say, “There is none like that; give it me!”

It constitutes the great and magnificent quality of youth that it can glow and blaze. It is a very commonplace thought after all that when men are old they will take things more calmly, meaning only that the fires will have burned low. Cynicism is a poor exchange for enthusiasm. There are many and manifest temptations of youth, such as rashness, both of judgment and of conduct, hotheadedness, passion, unbalanced zeal, but these are all the extravagances of what is its finest quality. The world needs the strong hopefulness and buoyancy of youth, as well as the large experience and cautious wisdom of age. Youth is the motive-power of the world, driving it to new ends, and

bringing to it new hopes.1 [Note: H. Black.]

How good is man’s life, the mere living! how fit to employ

113

All the heart and the soul and the senses, for ever in joy!2 [Note: Browning, Saul.]

(2) David was thinking of his lost ideals. In life, with its failures and disappointments, its cruel blows, its dread sufferings, we are all too apt to become flat and weary, stale, unprofitable, quenched in our enthusiasm, blinded in our hopes, blunted in our enterprises. We want, like David, draughts from the water of the well at Bethlehem, where we can renew our youth, and forget the darkness of the cave, the heartlessness of the foes, and the dull weight of defeats, which lie between us and the past.

A boy at school has not yet become, thank God, a bankrupt in spent pleasures. He is not that miserable creature whom you see lounging round the amphitheatre of life, languidly wondering whether the prizes which it offers are after all worth the trouble of contesting them. He is not that pitiable being who has lost all beauty out of nature, all refinement from art, all the subtler joys of simple life, in the frantic plunge after pleasure, followed by a brutal incapacity for enjoyment, and who “sees a blight in every

flower, a canker in every fruit, and a baldness on the head of every prophet.”1 [Note:

Canon Newbolt.]

3. There are some persons, no doubt, who tell us that all this is mere sentimentality, that it is all a mistake, that people regard the days of youth with affection only because they are far off and out of reach; or that, at any rate, it is very foolish and very unprofitable to cry over what is past recall, and to indulge in feelings which are weak and enervating, and which may unfit them for the practical business of the present hour. Well, no doubt it is possible to be mawkish and feebly sentimental about the past, and to waste to-day in useless regrets for that which is beyond recovery. But we pity the man or woman who cannot feel, at moments, as David felt, when he turned from the heat and burden of a busy, harassed life, and thought of the quiet fields of Bethlehem and the sheepfolds, and of the sweet cool water of the well by the gate, and the dear memories of childhood, youth, and home. Do you suppose David was unnerved and enfeebled and rendered less capable of facing the rough, hard cares and troubles and difficulties of life because his mind was carried back, with a great rush of love, to the days that were no more—the golden days of the morning of life?

Far from that. It is well now and then to go back in thought, and drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem that is by the gate. It is well to go back to the unstained memories and associations of the dawn of life; to recall the glowing dreams and visions of boyhood and girlhood; to think of the time when the mind first awoke, and the mystery and splendour of life lay unfolded before us; to rebuild in fancy the world where we first began to know and understand the high lessons of duty and obedience, and received on our souls the first impress of those Divine truths which “wake to perish never,” and remain

The fountain-light of all our day,

The master-light of all our seeing.

To think of these things when the cares and troubles of life press heavily on us, and when the heart is sore, and the feet are weary, and the world grows cold and grey, is often to find new strength and hope and courage for the necessary work of life.

“Forty years after Dr. Kidd’s death, my father was stopped by an elderly woman as he was walking in the neighbourhood of Rose Street, Dundee. She wore an apron, under which she seemed to carry a parcel. This she took from its hiding-place just as my father and she met each other. It was a little portrait in a paltry frame, the same likeness of Dr. Kidd that does duty as a frontispiece of some of his books. ‘You’ll mind wha that is,’ said she. My father looked at the engraving, and replied that he well remembered the Doctor. ‘I’m but a puir body,’ continued the woman, ‘I get aff the Buird’ (the

114

Parochial Board), ‘but I saw the pictur’ a while syne in a broker’s shop—it was ninepence, and I saved up till I was able to buy it.’ And then she told how the Doctor used to preach in the Chapelshade Kirk on fast-days or communion Sabbaths when she was a lassie, and how much spiritual good she had got from his ministrations there, few and far between as his appearances must have been. ‘I sometimes think,’

added she, ‘that I can hear his voice reading in the Revelations yet.’ ”1 [Note: Dr. Kidd of

Aberdeen, 305.]

We leave the simple master-words of life

Behind us with the toys of childhood’s years,

Whilst in the book-bound wisdom of the seers

We seek some scant equipment for the strife.

All nature’s lore and tenderness we spurn,

Alone fare forth in search of gold or fame,

And then look backward through the dust and shame,

Knowing that we can nevermore return.

Yet now and then a sunset or a flower,

Or some old haunt revisited once more,

Or the sea’s story whispered to the shore,

Or the wind’s music in a listening bower,

Will bring again the unalloyed delight

We knew before our life had held a wrong,

Recall the refrain of a cradle-song,

And lift the shadows from our saddened sight.1 [Note: Percy C. Ainsworth, Poems and Sonnets,

31.]

IV

How was the Longing Satisfied?

1. Water was brought to David from the very well of which he desired to drink. Three of these mighty men overheard that longing as it broke forth from his weary spirit. They waited for no command, they sounded no trumpet, they summoned no companies, but forth they went and perilled their very lives that David might have his wish. They fought their way to the well of Bethlehem—the well by the gate; they drew for their master;

115

with their swords they cleared their way as they returned to the cave of Adullam, and there they presented the crystal draught the king had longed for. But the pure sweet water he had longed for above all things was now nothing to him in itself though he had it in his hands. He would not drink it. He knew now that he wanted it no more; or rather he knew that deeper than the thirst for water had been the longing of his wearied spirit which mere water could not satisfy.

2. If David could have gone back to the actual scenes of his childhood, he would still have been unsatisfied. He might have returned to the home of his boyhood and revisited scenes amid which he had wandered free from care, and the fields and the trees and the streams which he loved might have been around him—the same, yet how different! The charm is gone. He has returned to the home; but he can never return to the feelings of his youthful days. There is no actual going back. We cannot begin again, start afresh, make a new attempt, with the added experience of life, as many of us would like to do—“To the land whereunto they desire to return, thither shall they not return.” We cannot now re-write the story of our lives. The record, with all its faults, mistakes, confusions, sins, must stand. Nor can we replace the losses of the heart, the separations of death, and alas! the separations of life.

We return to a memory-haunted scene, and how strangely the hills, the streams, the streets have dwindled and shrunk together. Size is relative to that central affection which magnifies all its store of surroundings. That which is about us has its perspective, not in fact, but in love’s wiser fancy. We cannot restore the outer ratio of what made life’s earliest impressions. A secret and vanished beauty fails of reattachment to visible things. The lute is hushed, the chairs are vacant, and Charles Lamb’s plaint rises to pallid lips:—

Ghost-like I paced round the haunts of my childhood,

Earth seemed a desert I was bound to traverse,

Seeking to find the old familiar faces.

The well is shallower. The waters that “were wont to go warbling so softly and well” do not flow as they used to flow. Their gush and sparkle have escaped, and something insipid and tasteless has come. The sweetness was about, not in, the draught. The

taste was in the tongue and the lips that have changed.1 [Note: M. W. Stryker.]

3. David here was crying for his vanished childhood, and in a moment certain things happened which proved to him that he was richer as a man than he had ever been as a child. He had won friendships that were faithful to him even unto death. Three men among his followers, as soon as they heard his cry, went off, without a moment’s doubt, to obey; they broke through an army, their lives hanging by a hair at every turn, on the mere chance of bringing him a draught. It was surely more than all the delights of childhood to have gained such devotion, such love, as that! It was brought home to him that even here, in dreary Adullam, with its bitter experiences and brackish water, he had what not even Bethlehem with all its wells could give him. He had gained much, though he had lost much. He had gained more than he had lost.

There are better things than the glory of childhood, just as the gnarled, strong, winter-worn oak is nobler than the slender sapling with its first shoots of green. God did not send us into the world to be always children; but to be strong, long-suffering, serviceable men and women; to make friends and deserve their friendship; to learn patience through sorrow and courage by facing difficulties, and to take a real soldier’s part in the great battle of life. And if we are doing that, there is no need to sigh for our Bethlehem days. A man, if he has grown with some sense of duty, with some fear of God, and in a religious way; if he has fought with temptation and not always yielded; if he has learned some of the finer lessons which experience teaches, is in all ways richer

116

than he was as a youth or a little child. His thoughts are larger and wiser; his whole conception of things is more Godlike; his sympathies are wider; his world is a bigger place. He loves and pities his fellow-men more; his hands and brain and heart are fitter for work; his influence is greater; and the world which thanks God for the children ought to thank God even more for him.

The regret we have for our childhood is not wholly justifiable: so much a man may lay down without fear of public ribaldry; for although we shake our heads over the change, we are not unconscious of the manifold advantages of our new state. What we lose in generous impulse we more than gain in the habit of generously watching others; and the capacity to enjoy Shakespeare may balance a lost appetite for playing at

soldiers.1 [Note: R. L. Stevenson, Child’s Play.]

Let us never fancy that the path of life is a path that steadily declines and slopes downward. It is true “heaven lies about us in our infancy.” It is true that “the vision splendid” is often unveiled to young eyes. But it is still more true that heaven and God and “the vision splendid “are far nearer and closer to the man or woman who, in the battle of life, holds fast by truth and right and holiness, and pushes on, carrying a daily cross, along the rough, painful road of duty and faith and earnest living. It is a cruel mistake, and a most faithless one, to suppose that the beginning of life is better than the end of life, and that the days of youth are purer and better and of more value than the days of mature manhood and experienced old age.

The David whom we love and admire, the David who has helped and enriched countless souls, and sent the echo of his song down through the centuries and won for himself deathless glory and fame in the Church of God, is not the boy of Bethlehem, dreaming in the fields and sitting by the well at the gate in all the charm of golden youth. The David who helps us and bids us be of good cheer is the man of many trials and many troubles; the man of vast experience, much sorrow, much prayer; the man of a “broken and a contrite heart,” wounded and showing the scars of many a fight. David is dear to us because he stands before us as one who, with infinite toil and labour, and with sweat of brain and heart, gained the mastery of himself; and who, in spite of defeats, failures, and sins, held fast, sometimes almost with desperation, by what is best and highest; and so found at last the true end of life, which is the knowledge and

peace of God.1 [Note: W. Harrison.]

It is the experiences of our lives that are truly valuable. It is our sorrows and our joys, our exaltations and enthusiasms, that are really so much to us. Lives grow richer as they grow older. So long as a man really lives, he is continually establishing new relations with all the things about him. Every year some new object becomes representative and suggestive of some deep experience of life. One year his business becomes glorified with all the spiritual discipline of threatened failure and restored prosperity. Another year his family life is deepened and softened by bereavement. Again, his country’s danger lifts patriotism into a passion. And yet again his body grows sacred to him by the mysterious touch of God in sickness. Always there is a new

value coming into things which sinks the old and makes them new to him.2 [Note: Phillips

Brooks.]

4. When David realized the gain that the years had brought, he thanked God and was satisfied. For David the water of the Bethlehem well had become wine—the red wine of the sacrament of selfless love. He could no longer think of himself, but of these three devoted hearts and of the God to whom he felt he in the long-run owed the priceless draught of human affection which had so mightily refreshed his weary soul. Their unselfish readiness to sacrifice themselves in order to gratify a chance wish, uttered in a despondent hour, made him unselfish too—nay, made him more than unselfish, made him go straight to God in a fervour of thanksgiving, and talk about it to Him as if He would be sure to understand it, and recognize its true value. In that moment David rose

117

again to the stature of a man of God. He could thank God for what the years had brought; he could thank God for the losses they had brought as well as the gains.

An easy thing, O Power Divine,

To thank Thee for these gifts of Thine!

For summer’s sunshine, winter’s snow,

For hearts that kindle, thoughts that glow.

But when shall I attain to this—

To thank Thee for the things I miss?

For all young Fancy’s early gleams,

The dreamed-of joys that still are dreams,

Hopes unfulfilled, and pleasures known

Through others’ fortunes, not my own,

And blessings seen that are not given,

And never will be, this side heaven.

Had I too shared the joys I see,

Would there have been a heaven for me?

Could I have felt Thy presence near,

Had I possessed what I held dear?

My deepest fortune, highest bliss,

Have grown perchance from things I miss.

Sometimes there comes an hour of calm;

Grief turns to blessing, pain to balm;

A Power that works above my will

Still leads me onward, upward still:

And then my heart attains to this,—

To thank Thee for the things I miss.1 [Note: Thomas Wentworth Higginson.]

5. There is something better than looking back with longing to the days of youth. It is

118

this—to realize that true life, the life of the soul, never grows old, although it grows up. Our true home never is, never was, amid the symbols and shadows of time, but in the grand reality of eternity. The well of Bethlehem in the morning—there is no turning back to it in the afternoon. There is a farther, a more glorious morning, a deeper, a nobler, a purer draught from the waters of God, the waters of rest. The soul in growing older is not farther from God than in the days of sweet innocence. To turn in simplest, most childlike trust to God, truth, heaven, wherever you are and however you are, is to drink deep of the water of ageless life.

Gray distance hid each shining sail,

By ruthless breezes borne from me;

And, lessening, fading, faint and pale,

My ships went forth to sea.

Where misty breakers rose and fell

I stood and sorrowed hopelessly;

For every wave had tales to tell

Of wrecks far out at sea.

Today, a song is on my lips:

Earth seems a paradise to me:

For God is good, and lo, my ships

Are coming home from sea!1 [Note: George Arnold.]

ELLICOTT, "(15) The well of Bethlehem.—There are now no wells of living water at Bethlehem itself, the

town being supplied by an aqueduct. Robinson could find none in the neighbourhood, and was assured that

none existed (Bib. R. ii. 157-163); but Ritter (Geog. of Pal. iii. 340) says that a little north of the town “is”

David’s well, “with its deep shaft and its clear cool water.”

PULPIT, "The well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate. Bethlehem is now supplied with water by an aqueduct, and the wells close to the town have ceased to exist. The cistern of "deep, clear, cool water," descsribed by Ritter, in his ’Geography of Palestine,’ and now called David’s Well, is three quarters of a mile to the north of Bethlehem, and too distant to be that which David meant.

119

16 So the three mighty men broke through the Philistine lines, drew water from the well near the gate of Bethlehem and carried it back to David. But he refused to drink it; instead, he poured it out before the LORD .

BARNES, "Brake through the host - Their camp was pitched in the valley of Rephaim 2Sa_23:13; 1Ch_11:15. It follows from this that the way from Adullam to Bethlehem lay through or across the valley of Rephaim.

Poured it out unto the Lord - It was too costly for his own use, none but the Lord was worthy of it. For libations, see Jdg_6:20 note.

CLARKE, "Poured it out unto the Lord - To make libations, both of water and wine, was a frequent custom among the heathens. We have an almost similar account in Arrian’s Life of Alexander: “When his army was greatly oppressed with heat and thirst, a soldier brought him a cup of water; he ordered it to be carried back, saying, I cannot bear to drink alone while so many are in want, and this cup is too small to be divided among the whole.” Tunc poculo pleno sicut oblatum est reddito: Non solus, inquit, bibere sustineo, nec tam exiguum dividere omnibus possum. -Arrian, lib. vi.

The example was noble in both cases, but David added piety to bravery; he poured it out unto the Lord.

GILL, "And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines,.... Which lay in the valley of Rephaim, between the hold in which David was and the well of Bethlehem; these three men hearing David express himself in the above manner, though without any view that any should risk their lives to obtain it, only in a general way said, oh for a draught of the water of the well of Bethlehem! immediately set out, and made their way through the army of the Philistines to the well:

and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate,

and took it, and brought it to David; in a vessel which they probably carried with them for that purpose:

nevertheless he would not drink thereof; because, say they who take these words in a spiritual sense, it was not this water, but spiritual water, he desired: but the reason is given in 2 Samuel 23:17,

120

but poured it out unto the Lord; as a libation to him, it being rather blood than water, being fetched at the hazard of men's lives, and therefore more fit to be offered as a sacrifice to God than to be drank by him; and this he might do in thankfulness to God for preserving the lives of the men. Gersom thinks it was now the feast of tabernacles, which was the feast of ingathering the fruits of the earth, when great quantities of water were drawn and poured out at the altar, which was done to obtain the blessing of the former rain; See Gill on John 7:37 and See Gill on John 7:38.

HENRY6-17, "How bravely his three mighty men, Abishai, Benaiah, and another not named, ventured through the camp of the Philistines, upon the very mouth of danger, and fetched water from the well of Bethlehem, without David's knowledge, 2Sa_23:16. When he wished for it he was far from desiring that any of his men should venture their lives for it; but those three did, to show, First, How much they valued their prince, and with what pleasure they could run the greatest hardships in his service. David, though anointed king, was as yet an exile, a poor prince that had no external advantages to recommend him to the affection and esteem of his attendants, nor was he in any capacity to prefer or reward them; yet those three were thus zealous for his satisfaction, firmly believing the time of recompence would come. Let us be willing to venture in the cause of Christ, even when it is a suffering cause, as those who are assured that it will prevail and that we shall not lose by it at last. Were they so forward to expose themselves upon the least hint of their prince's mind and so ambitious to please him? And shall not we covet to approve ourselves to our Lord Jesus by a ready compliance with every intimation of his will given us by his word, Spirit and providence? Secondly, How little they feared the Philistines. They were glad of an occasion to defy them. Whether they broke through the host clandestinely, and with such art that the Philistines did not discover them, or openly, and with such terror in their looks that the Philistines durst not oppose them, is not certain; it should seem, they forced their way, sword in hand. But see, [3.] How self-denyingly David, when he had this far-fetched dear-bought water, poured it out before the Lord, 2Sa_23:17. First, Thus he would show the tender regard he had to the lives of his soldiers, and how far he was from being prodigal of their blood, Psa_72:14. In God's sight the death of his saints is precious. Secondly, Thus he would testify his sorrow for speaking that foolish word which occasioned those men to put their lives in their hands. Great men should take heed what they say, lest any bad use be made of it by those about them. Thirdly, Thus he would prevent the like rashness in any of his men for the future. Fourthly, Thus he would cross his own foolish fancy, and punish himself for entertaining and indulging it, and show that he had sober thoughts to correct his rash ones, and knew how to deny himself even in that which he was most fond of. Such generous mortifications become the wise, the great, and the good. Fifthly, Thus he would honour God and give glory to him. The water purchased at this rate he thought too precious for his own drinking and fit only to be poured out to God as a drink-offering. If it was the blood of these men, it was God's due, for the blood was always his. Sixthly, Bishop Patrick speaks of some who think that David hereby showed that it was not material water he longed for, but the Messiah, who had the water of life, who, he knew, should be born at Bethlehem, which the Philistines therefore should not be able to destroy. Seventhly, Did David look upon that water as very precious which was got at the hazard of these men's blood, and shall not we much more value those benefits for the purchasing of which our blessed Saviour shed his blood? Let us not undervalue the blood of the covenant,

121

as those do that undervalue the blessings of the covenant.

K&D 16-17, "2Sa_23:16-17

The three heroes then broke through the camp of the Philistines at Bethlehem, i.e., the outpost that occupied the space before the gate, fetched water out of the well, and brought it to David. He would not drink it, however, but poured it out upon the ground to the Lord, as a drink-offering for Jehovah. “He poured it out upon the earth, rendering Him thanks for the return of the three brave men” (Clericus). And he said, “Far be it from me, O Jehovah, to do this! The blood of the men who went with their lives (i.e., at the risk of their lives),” sc., should I drink it? The verb אשתה is wanting in our text, but is not to be inserted according to the Chronicles as though it had fallen out; the sentence is rather to be regarded as an aposiopesis. יהוה after ליחלילה is a vocative, and is not to be altered into מיהוה according to the חיmמא of the Chronicles. The fact that the vocative does not occur in other passages after לי חלילהproves nothing. It is equivalent to the oath יהוה The chronicler has .(1Sa_14:45) חיendeavoured to simplify David's exclamation by completing the sentence. בנפשותם, “for the price of their souls,” i.e., at the risk of their lives. The water drawn and fetched at the risk of their lives is compared to the soul itself, and the soul is in the blood (Lev_17:11). Drinking this water, therefore, would be nothing else than drinking their blood.

ELLICOTT, "(16) Poured it out unto the Lord.—The brave act of the three heroes shows strikingly the personal power of David over his followers and the enthusiasm with which he inspired them. Yet, on the other hand, David would not suffer his own longing to be gratified by the hazard of men’s lives. Taking the water, therefore, he “poured it out unto the Lord.” The word is the technical term for the sacrificial libation, and David assimilated his act to a sacrifice by a solemn consecration of this dangerously won water to the Lord.

PULLPIT 16-17, "Brake through the host (or, camp) of the Philistines. The Philistine camp was pitched in the valley of Rephaim, and to reach Bethlehem, which was more than twenty or twenty-five miles distant, these three heroes must pass close to the ground occupied by the enemy. The valley of Rephaim, in fact, extended from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, and, to guard their position, the Philistines held Bethlehem with a strong garrison. Of course the heroes would use every precaution; for to be discovered would be certain death. The story of their perils and presence of mind in danger, and hairbreadth escape, would be full of interest; but we are told only that they succeeded, and returned in safety, bearing their precious burden; but David would not drink, and poured it out unto Jehovah. The word is that used of a sacrificial libation; for David regarded it as holy, and consecrated to God, because it had been bought with blood—at the risk, that is, of the lives of these gallant men. Nothing is recorded in the romances of the Middle Ages, when knightly chivalry was at its height, more gallant and noble than the exploit of these men. And the very essence of its devotion lay in the fact that it was done to gratify a mere sick longing, and therefore out of pure love. Sick, no doubt, David was, and burning with fever; and even more depressed by the apparent hopelessness of his position. The exploit changed the course of his thoughts. What could he not do with such heroes! Though racked during their absence with anxiety and self-reproach, yet on their return he would be dispirited no longer, but filled with confidence. The words, "Shall I drink?" inserted in the Revised Version, have apparently dropped out of the text by

122

accident. They are found in the parallel place in Chronicles, and in the Septuagint and Vulgate here. The Syriac has, "At the peril of their life’s blood these men went."

17 "Far be it from me, O LORD , to do this!" he said. "Is it not the blood of men who went at the risk of their lives?" And David would not drink it. Such were the exploits of the three mighty men.

GILL, "And he said, be it far from me, O Lord, that one should do this,.... Drink of the water these men had brought him:

is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? who risked the shedding of their blood, and went in danger of their lives to get it:

therefore he would not drink it: some compare with this the story of AlexanderF4 to whom a vessel of water was offered when in extreme thirst, which he refused, because he could not bear to drink it alone, and so small a quantity could not be divided among all about him; but the reasons are not the same:

these things did these three mighty men; which made them very famous.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:17. He said, Far be it from me — He looked upon it no longer as water, but as the blood of those men who fetched it with the peril of their lives; and the blood of every thing belonged to the Lord, and therefore he poured it out before him. If the generosity of David’s worthies was great, David’s generosity was no less so. Such actions as these dignify human nature, and manifest an excellence and grandeur which one should not otherwise think it capable of. These things did these three — They all joined in this hazardous exploit. But now follows what they did singly.

ELLICOTT, " (17) Is not this the blood . . .?—The Hebrew here is simply an interrogative exclamation, “the blood of the men?” but in 1 Chronicles 11:19 the text reads, “Shall I drink the blood of these men?” &c., and so the LXX. and Vulg. translate here. To David the water gained only at the risk of life, “seemed

123

the very blood in which the life resides” (Leviticus 17:10-11).

These three.—Rather, the three.

18 Abishai the brother of Joab son of Zeruiah was chief of the Three. [6] He raised his spear against three hundred men, whom he killed, and so he became as famous as the Three.

BARNES, "Three - “The three” 2Sa_23:22. It was Abishai’s prowess on this occasion that raised him to be chief of this triad.

GILL, "And Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief among the three,.... Another triumvirate, of which he was the head:

and he lifted up his spear against three hundred, and slew them; JosephusF5 says six hundred; this seems to confirm the reading of 2 Samuel 23:8, that the number eight hundred is right, for if it was only three hundred, Abishai would have been equal to one, even the first, of the former three; which yet is denied him in 2 Samuel 23:19,

and had the name among three; of which he was one; and he had the chief name among them, or was the most famous of them.

HENRY 18-23, "(2.) The brave actions of two of them on other occasions. Abishai slew 300 men at once, 2Sa_23:18, 2Sa_23:19. Benaiah did many great things. [1.] He slew two Moabites that were lion-like men, so bold and strong, so fierce and furious. [2.] He slew an Egyptian, on what occasion it is not said; he was well armed but Benaiah attacked him with no other weapon than a walking staff, dexterously wrested his spear out of his hand, and slew him with it, 2Sa_23:21. For these and similar exploits David preferred him to be captain of the life-guard or standing forces, 2Sa_23:23.

K&D, "2Sa_23:18-19

Heroes of the second class. - 2Sa_23:18, 2Sa_23:19. Abishai, Joab's brother (see 1Sa_26:6), was also chief of the body-guard, like Jashobeam (2Sa_23:8 : the Chethibהשלשי is correct; see at 2Sa_23:8). He swung his spear over three hundred slain. “He

124

had a name among the three,” i.e., the three principal heroes, Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah. The following words, מן־השלשה, make no sense. השלשה is an error in writing for השלשים, as 2Sa_23:23 shows in both the texts (2Sa_23:25 of the Chronicles): an error the origin of which may easily be explained from the word שלשה, which stands immediately before. “He was certainly honoured before the thirty (heroes of David), and became their chief, but he did not come to the three,” i.e., he was not equal to Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah. הכי has the force of an energetic assurance: “Is it so that,” i.e., it is certainly so (as in 2Sa_9:1; Gen_27:36; Gen_29:15).

COFFMAN, "THE PROMINENCE OF ABISHAI; JOAB'S BROTHER

"Now Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief of the thirty. And he wielded his spear against three hundred men and slew them, and won a name besides the three. He was the most renowned of the thirty; but he did not attain to the three."

Abishai was indeed a great soldier for David. He accompanied David into Saul's camp when David took Saul's spear; he once saved David's life, and he was ready to Execute Shimei if David had allowed it.

LANGE, "18And Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief among three [better, chief of the thirty]. And he lifted up his spear against three hundred and slew them 300 slain], and had the [a] name among three [the thirty]. Was Hebrews 19not [He was] most honourable of three [the thirty], therefore he was [and became] their captain, howbeit [and] he attained not unto the first [om. first] three.

LANGE, " 2 Samuel 23:18 sqq. Abishai, see 1 Samuel 26:6. He was (as Jashobeam), a chief Prayer of Manasseh, captain of the shalish-corps. (Erdmann retains the text (Kethib) shalish, Eng. A. V. follows the margin (Qeri): “chief of (the) three;” but it seems better to read: “chief of the thirty.” Abishai and Benaiah attained to fame and distinction among the thirty, without reaching to the three ( 2 Samuel 23:8-12).—Tr.] He brandished his spear over, etc., as in 2 Samuel 23:8. And he had a name among the three, Jashobeam, Eleazar and Shammah. Among these greatest heroes he had a name for heroic bravery.

2 Samuel 23:19. But also above the Shalish-corps (knights) was he honored. Our text reads: “above the three he was honored,” but, while the “three” at the end of 2 Samuel 23:18 is to be maintained against Thenius (who would unnecessarily change it to Shalish), here it must be regarded as a scribal error, and changed to Shalish, partly because of the following words: “and he became their captain,” partly because of the relation of these words (which indicate his position) to the “chief of the Shalish” in 2 Samuel 23:18.—The text here is as to one word (הכי[FN30]) unintelligible, and must be changed after Chron, so as to read: “above the Shalish he was doubly honored,” so that he became their leader, which answered to his position as “chief of the Shalish-corps” ( 2 Samuel 23:18). But to the three (first) he attained not, they were beyond him in bravery and heroic achievement. [Dr. Erdmann thus, by somewhat arbitrary

125

changes of text, brings out of this list a Shalish-corps with Abishai as captain; but we hear nothing elsewhere of such a corps, and it seems foreign to the design of this list to mention it. Moreover, the statement in 2 Samuel 23:23 concerning Benaiah seems to be parallel to that in 2 Samuel 23:19 concerning Abishai, and 2 Samuel 23:23 gives a clear and appropriate sense, in accordance with which it is better to render 2 Samuel 23:19 : “He was more honorable than the thirty, and became their captain, but did not attain to the three.” Thus, between the three and the thirty we have the two eminent soldiers, Abishai and Benaiah, of whom the first was made Captain of the Thirty, and the second Privy Councillor. The change of text required in order to give this reading (that Isaiah, to conform 2 Samuel 23:19 to 2 Samuel 23:23) is slight, involving only the alteration of ah to im.—Tr.]

19 Was he not held in greater honor than the Three? He became their commander, even though he was not included among them.

BARNES, "i. e., “Was he not the most honorable of the three of the second order, howbeit, he attained not to the three,” the triad, namely, which consisted of Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah. That two triads are mentioned is a simple fact, although only five names are given.

GILL, "Was he not most honourable of three?.... He was; who, besides the exploit here mentioned, did many other things; he went down with David into Saul's camp, and took away his spear and cruse, which were at his bolster, 1 Samuel 26:6; he relieved David when in danger from Ishbibenob the giant, 2 Samuel 21:16; he beat the Edomites, and slew eighteen thousand of them in the valley of salt, 1 Chronicles 18:12, therefore he was their captain; of the other two, or was head over them, took rank before them: howbeit he attained not unto the first three; for fortitude, courage, and warlike exploits, namely, to the Tachmonite, Eleazar, and Shammah.

JAMISON, "the first three — The mighty men or champions in David’s military staff were divided into three classes - the highest, Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah; the second class, Abishai, Benaiah, and Asahel; and the third class, the thirty, of which Asahel was the chief. There are thirty-one mentioned in the list, including Asahel; and these added to the two superior orders make thirty-seven. Two of them, we know, were already dead; namely, Asahel [2Sa_3:30] and Uriah [2Sa_11:17]; and if the dead, at the drawing up of the list, amounted to seven, then we might suppose a legion of honor, consisting of the definite number thirty, where the vacancies, when they occurred, were replaced by fresh appointments.

126

BI, "Howbeit he attained not unto the first three.

The might of mediocrity

Everybody just now is deploring the singular dearth of genius which marks our immediate era. Some historic periods are remarkable in consequence of the brilliant constellations of extraordinarily gifted men which illuminate them; but the current age threatens to resemble those starless spaces of the firmament which perplex astronomers. In the musical world no one remains to play the first fiddle. The dropped mantle of Macaulay lies unclaimed. A modern commentator warmly protests against the custom of describing certain prophets as “minor prophets”; but no one proposes to abolish the designation “minor poets”—they are very much to the |ore, and there is no forehead worthy of Tennyson’s laurel. Epoch-making scientists like Darwin and Faraday, and masterly expositors of science like Huxley and Tyndall, have left no successors. As to great singers like Lind and Titiens, we feel the silence that Israel felt on the day and in the place of which the sacred historian wrote: “Miriam died there, and was buried there.” No artist appears competent to take up Millais’ fallen pencil. No orator like Bright charms the nation. We might think that the forces of nature were spent. The greatest souls are rarer than ever. This is the age of democracy, and it would seem as ii it were going to justify Amiel’s dictum that “democracy is the grave of talent.” The nineteenth century ended without leaving a single really great figure on the stage. We rather welcome this parenthesis in the annals of the sublime; it gives a rare opportunity to mediocrity to demonstrate its great merits, and to show that it is not without considerable glory of its own. Nothing may compare with the Divine virtue of genius; it is a direct gleam of the eternal light: and there is little danger in our day that any real greatness will suffer depreciation and neglect. The danger always is lest we should disesteem faithful mediocrity. Victor Hugo regrets the English victory at Waterloo because it was “the victory of mediocrity.” We do not care to attempt any refutation of this epigram; let us allow that Wellington was not a brilliant adventurer like Napoleon, and that, as poets reason, the victory of Waterloo was the triumph of mediocrity. It must be acknowledged also that the victory of mediocrity is quite a feature of the world’s general affairs and history. Ages ago the author of Ecclesiastes wrote: “I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happened to them all.” This keen observer discerned what Victor Hugo regretted, that there is a place in the government of the world for the triumph of mediocrity. We ourselves constantly observe the same thing. The brilliant preacher conspicuously fails to create a church, whilst the plodding pastor ministers through years to a flourishing congregation. The brilliant speculator dies poor, whilst the homespun’ shopkeeper leaves an inheritance to his children’s children. The fable of the hare and the tortoise never grows obsolete. Said Diderot, “The world is for the strong.” But the world is not altogether for the strong, neither are brilliant men permitted to ride roughshod over the simple. The world is also for the faithful, the artless, the industrious, the modest, and the meek. All things are not delivered over into the hands of William the Conqueror, Lorenzo the Magnificent, and Peter the Great; strugglers destitute of original power and brilliant parts have a trick of coming out at the top and sharing the spoils with the strong. We may honestly rejoice that this is so. It may affront the romantic critic to see the soldier of genius banished to St. Helena whilst the soldier of patience stands before kings; but the fact is comforting and inspiring to the faithful many. Intense, decisive faithfulness has the character of the sublime, and it sets the virtuous man of ordinary intelligence on a level with the most gifted. Commonplace talent united with high moral qualities is certainly one of the most precious factors of civilisation. We must

127

not permit ourselves to be browbeaten by towering greatness; we too have possibilities. Faithful mediocrity may enter hopefully into all social competitions; it often turns out to be genius in undress; it has a good chance of the prizes of life. We are not equal to daring assaults, far-reaching speculations, dazzling manoeuvres; but simple truth and perfect patience possess mysterious efficacy, and they as well as genius bring riches and honours, power, and fame. In our struggle against gifted and splendid wickedness let us remember the victory of mediocrity. The New Testament frequently calls attention to the power and magnificence of the kingdom of evil. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” “And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.” The Apocalypse brings out very strikingly the glory and power of the evil with which the saints contend. Wickedness is seen with many heads, eyes, and horns; she is arrayed in purple and scarlet, decked with precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand; force, fire, and fury are attributes of the awful power. This picture is not mere rhetoric. In the actual world we find these gigantic and lurid poetic images distinctly and powerfully reflected. A thousand times over wickedness is seen identified with royal magnificence, luminous intellect, immense learning, fabulous riches, indomitable courage, and resources all but infinite. Now it seems simply impossible for good, plain, honest, spiritual souls to make headway against the devilry thus leagued with might, magnificence, and stratagem. Men smile pitifully when they read on the page of history of clowns going forth with scythes, pikes, and pitchforks to do battle with panoplied hosts; but it seems unutterably more absurd for simple men and women to dare the rampant wickedness of the universe, boasting as it does this strength and splendour. In the natural world we daily witness the victories of mediocrity, and we may be sure that in the spiritual universe these victories are not less wonderful. The conflict of simple souls with the dash and guile of the demoniac powers appears a battle of doves with eagles; but tiny humming birds are said to attack the eagle with impunity, ignominiously driving it away. So wickedness in its utmost pride is strangely vulnerable, and sinks vanquished by very weakness There is a haste in wickedness which threatens its overthrow; it is feverish, premature, precipitate, and in its hurry comes to grief, despite the greatest advantages. Goodness, on the other hand, is deliberate, tranquil, patient, and herein finds a source of strength and victory. “Here is the patience and faith of the saints.” All hell in its wrath and pride makes shipwreck on this innocent-looking rock of simple faith and steadfastness, as at Waterloo the glittering, impetuous legions of France were worn out by the sheer patience and confidence of the duke. There is a blindness in wickedness which frustrates its designs. Brilliant, crafty sinners fall into egregious mistakes; they are guilty of surprising lapses, oversights, miscalculations. There is also in wickedness s pride and presumption which work its confusion, and in Strange ways turn its pomp into shame, its boastings into failure. Napoleon is reported to have said on the morning of Waterloo that he would “teach that little English general a lesson.” Such pride cometh before destruction. How utterly wrong are they who capitulate to temptation from the notion that evil is overwhelming, that it is necessarily victorious! We too often forget the penetration of sincerity, the depth of simplicity, the cleverness of uprightness, the strategy of straightforwardness; we forget that patience is genius, that persistence is the most unequivocal sign of force, that there is a conquering awfulness in real goodness, an all-subduing loveliness in the form of simple virtue. Mediocre as we are, we are destined to great victories. Entrenched in nature, exalted on thrones, defended by literature and eloquence, wickedness shall be vanquished by plain, good men. (W. L. Watkinson.)

128

The value of second-rate

To the student who asked, “What is the good of second-rate art?” Ruskin replied: “I am glad you asked me that question. Fifth rate, sixth rate, to s hundredth rate art is good. Art that gives s pleasure to any one has s right to exist. For instance, if I can only draw a duck that looks as though he waddled, I may give pleasure to the last baby of our hostess, while a flower beautifully drawn will give pleasure to her eldest girl, who is just beginning to learn botany, and it may be useful to some man of science. The true outline of a leaf shown a child may turn the whole course of its life. Second-rate art is useful to a greater number of people than even first-rate art—there are so few minds of high enough order to understand the highest kind of art. Many more people find pleasure in Copley or Fielding than in Turner. Most people only see the small vulgarisms in Turner, and cannot appreciate his grander qualities.” (Christian Weekly.)

20 Benaiah son of Jehoiada was a valiant fighter from Kabzeel, who performed great exploits. He struck down two of Moab's best men. He also went down into a pit on a snowy day and killed a lion.

BARNES, "Benaiah the son of Jehoiada - He commanded the Cherethites and Pelethites all through David’s reign 2Sa_8:18; 2Sa_20:23, and took a prominent part in supporting Solomon against Adonijah when David was dying, and was rewarded by being made captain of the host in the room of Joab 1Ki_1:8, 1Ki_1:26, 1Ki_1:32-40; 1Ki_2:25-35; 1Ki_4:4. It is possible that Jehoiada his father is the same as Jehoiada 1Ch_12:27, leader of the Aaronites, since “Benaiah the son of Jehoiada” is called a “chief priest” 1Ch_27:5.

Two lion-like men - The Hebrew word אריאל 'ărıy'êl, means literally “lion of God,” and is interpreted to mean “an eminent hero.” Instances occur among Arabs and Persians of the surname “lion of God” being given to great warriors. Hence, it is supposed that the same custom prevailed among the Moabites. But the Vulgate has “two lions of Moab,” which seems to be borne out by the next sentence.

Slew a lion ... - Rather, THE lion, one of those described above as “a lion of God,” if the Vulgate Version is right. Apparently in a severe winter a lion had come up from its usual haunts to some village in search of food, and taken possession of the tank or cistern to the terror of the inhabitants, and Benaiah attacked it boldly and killed it.

129

CLARKE, "Two lion-like men of Moab - Some think that two real lions are meant; some that they were two savage gigantic men; others, that two fortresses are meant. The words שני אראל מואב sheney ariel Moab may signify, as the Targum has rendered it, ית תרין רברבי מואב yath terein rabrebey Moab, “The two princes of Moab.”

GILL, "And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a valiant man of Kabzeel,.... A city in the tribe of Judah, Joshua 15:21; the father of this man was a man of great vivacity, valour, and strength, so that it was like father like son. Procopius Gazaeus says Benaiah was David's brother's son, and a grandson of Jesse:

who had done many acts; which may refer either to the father of Benaiah or to Benaiah himself; and indeed the Syriac and Arabic versions refer the preceding character, "a valiant man", not to the father, but the son:

he slew two lionlike men of Moab; two princes of Moab, as the Targum, or two giants of Moab, as the Syriac and Arabic versions; men who were comparable to lions for their strength and courage; for this is not to be understood of two strong towers of Moab, as Ben Gersom, which were defended by valiant men like lions, or which had the form of lions engraved on them: nor of Moabitish altars, as GussetiusF6, the altar of the Lord, being called by this name of Ariel, the word used; but of men of uncommon valour and fortitude:

he went down also, and slew a lion in the midst of a pit in time of snow; not Joab, 1 Kings 2:34, as is the traditionF7, but a real lion, the strongest among the beasts; and that in a pit where he could not keep his distance, and turn himself, and take all advantage, and from whence he could not make his escape; and which indeed might quicken his resolution, when he must fight or die; and on a snowy day, when lions are said to have the greatest strength, as in cold weather, or however are fiercer for want of food; and when Benaiah might be benumbed in his hands and feet with cold. JosephusF8 represents the case thus, that the lion fell into a pit, where was much snow, and was covered with it, and making a hideous roaring, Benaiah went down and slew him; but rather it was what others say, that this lion very much infested the places adjacent, and did much harm; and therefore, for the good of the country, and to rid them of it, took this opportunity, and slew it; which one would think was not one of the best reasons that might offer; it seems best therefore what BochartF9 conjectures, that Benaiah went into a cave, for so the word used may signify, to shelter himself a while from the cold, when a lion, being in it for the same reason, attacked him, and he fought with it and slew it; or rather it may be an hollow place, a valley that lay between Acra and Zion, where Benaiah, hearing a lion roar, went down and slew itF11.

HENRY, "

JAMISON, "

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:20. Who had done many acts — As Abishai also had

130

done, who had succoured David, when a giant thought to have killed him. But their greatest acts only are here mentioned. He slew two lion-like men of Moab — The Hebrew word אראל, ariel, signifies a lion of God, that is, a great lion. And it was the name among the Moabites for a very valiant man. Such a one at this day is called assedollabi, a lion of God, among the Arabians. He slew a lion in the midst of a pit — By going down into which he had put himself under a necessity of killing or being killed. In time of snow — This is mentioned to magnify the action, because then lions are fiercer both for want of prey, and from the sharpness of their appetite in cold seasons.

ELLICOTT, " (20) Benaiah.—He was the general of the third division of the army (1 Chronicles 27:5-6). This probably included the Cherethites and Pelethites, since he was also their commander (2 Samuel 8:18; 2 Samuel 20:23). In consequence of his faithfulness to Solomon in the rebellion of Adonijah, he was finally made commander-in-chief (1 Kings 1:8; 1 Kings 1:26; 1 Kings 1:32; 1 Kings 2:25; 1 Kings 2:29-35; 1 Kings 4:4). His father Jehoiada is called “a chief priest “in 1 Chronicles 27:5, and in 1 Chronicles 12:27 mention is made of a “Jehoiada the leader of the Aaronites,” who came to David at Hebron, and who may have been the same person.

Kabzeel.—A town on the extreme south of Judah, on the border of Edom (Joshua 15:21).

Lion-like men.—Literally, lion of God, an expression used among Arabs and Persians of great warriors.

Slew a lion.—Comp. 1 Samuel 17:34-37. It is not said with what weapons he slew him, but the act was evidently a great feat of valour.

LANGE, " 2 Samuel 23:20-23. Benaiah; first, his person and character. The son of Jehoiada, according to 1 Chronicles 27:5 the priest Jehoiada (compare 2 Samuel 12:27); he was ( 2 Samuel 8:18; 2 Samuel 20:23) the commander of the body-guard (Cherethites and Pelethites), and became ( 1 Kings 1:35) in Joab’s stead commander-in-chief of the army. He was the son of an honorable man. As both texts have the “ Song of Solomon,” it is not to be stricken out (Ew, Berth, Then, Bötttch.), though of the Versions only the Chald. has it. Not: “the son of a valiant man”—that would not suit the priest Jehoiada—but: “of an upright, honest, capable[FN31] man” (as in Numbers 24:18; 1 Kings 1:52; Ruth 4:11; Proverbs 12:4; Proverbs 30:10; Proverbs 30:29). [It is not probable that, after the name of his father has been given, he would then be described afresh by this general phrase: “son of a man of force;” in spite of the concurrence of the two texts (Sam. and Chron.) in retaining the word “ Song of Solomon,” it is better to omit it.—Tr.].—He was “rich in deeds.” Of Kabzeel, in the south of Judah, Joshua 15:21; Nehemiah 11:25.—His deeds: 1) He slew the two Ariels [Eng. A. V.: two lion like men] of Moab. Thenius (after the Sept, with a slight alteration[FN32]) renders: “he slew the two sons of Ariel, the Moabite.” So also Ewald, who conjectures that Ariel was a name of honor of a king of Moab. But

131

as both texts have the same reading, the renderings of Sept. and Targ. are mere conjectures. Nor can our text be translated: “two lions of God[FN33] (God-lions)” (De W, Böttch.) = monstrous lions; poetical expressions such as “mountains of God, cedars of God” ( Psalm 36:7 [ Psalm 36:6]; Psalm 80:11 [ Psalm 80:10]) [= great mountains, goodly cedars] are not suitable to wild beasts and to “historical prose” (Then.). Among the Arabians and Persians “Lion of God” is the designation of a hero, comp. Boch. Hieroz. II:7, 63, ed. Rosenmüller; Indian princes call themselves Dœvasinha, “god-lions” (Ew.). It was two famous Moabite heroes that Benaiah conquered and killed. Why is it so improbable (Then. [Wellh.]) that this name should have been given to two contemporary men of a nation? This exploit belongs, therefore, in the history of the Moabite war, of which we otherwise know little.—2) He went down and slew the lion in the pit.—The word (אריה) denotes a lion-animal, a beast that looks like a lion (Böttcher).[FN34] The Art. points out that the fact was generally known. On the day of snow, on a snowy day, when more snow than usual had fallen, and the lion, having approached human habitations to seek food, fell into an ordinary cistern, or a pit dug to catch him.—3) 2 Samuel 23:21. And he slew the Egyptian; the Art. denotes that the man was known according to this account. He was a “man[FN35] of appearance,” that Isaiah, a large man. Chron. has: “a man of measure,” = a man of great height. Which is the original reading must be left undetermined; both denote gigantic stature, Chron, adding: “he was five cubits high, and his spear as a weaver’s beam.” The heroic nature of Benaiah’s deed consisted in his going down with a staff to the Egyptian, who was armed with a spear. We must suppose that there was a battle, in which Benaiah stood with Israel on a height, while the Egyptian and the enemy were below in the plain; he showed his skill and strength by snatching the spear out of the Egyptian’s hand and killing him with it.

2 Samuel 23:22. His name also (as Abishai’s) was renowned among the three chief heroes (comp. 2 Samuel 23:18) [here, as there, it seems better to read: “among the thirty.”[FN36]—Tr.].

2 Samuel 23:23. Here (as in verse19) instead, of the “thirty” of the text, we are to read “Shalish” (knights).—Above the knights he was honored (as Abishai), but also he came not up to the three, the first-named three heroes.—And David made him his privy-councillor.—See on 1 Samuel 22:14. On his high military position see 2 Samuel 8:18 and 2 Samuel 20:23.—[As above remarked, it is simpler to retain the text here (as in Eng. A. V.), and make 2 Samuel 23:19 conform to it.—Tr.]

2 Samuel 23:24-39. The remaining heroes [thirty-two in number], who belonged to the corps of Shalishim, and, in comparison with the above-named, formed the third grade.

PULPIT, "Benaiah the son of Jehoiada. He was a very important person throughout David’s reign, being the commander of the body guard’ (2Sa_8:18), and

132

general of the third brigade of twenty-four thousand men (1Ch_27:5). The meaning of the description given of him there is disputed; but probably it should be translated, "Benaiah the son of Jehoiada the priest, as head," that is, of the brigade. He was thus the son of the Jehoiada who was leader of the house of Aaron, and whose coming to Hebron with three thousand seven hundred martial priests did so much to make David king of all Israel (1Ch_12:27). Subsequently he took the side of Solomon against Adonijah, and was rewarded by being made commander-in-chief, in place of Joab (1Ki_2:35). Kabzeel. An unidentified place in the south of Judah, on the Edomite border (Jos_15:21), called Jekabzeel in Neh_11:25. Two lionlike men of Moab. The Septuagint reads, "the two sons of Ariel of Moab." which the Revised Version adopts. "Ariel" means "lion of God," and is a name given to Jerusalem in Isa_29:1, Isa_29:2. The Syriac supports the Authorized Version in understanding by the term "heroes," or "champions;" but the use of poetical language in a prosaic catalogue is so strange that the Septuagint is probably right. If so, Ariel is the proper name of the King of Moab and the achievement took place in the war recorded in 2Sa_8:2. A lion. This achievement would be as gratefully remembered as the killing of a man eating tiger by the natives in India. A lion, driven by the cold from the forests, had made its lair in a dry tank near some town, and thence preyed upon the inhabitants as they went in and out of the city. And Benaiah had pity upon them, and came to the rescue, and went down into the pit, and, at the risk of his life, slew the lion.

COFFMAN, "THE EXPLOITS OF BENAIAH

"And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was a valiant man of Kabzeel, a doer of great deeds; he smote two ariels of Moab. He also went down and slew a lion in a pit on a day when snow had fallen. And he slew an Egyptian, a handsome man. The Egyptian had a spear in his hand, but Benaiah went down to him with a staff, and snatched the spear out of the Egyptian's hand, and slew him with his own spear. These things did Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, and won a name beside the three mighty men. He was renowned among the thirty, but he did not attain to the three. And David set him over his bodyguard."

This concludes the special record of the unusually brilliant and sensational achievements of certain individuals among the mighty men. The others are named, but their deeds are not especially mentioned. It is significant that a duplicate list of these mighty men appears in 1 Chronicles 11:10-45, with some variations, but essentially the same; and then an additional list of sixteen members of the "thirty" is also appended. This suggests that, as members of the thirty were lost in battle, they were replaced, keeping the company up to its normal size. The report in Chronicles also states that this group gave David, "Strong support in his kingdom" (1 Chronicles 11:10).

"He smote two ariels of Moab" (2 Samuel 23:20). The meaning of ariels is unknown; the common guesses suppose that it might mean lions or lion-like men.

133

THE NAMES OF THE MIGHTY MEN OF THE THIRTY (2 Samuel 23:24-39)

"Asahel the brother of Joab was one of the thirty" (2 Samuel 23:24). He was one of the three sons of Zeruiah, David's sister, who lost his life when he tried to kill Abner (2 Samuel 2:18-23). Joab avenged Asahel's death by murdering Abner (2 Samuel 3:26-30).

"Elhanan the son of Dodo of Bethlehem" (2 Samuel 23:24). This son of Dodo should not be confused with Eleazer the son of Dodo (2 Samuel 23:9). The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia distinguishes them as sons of different Dodo's.[17]

"Shammah of Harod" (2 Samuel 23:25). Isaacs identified this Shammah with the one mentioned in 2 Samuel 23:11, but pointed out that 1 Chronicles 11:10ff ascribes that deed of bringing David the water from Bethlehem to Eleazer the son of Dodo."[18] Another of the mighty men had the same name (2 Samuel 23:33).

"Elika of Harod" (2 Samuel 23:25). We are given no additional information about Elika.

"Helez the Paltite" (2 Samuel 23:26). "From 1 Chronicles 11:27, it appears that this man was an Ephraimite and captain of the seventh monthly course (1 Chronicles 27:10)."[19]

"Ira the son of Ikkesh" (2 Samuel 23:26). Ira is also mentioned in 1 Chronicles 11:28, but no additional information is given.

"Abiezer of Anathoth" (2 Samuel 23:27). 1 Chronicles 27:12 states that he was a Benjaminite with twenty four thousand men in his division. His was the Ninth course.

"Mebunnai the Hushathite" (2 Samuel 23:27). "This man's name appears only here in this form; but he is elsewhere called Sibbechai (2 Samuel 21:18; 1 Chronicles 20:4), or Sibbecai 1 Chronicles 11:29; 27:11)."[20]

"Zalmon the Ahohite" (2 Samuel 23:28). "He may have been named Zalmon to indicate his strength; he is called Ilai in 1 Chronicles 11:29)."[21] "A mountain near Shechem was called Zalmon."[22] "The name means shady or ascent."[23] We might have called him "a mountain of a man."

"Maharai of Netophah" (2 Samuel 23:28). See 1 Chronicles 11:30. "He was one of the twelve monthly captains in David's reign, serving in the tenth month. He

134

came of the family of Zerah from Netophah in Judah, serving in the tenth month over 24,000 men (1 Chronicles 27:13)."[24]

"Heleb the son of Baanah of Netophah" (2 Samuel 23:29). "This man is called Heled in 1 Chronicles 11:30 and Heldai in 1 Chronicles 27:15. He also was one of the monthly captains over 24,000 men in the twelfth month."[25]

"Ittai the son of Ribai of Gibeah of the Benjaminites" (2 Samuel 23:29). "The name means plowman or living. He is called Ithai in 1 Chronicles 11:31."[26]

"Benaiah of Pirathon" (2 Samuel 23:30). Lockyer gives two possible meanings of this name. "Either Jehovah hath built or is intelligent."[27] He is mentioned again in 1 Chronicles 11:31,27:14, where we learn that he commanded one of the twelve divisions of 24,000 men who were called on a monthly basis to serve David the king. His tour of duty in that capacity was in the eleventh month. He belonged to the tribe of Ephraim.

"Hiddai of the brooks of Gaash" (2 Samuel 23:30). "His name means mighty or joyful."[28] Gaash was in Ephraim.

"Abialbon the Arbathite" (2 Samuel 23:31). This one of David's heroes is mentioned in the Chronicles list under the name of Abiel (1 Chronicles 11:32). "His name may mean father of strength. Presumably, he was from Betharabah (Joshua 15:6,61; 18:22)."[29]

"Azmaveth of Bahurim" (2 Samuel 23:31). Two or three other Biblical characters wore this name which is sometimes said to mean counsel. He appears again in 1 Chronicles 11:33; and "Some identify him as the same Azmaveth whom David placed over his treasures (1 Chronicles 27:25)."[30]

"Eliahba of Shalbon" (2 Samuel 23:32). This hero also is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 11:33; and. "His name means, whom God hides."[31] In view of all the dangerous exploits of this group, the name might well have been applied to all of them.

"The sons of Jashen, Jonathan" (2 Samuel 23:32). The name means God gave,[32] or, as we might say, "The gift of God." His name appears again in 1 Chronicles 11:34, where he is identified as "a son of Shagee the Hatafire." Such difficulties are common in this section of the O.T. We have already cited at least seven or eight uses of the word "son," grandson, or descendant of being among them. This was a very common name in the O.T., there being at least a dozen characters who were named Jonathan.

135

"Shammah the Hararite" (2 Samuel 23:33). Two of David's mighty men bore this name, one of "the three" (1 Samuel 23:11) and this one "of the thirty." He is called Shammoth in 1 Chronicles 11:27 and Shammuth in 1 Chronicles 27:8, where we learn that he commanded 24,000 men in the fifth month for David.

"Ahiam the son of Sharar the Hararite" (2 Samuel 23:33). Little is known of this man. He is called "the son of Sacar" (1 Chronicles 11:35), which is probably a variation of the same name.

"Eliphelet the son of Ahasbai of Maacah" (2 Samuel 23:34). This name is variously spelled. David must have had a special love for this hero, because he named one of his sons born in Jerusalem Eiphelet (1 Chronicles 3:8).

"Eliam the son of Ahithophel of Gilo" (2 Samuel 23:34). This man, the father of Bathsheba, stood in relation to David as a father-in-law. He is called Amiel in other passages, which is only a variation of Eliam. "The name means, my God is a kinsman."[33] The presence of Bathseba's father in the list of David's thirty heroes adds further to David's shame in violating her. Her grandfather Ahithophel was David's principal counselor; her father and her husband (Uriah) were both among his thirty mighty men.

"Hezro of Carmel" (2 Samuel 23:35). "This name is also spelled Hezrai (1 Chronicles 11:37); it means enclosed or beautiful."[34]

"Paarai the Arbite" (2 Samuel 23:35). "The name means devotee of Peor. He was one of David's thirty-seven valiant men and undoubtedly the same person as Naarai of 1 Chronicles 11:37."[35]

"Igal the son of Nathan of Zobah" (2 Samuel 23:36). "Zobah was a part of Syria,"[36] and thus we must reckon Igal as among the foreigners who supported David. "The name `Igal' means `God redeems'."[37] This was also the name of one of the unfaithful spies sent out to Canaan by Moses (Numbers 13:7).

"Bani the Gadite" (2 Samuel 23:36). This name is not in the list given in 1 Chronicles 11; but the lists may be viewed as supplementary. There is no need for deleting the name of Bani from the list. It might easily have been omitted by accident from the roster in 1Chronicles. It is significant that many of the tribes of Israel and even a number of foreign countries were represented among David's top ranking soldiers. Bani was of the trans-Jordanic tribe of Gad.

"Zelek the Ammonite" (2 Samuel 23:37). Here is another foreigner. Cook listed, "Igal of Zobah, Zelek the Ammonite, Nahari the Beerothite and Uriah the Hittite as the foreigners in this list."[38]

136

"Naharai of Beeroth the armor-bearer of Joab the son of Zeruiah" (2 Samuel 23:37). Beeroth was one of the four cities of the Hivites who deluded Joshua into a treaty of peace with them (Joshua 9:17). It is now el Bireh, located eight miles north of Jerusalem."[39]

"Armor-bearer of Joab" (2 Samuel 23:37). Some have marveled that Joab is not in this list of the "thirty-Seven" mighty men,' but he is in it. He is mentioned in 2 Samuel 23:18,24,37, the only man to be mentioned three times. He was David's great commander-in-chief who stood prominently above the mighty "thirty-seven."

"Ira the Ithrite, Gareb the Ithrite" (2 Samuel 23:38). Ithrites was the name given to one of the families descended from Kiriath-jearim (1 Chronicles 2:53). Two members of David's mighty men (and bodyguard), Ira and Gareb, came from this family (2 Samuel 23:38; 1 Chronicles 11:40) and may have originated from the town of Jattir (1 Samuel 30:27)."[40] "Jattir is located in the mountains of Judah."[41]

"Uriah the Hittite, thirty seven in all" (2 Samuel 23:39). There is little need to comment on Uriah at this point, since many things concerning him have already been mentioned in Second Samuel. He was the Hittite husband of Bathsheba whom David ordered to be murdered by the hand of Joab in a vain effort to hide David's adultery with Uriah's wife.

He was not being chased by a lion, but he went after it as the aggressor. He went down into a pit where the lion was seemingly trapped and not able to get out. The best thing to do would be to use some weapon to kill the lion while down there, and not go into the pit to get him. Doing this makes it clear that he was fearless and strong. He was confident that he could handle a lion with no sweat. It was snowy on top of it, and so it would be slippery, and yet he jumps in to face a trapped lion. Extremely stupid or extremely brave.

21 And he struck down a huge Egyptian. Although the Egyptian had a spear in his hand, Benaiah went against him with a club. He snatched the spear from the Egyptian's hand and killed him with his own spear.

137

CLARKE, "He slew an Egyptian - This man in 1Ch_11:23 is stated to have been five cubits high, about seven feet six inches.

He went down to him with a staff - I have known men who, with a staff only for their defense, could render the sword of the best practiced soldier of no use to him. I have seen even a parallel instance of a man with his staff being attacked by a soldier with his hanger; he soon beat the weapon out of the soldier’s hand, and could easily have slain him with his own sword.

We have a good elucidation of this in a duel between Dioxippus the Athenian and Horratas a Macedonian, before Alexander: “The Macedonian, proud of his military skill, treated the naked Athenian with contempt, and then challenged him to fight with him the ensuing day. The Macedonian came armed cap-a-pie to the place; on his left arm he had a brazen shield, and in the same hand a spear called sarissa; he had a javelin in his right hand, and a sword girded on his side; in short, he appeared armed as though he were going to contend with a host. Dioxippus came into the field with a chaplet on his head, a purple sash on his left arm, his body naked, smeared over with oil, and in his right hand a strong knotty club, (dextra validum nodosumque stipitem praeferebat). Horratas, supposing he could easily kill his antagonist while at a distance, threw his javelin, which Dioxippus, suddenly stooping, dexterously avoided, and, before Horratas could transfer the spear from his left to his right hand, sprang forward, and with one blow of his club, broke it in two. The Macedonian being deprived of both his spears, began to draw his sword; but before he could draw it out Dioxippus seized him, tripped up his heels, and threw him with great violence on the ground, (pedibus repente subductis arietavit in terram). He then put his foot on his neck, drew out his sword, and lifting up his club, was about to dash out the brains of the overthrown champion, had he not been prevented by the king.” - Q. Curt. lib. ix., cap. 7.

How similar are the two cases! He went down to him with a staff, and plucked the spear out of the Egyptian’s hands, and slew him with his own spear. Benaiah appears to have been just such another clubsman as Dioxippus.

GILL, "And he slew an Egyptian, a goodly man,.... A person of good countenance and shape, very large and tall; in 1 Chronicles 11:28, he is said to be a man of great stature, and five cubits high, and so wanted a cubit and a span of the height of Goliath, 1 Samuel 17:4, and the Egyptian had a spear in his hand; as large as Goliath's; for in 1 Chronicles 11:23, it is said to be like a weaver's beam, as Goliath's was; see Gill on 1 Samuel 17:7, and he went down to him with a staff; with a walking staff only, having no other weapon: and plucked the spear out of the Egyptian's hand; and therefore must be a man very nimble and dexterous, as well as bold and courageous: and slew him with his own spear; as David cut off Goliath's head with his own sword. This is supposedF12 to be Shimei, the son of Gera, 1 Kings 2:46.

138

HENRY, "

JAMISON, "

BENSON, "2 Samuel 21:21-22. An Egyptian, a goodly man — A person of great stature, 1 Chronicles 11:23. He plucked the spear out of the Egyptian’s hand — This shows him to have been both fearless, and a person of great skill and dexterity in managing a combat, either with man or beast. And had the name among three mighty men — That is, among the three in the second rank, for it is said in the following verse that he did not attain or come up to the first three. Who the third was of this second rank of mighty men is not mentioned.

ELLICOTT " (20) Benaiah.—He was the general of the third division of the army (1 Chronicles 27:5-6). This probably included the Cherethites and Pelethites, since he was also their commander (2 Samuel 8:18; 2 Samuel 20:23). In consequence of his faithfulness to Solomon in the rebellion of Adonijah, he was finally made commander-in-chief (1 Kings 1:8; 1 Kings 1:26; 1 Kings 1:32; 1 Kings 2:25; 1 Kings 2:29-35; 1 Kings 4:4). His father Jehoiada is called “a chief priest “in 1 Chronicles 27:5, and in 1 Chronicles 12:27 mention is made of a “Jehoiada the leader of the Aaronites,” who came to David at Hebron, and who may have been the same person.

Kabzeel.—A town on the extreme south of Judah, on the border of Edom (Joshua 15:21).

Lion-like men.—Literally, lion of God, an expression used among Arabs and Persians of great warriors.

Slew a lion.—Comp. 1 Samuel 17:34-37. It is not said with what weapons he slew him, but the act was evidently a great feat of valour.

PULPIT, "A goodly man. The Hebrew text has "who a sight," for which the Massorites read, "a man of sight," that is, handsome, and worth looking at. In Chronicles 2Sa_11:23 we find what, no doubt, is the right reading, "a man of measure [equivalent to ’a tall man’], five cubits high." The height of Goliath was six cubits and a span (1Sa_17:4).

22 Such were the exploits of Benaiah son of Jehoiada; he too was as famous as the three mighty men.

139

GILL, "These things did Benaiah the son of Jehoiada,.... Slew a lion, and two lion-like men of Moab, and an Egyptian of a gigantic stature, 2 Samuel 23:20,

and had the name among three mighty men; of which he was one, and Abishai another, the third Asahel, one of the thirty; or was over them, 2 Samuel 23:24, since thirty are reckoned without him. Abarbinel thinks that the third was Adina, the son of Shiza, the Reubenite, 1 Chronicles 11:42; since thirty were with him, and he at the head of them.

HENRY, "2Sa_23:20-23

Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada, “Jehoiada the priest” according to 1Ch_27:5, possibly the one who was “prince for Aaron,” i.e., of the family of Aaron, according to 1Ch_12:27, was captain of the Crethi and Plethi according to 2Sa_8:18 and 2Sa_20:23. He was the son of a brave man, rich in deeds (חי is evidently an error for חיל in the Chronicles), of Kabzeel in the south of Judah (Jos_15:21). “He smote the two Ariels of Moab.” The Arabs and Persians call every remarkably brave man Ariel, or lion of God (vid., Bochart, Hieroz. ii. pp. 7, 63). They were therefore two celebrated Moabitish heroes. The supposition that they were sons of the king of the Moabites is merely founded upon the conjecture of Thenius and Bertheau, that the word בני (sons of) has dropped out before Ariel. “He also slew the lion in the well on the day of the snow,” i.e., a lion which had been driven into the neighbourhood of human habitations by a heavy fall of snow, and had taken refuge in a cistern. The Chethibהאריה and באר are the earlier forms for the Keris substituted by the Masoretes הארי and and consequently are not to be altered. He also slew an Egyptian of ,הבורdistinguished size. According to the Keri we should read מראה איש (instead of מראה fo daetsni( א a man of appearance,” i.e., a distinguished man, or a man of great“ ,(אשרsize, αaνδρα οaρατόν (lxx); in the Chronicles it is simplified as מדה a man of ,אישmeasure, i.e., of great height. This man was armed with a spear or javelin, whereas Benaiah was only armed with a stick; nevertheless the latter smote him, took away his spear, and slew him with his own weapon. According to the Chronicles the Egyptian was five cubits high, and his spear like a weaver's beam. Through these feats Benaiah acquired a name among the three, though he did not equal them (2Sa_23:22, 2Sa_23:23, as in 2Sa_23:18, 2Sa_23:19); and David made him a member of his privy council (see at 1Sa_22:14).

23 He was held in greater honor than any of the Thirty, but he was not included among the Three. And David put him in charge of his bodyguard.

140

BARNES, "David set him over his guard - “Made him of his privy council,” would be a better rendering. See 1Sa_22:14 note. This position, distinct from his office as captain of the Cherethites and Pelethites, is clearly indicated 1Ch_27:34.

CLARKE, "David set him over his guard - The Vulgate renders this, Fecitque eun sibi David auricularium a secreto, “David made him his privy counsellor;” or, according to the Hebrew, He put him to his ears, i.e., confided his secrets to him. Some think he made him a spy over the rest. It is supposed that the meaning of the fable which attributes to Midas very long ears, is, that this king carried the system of espionage to a great length; that he had a multitude of spies in different places.

GILL, "He was more honourable than the thirty,.... Whose names are after recorded:

but he attained not to the first three; the first triumvirate, Jashobeam, Eleazar, and Shammah; he was not equal to them for fortitude, courage, and military exploits:

and David set him over his guard; his bodyguard, the Cherethites and Pelethites, 2 Samuel 8:18; who are called in the Hebrew text "his hearing"F13, because they hearkened to his orders and commands, and obeyed them.

PULPIT, "David set him over his guard. We have already seen (upon 1Sa_22:14) that the words mean that David made him a member of his privy council. Literally the words are, and David appointed him to his audience. In 1Ch_27:34mention is made of "Jehoiada the son of Benaiah" as being next in the council to Ahithophel, and many commentators think that the names have been transposed, and that we ought to read, "Benaiah the son of Jehoiada."

24 Among the Thirty were: Asahel the brother of Joab, Elhanan son of Dodo from Bethlehem,

BARNES, "etc. The early death of Asahel 2Sa_2:32 would make it very likely that his place in the 30 would be filled up, and so easily account for the number 31 in the list. Compare throughout the list in 1 Chr. 11.

141

CLARKE, "Shammah the Harodite - There are several varieties in the names of the following shalishim; which may be seen by comparing these verses with 1Ch_11:27.

GILL, "Asahel the brother of Joab was one of the thirty,.... Or rather over the thirtyF14, who are next mentioned; since there are thirty reckoned besides him, and the Arabic version calls him the prince of the thirty; Joab is not named at all, because he was general of the whole army, and so not to be reckoned in any of the three classes:

Elhanan the son of Dodo of Bethlehem: a townsman of David.

HENRY, "3. Inferior to the second three, but of great note, were the thirty-one here mentioned by name, 2Sa_23:24, etc. Asahel is the first, who was slain by Abner in the beginning of David's reign, but lost not his place in this catalogue. Elhanan is the next, brother to Eleazar, one of the first three, 2Sa_23:9. The surnames here given them are taken, as it should seem, from the places of their birth or habitation, as many surnames with us originally were. From all parts of the nation, the most wise and valiant were picked up to serve the king. Several of those who are named we find captains of the twelve courses which David appointed, one for each month in the year, 1 Chr. 27. Those that did worthily were preferred according to their merits. One of them was the son of Ahithophel (2Sa_23:34), the son famous in the camp as the father at the council-board. But to find Uriah the Hittite bringing up the rear of these worthies, as it revives the remembrance of David's sin, so it aggravates it, that a man who deserved so well of his king and country should be so ill treated. Joab is not mentioned among all these, either, (1.) to be mentioned; the first, of the first three sat chief among the captains, but Joab was over them as general. Or, (2.) Because he was so bad that he did not deserve to be mentioned; for though he was confessedly a great soldier, and one that had so much religion in him as to dedicate of his spoils to the house of God (1Ch_26:28), yet he lost as much honour by slaying two of David's friends as ever he got by slaying his enemies.

Christ, the Son of David, has his worthies too, who like David's, are influenced by his example, fight his battles against the spiritual enemies of his kingdom, and in his strength are more than conquerors. Christ's apostles were his immediate attendants, did and suffered great things for him, and at length came to reign with him. They are mentioned with honour in the New Testament, as these in the Old, especially, Rev_21:14. Nay, all the good soldiers of Jesus Christ have their names better preserved than even these worthies have; for they are written in heaven. This honour have all his saints.

K&D, 2Sa_23:24-25

Heroes of the third class. - 2Sa_23:24. “Asahel, the brother of Joab, among the thirty,” i.e., belonging to them. This definition also applies to the following names; we therefore find at the head of the list in the Chronicles, החילים and brave“ ,וגבוריheroes (were).” The names which follow are for the most part not further known. Elhanan, the son of Dodo of Bethlehem, is a different man from the Bethlehemite of that name mentioned in 2Sa_21:19. Shammah the Harodite also must not be confounded with the Shammahs mentioned in 2Sa_23:11 and 2Sa_23:33. In the Chronicles we find Shammoth, a different form of the name; whilst ההרורי is an error

142

in writing for החרדי, i.e., sprung from Harod (Jdg_7:1). This man is called Shamhut in 1Ch_27:8; he was the leader of the fifth division of David's army. Elika or Harod is omitted in the Chronicles; it was probably dropped out in consequence of the homoioteleuton .החרדי

LANGE, "24Asahel the brother of Joab was one of the thirty, Elhanan the son of Dodo of 25 Bethlehem, Shammah the Harodite, Elika the Harodite, 26Helez the Paltite, Ira the son of Ikkesh the Tekoite, Abiezer the Anethothite, Mebunnai the Hushathite, 27Zalmon the Ahohite, Maharai the Netophathite, Heleb the son of Baanah a [the] 28Netophathite, Ittai the son of Ribai, out of Gibeah of the children of Benjamin, 29Benaiah the Pirathonite, Hiddai of the brooks of Gaash [or, of Nahale-Gaash], 30Abi-albon the Arbathite, Azmaveth the Barhumite, Eliahba the Shaalbonite, of, 31the sons of Jashon [probably, Hashem the Gizonite], Jonathan, Shammah the32, 33Hararite [or, Jonathan the son of Shammah (Shage) the Hararite], Ahiam the 34 son of Sharar the Hararite [Ararite], Eliphalet the son of Ahasbai, the son of [or, Hepher] the Maachathite, Eliam the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite, 35Hezrai the Carmelite, Paarai the Arbite, Igal the son of Nathan of Zobah, Bani the Gadite, 36Zelek the Ammonite, Nahari the Beerothite, armour-bearer to Joab the son of Zeruiah, 37, 38Ira an [the] Ithrite, Gareb an [the] Ithrite, Uriah the Hittite; thirty and seven in all.

PULPIT, "The thirty. This order of knighthood consisted originally of thirty-three men, of whom three were of higher rank, and presided, probably, each over ten, while Joab was chief over them all. This arrangement of men in tens, with an officer over them. was, in fact, the normal rule among the Hebrews. The second triad is unusual, but is explained by the history. In honour of the exploit of bringing the water from the well of Bethlehem, this second order of three was instituted, lower than the three chiefs, but higher than the rest. The third of these is not mentioned, and the disappearance of the name is not the result of accident, but of purpose. Had it been a scribe’s error, there would have been some trace of it in the versions. But if the name was erased, it must have been blotted out for treason, and we thus have two candidates for the vacant niche: one is Amasa, and the other Ahithophel. The name of Joab we cannot for one moment admit. He never was a traitor to David, nor would the latter, though king, have ventured to degrade one so powerful, and who continued to be commander-in-chief until David’s death. Now, if Amasa is the same as the Amasai in 1Ch_12:18, who was chief of the captains who came from Judah and Benjamin to David when he was in the hold, it is difficult to account for the absence of his name from the list of the thirty. Plainly, however, David did not regard his treason with strong displeasure, but was prepared, after Absalom’s death, to make him commander-in-chief. But we must remember that a place in this second triad was gained by one exploit. The three were those who broke through the Philistine host, and fetched the water from Bethlehem. Such a deed would account for the close attachment between David and Ahithophel. He was the king’s companion, and his familiar friend. It would account also for his suicide. His love to David had, for some unknown reason, turned to bitter hatred. He sought, not only David’s life, but his dishonour. His feelings must have been highly excited before he could have worked himself up to such a pitch; and the reaction and disappointment would be equally extreme. He never could have faced David again, remembering the warmth of former love, and the shamelessness with which he had sought, not only his life, but to bring upon him public shame and ignominy. And his name would have been totally erased,

143

and gone down into silence. Of Ahithophel’s personal accomplishments as a brave warrior, we cannot doubt (see

2Sa_17:1), and his son Eliam was one of the mighties. (On a son and father both belonging to the order, see note on 1Ch_12:33.) Elhanan (see note on 2Sa_21:19).

25 Shammah the Harodite, Elika the Harodite,

GILL, "Shammah the Harodite,.... Called Shammah the Harorite in 1 Chronicles 11:27; by a change of the letters ר "R" and ד "D", which is frequent:

Elika the Harodite; or who was of Harod, as the Targum; these both were from one place: mention is made of the well of Harod, Judges 7:1.

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:25. Shammah the Harodite — In 1 Chronicles 11:27, he is called, Shammoth the Harorite, the same names of persons or places being differently pronounced according to the different dialects of divers places or ages. They that compare this catalogue with that in 1 Chronicles 11., will observe more names mentioned there than are found here. For the author of it reckons up and records the names of all the chief commanders in the army, though they were not in themselves heroical persons. But here the sacred writer only numbers those who were of themselves great heroes, not noticing the great commanders in the army who were not so.

PULLPIT, "Shammah the Harodite. The town Harod was in the plains of Jezreel, near Mount Gilboa. In 1Ch_11:27 he is called "Shammoth the Harorite," the latter word being an easy corruption of Harodite; and in 1Ch_27:8 he appears as "Shammuth the Izrahite," and has the command of the fifth brigade. "Izrahite" is by some regarded as an error for "the Zarhite," that is, a member of the clan descended from Zerah the son of Judah. But if so, how did he get to Hared? Elika. Omitted in Chronicles, probably through the repetition of the word "Harodite."

26 Helez the Paltite,

144

Ira son of Ikkesh from Tekoa,

GILL, "Helez the Paltite,.... Who was of a place called Pater, as the Targum; in 1 Chronicles 11:27, he is called the Pelonite:

Ira the son of Ikkesh the Tekoite; who was of the city of Tekoah, the native place of Amos the prophet, famous for oil, about twelve miles from Jerusalem; See Gill on Amos 1:1.

K&D, "2Sa_23:26

Helez the Paltite; i.e., sprung from Beth-pelet in the south of Judah (Jos_15:27). He was chief of the seventh division of the army (compare 1Ch_27:10 with 1Ch_11:27, though in both passages הפלטי is misspelt ניmהפ). Ira the son of Ikkesh of Tekoah in the desert of Judah (2Sa_14:2), chief of the sixth division of the army (1Ch_27:9).

BENSON, "2 Samuel 23:26-39. Helez the Paltite, &c. — None of the memorable acts of these or of the following worthies are recorded; therefore, all that can be said of them is, that when God determined to raise a king to a great height of power and glory, he raised up several great men to co-operate with and assist that king in his designs and undertakings. Thirty and seven in all — Here are only thirty-six named. Either therefore one must be supplied whose name is not expressed among the three worthies of the second rank, or Joab is comprehended in the number, as being the general and head of them all.

PULPIT, "Helez. He is twice called a Pelonite in Chronicles, and was general of the seventh brigade (1Ch_27:10), where he is said to have belonged to the tribe of Ephraim. Whether Paltite or Pelonite is right, no one knows; but Beth-Palet was a town in the tribe of Judah, and not in Ephraim. Ira. Ira had the command of the sixth brigade (1Ch_27:9). Tekoah (see note on 2Sa_14:2). This Ira is a distinct person from his namesake, David’s confidential minister (2Sa_20:26).

27 Abiezer from Anathoth, Mebunnai [7] the Hushathite,

145

GILL, "Abiezer the Anethothite,.... He was of Anathoth, in the tribe of Benjamin, Joshua 21:18, the birthplace of Jeremiah the prophet, Jeremiah 1:1,

Mebunnai the Hushathite; the same with Sibbecai, 1 Chronicles 11:29; this man had two names, and was a descendant of Hushah, who came of Judah, 1 Chronicles 4:4.

K,&D, "2Sa_23:29

Cheleb, more correctly Cheled (1Ch_11:30; or Cheldai, 1Ch_27:15), also of Netophah, was chief of the twelfth division of the army. Ittai (Ithai in the Chronicles), the son of Ribai of Gibeah of Benjamin, must be distinguished from Ittaithe Gathite (2Sa_15:19). Like all that follow, with the exception of Uriah, he is not further known.

PULPIT, "Abiezer. He had the command of the ninth brigade (1Ch_27:12). Anathoth, now Mata, was a priestly city in Benjamin (Jos_21:18), the home of Abiathar (1Ki_2:26), and the birthplace of Jeremiah (Jer_1:1). Anethothite and Antothite, in the parallel places in Chronicles, are merely different ways of pronouncing the same Hebrew consonants. Mebunnai. Written Sibbechai in 2Sa_21:18, and, as the name is so written in both the parallel places in Chronicles, Mebunnai is probably a mistake. In 1Ch_27:11 he is said to have been commander of the eighth brigade, and to have been a Zarhite of the town of Hushah, in the tribe of Judah (see 1Ch_4:4).

28 Zalmon the Ahohite, Maharai the Netophathite,

GILL, "Zalmon the Ahohite,.... The same with Ilai, 1 Chronicles 11:29; a descendant of Ahoah, a grandson of Benjamin, 1 Chronicles 8:4,

Maharai the Netophathite, who was of Netophah, a city of the tribe of Judah, mentioned along with Bethlehem, Nehemiah 7:26; a place of this name is spoken of in the MisnahF15, famous for artichokes and olives.

K&D, "2Sa_23:29

Cheleb, more correctly Cheled (1Ch_11:30; or Cheldai, 1Ch_27:15), also of Netophah, was chief of the twelfth division of the army. Ittai (Ithai in the Chronicles), the son of Ribai of Gibeah of Benjamin, must be distinguished from Ittaithe Gathite (2Sa_15:19). Like all that follow, with the exception of Uriah, he is not

146

further known.

29 Heled [8] son of Baanah the Netophathite, Ithai son of Ribai from Gibeah in Benjamin,

GILL, "Heleb the son of Baanah, a Netophathite,.... Called Heled, 1 Chronicles 11:30,

Ittai the son of Ribai out of Gibeah of the children of Benjamin: sometimes called Gibeah of Benjamin, Judges 20:10, and Gibeah of Saul, 1 Samuel 11:4, being a city in the tribe of Benjamin, and the birth place of Saul king of Israel; and this man is distinguished hereby from Ittai the Gittite, 2 Samuel 15:19.

K&D, "2Sa_23:29

Cheleb, more correctly Cheled (1Ch_11:30; or Cheldai, 1Ch_27:15), also of Netophah, was chief of the twelfth division of the army. Ittai (Ithai in the Chronicles), the son of Ribai of Gibeah of Benjamin, must be distinguished from Ittaithe Gathite (2Sa_15:19). Like all that follow, with the exception of Uriah, he is not further known.

PULPIT, "Zalmon. He is called Ilai in 1Ch_11:29. Ahohite (see note on 1Ch_11:9). Maharai the Netophathite. Netophah, in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem (Ezr_2:22), was chiefly inhabited, after the exile, by the singers (Neh_12:28). Robinson identifies it with Beit-Netif, to the south of Jerusalem; but probably erroneously, as Beit-Netif is too far from Bethlehem. Maharai was commander of the tenth brigade, and was a Zarhite, and therefore belonged to the tribe of Judah.

2Sa_23:29

Heleb. He is called Heled and Heldai in the parallel places in Chronicles, where we are told that he was a descendant of Othniel, and commander of the twelfth brigade. Ittai. He is called Ithai, by a very slight change, in Chronicles. Gibeah is the Geba so closely connected with the history of Saul (see 1Sa_13:3, 1Sa_13:15, etc.). (For Ittai the Philistine, a distinct person, see 2Sa_15:19.)

30 Benaiah the Pirathonite,

147

Hiddai [9] from the ravines of Gaash,

GILL, "Benaiah the Pirathonite,.... Who was of Pirathon, a city in the tribe of Ephraim, Judges 12:15.

Hiddai of the brooks of Gaash; which perhaps ran by the hill Gaash, and was also in the tribe of Ephraim, Joshua 24:30. This man is called Hurai, 1 Chronicles 11:32

PULPIT, "Benaiah. He was an Ephraimite, and had the command of the eleventh brigade. Pirathon was a town in Ephraim (Jdg_12:15). Hiddai. Called Hurai in 1Ch_11:32, by the common confusion of d and r. The brooks of Gaash. "Nahale-Gaash," the ravines of Gaash, was probably the name of some village, of which nothing is now known.

K&D, "2Sa_23:30

Benaiah of Phir'aton in the tribe of Ephraim, a place which has been preserved in the village of Fer'ata, to the south-west of Nablus (see at Jdg_12:13). Hiddai(wrongly spelt Hudai in the Chronicles), out of the valleys of Gaash, in the tribe of Ephraim by the mountain of Gaash, the situation of which has not yet been discovered (see at Jos_24:30).

31 Abi-Albon the Arbathite, Azmaveth the Barhumite,

GILL, "Abialbon the Arbathite,.... A native of Betharabah, either in the tribe of Judah, Joshua 15:6, or in the tribe of Benjamin, Joshua 18:18; he is called Abiel in 1 Chronicles 11:32,

Azmaveth the Barhumite; or Bachurimite, the letters transposed, an inhabitant of Bachurim or Bahurim, a city in the tribe of Benjamin, 2 Samuel 16:5.

K&D, "2Sa_23:31

Abi-Albon (written incorrectly Abiel in the Chronicles) the Arbathite, i.e., from the place called Beth-haarabah or Arabah (Jos_15:61 and Jos_18:18, Jos_18:22) in the desert of Judah, on the site of the present Kasr Hajla (see at Jos_15:6). Azmaveth of Bahurim: see at 2Sa_16:5.

148

PULPIT, "Abi-albon. He is called Abiel in 1Ch_11:32. He belonged to the town of Beth-Arabah (Jos_15:61; Jos_18:22), called also Arabah (Jos_18:18), in the wilderness of Judah. Azmaveth the Barhumite. He was of Bahurim, for which see note on 2Sa_3:16.

32 Eliahba the Shaalbonite, the sons of Jashen, Jonathan

GILL, "Eliahba the Shaalbonite,.... Of Shaalboa or Shaaiabin, a city in the tribe of Dan, Joshua 19:42; perhaps the Silbonitis of JosephusF16:

of the sons of Jashen, Jonathan; in 1 Chronicles 11:34, it is, the sons of Hashem the Gizonite: sons are spoken of, though but one, as in Genesis 46:23.

PULPIT, "Eliahba. He was of Shaalabbin, in the tribe of Dan (Jos_19:42). St. Jerome calls the place Selebi, the modern Sebbit. Of the sons of Jashen, Jonathan, Shammah the Hararite. In 1Ch_11:34, "The sons of Hashem the Gizonite, Jonathan the son of Shage the Hararite." The word "of" is not in the Hebrew, and is inserted in the Authorized Version to make sense. Really, b’ne, sons, is a careless repetition of the three last letters of the name "Shaalbonite," and should be omitted. The text in Chronicles then goes on regularly, "Hashem the Gizonite, Jonathan the son of Shage the Hararite;" but see note on next verse.

K&D, "2Sa_23:32-33

Eliahba of Shaalbon or Shaalbin, which may possibly have been preserved in the present Selbit (see at Jos_19:42). The next two names, יהונתן ישן בני and ההררי שמה(Bneyashen Jehonathan and Shammah the Hararite), are written thus in the Chronicles (2Sa_23:34), ההררי בן־שגא יונתן הגזוני השם ,Bnehashem the Gizonite“ :בניJonathan the son of Sage the Hararite,” The text of the Chronicles is evidently the more correct of the two, as Bne Jashen Jehonathan does not make any sense. The only question is whether the form השם בני is correct, or whether בני has not arisen merely through a misspelling. As the name does not occur again, all that can be said is that Bne hashem must at any rate be written as one word, and therefore should be pointed differently. The place mentioned, Gizon, is unknown. שמה for בן־שגא probably arose from 2Sa_23:11. Ahiam the son of Sharar or Sacar (Chron.) the Ararite (in the Chronicles the Hararite).

149

33 son of [10] Shammah the Hararite, Ahiam son of Sharar [11] the Hararite,

GILL, "Shammah the Hararite,.... From the mountainous country, as the Targum; the Arabic and Syriac versions say, from the mount of Olives:

Ahiam the son of Sharar the Hararite: from the high mountain, as the Targum; in 1 Chronicles 11:35, he is called the son of Sacar.

PULPIT, "Shammah the Hararite. He was really one of the first three (see 2Sa_23:11). (For the reading in Chronicles, see above.) A very probable correction would be "Jonathan the son of Shammah, the son of Agee the Hararite." Thus both father and son would be in the number of the thirty, Ahiam. He is called "the son of Sacar" in 1Ch_11:35.

34 Eliphelet son of Ahasbai the Maacathite, Eliam son of Ahithophel the Gilonite,

GILL, "Eliphelet the son of Ahasbai, the son of the Maachathite,.... In 1 Chronicles 11:35, he is called Eliphal the son of Ur:

Eliam the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite; David's counsellor, that went off to Absalom, 2 Samuel 15:12; Eliam his son is supposed, by the Jews, to be the father of Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, 2 Samuel 11:3; according to HillerusF17, he is the same with Ahijah the Pelonite, 1 Chronicles 11:36.

K&D, "2Sa_23:34

The names in 2Sa_23:34, Eliphelet ben-Ahasbai ben-Hammaacathi, read thus in the Chronicles (2Sa_23:35, 2Sa_23:36): Eliphal ben-Ur; Hepher hammecerathi. We see from this that in ben-Ahasbai ben two names have been fused together; for the text as it lies before us is rendered suspicious partly by the fact that the names of both father and grandfather are given, which does not occur in connection with any other name in the whole list, and partly by the circumstance that בן cannot properly be written with המעכתי, which is a Gentile noun. Consequently the following is probably the correct way of restoring the text, המעכתי חפר בן־אור Eliphelet ,אליפלט (a

150

name which frequently occurs) the son of Ur; Hepher the Maachathite, i.e., of Maacah in the north-east of Gilead (see at 2Sa_10:6 and Deu_3:14). Eliam the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite, the clever but treacherous counsellor of David (see at 2Sa_15:12). This name is quite corrupt in the Chronicles.

PULPIT, "2Sa_23:34

Eliphelet the son of Ahasbai, the son of the Maachathite. In Chronicles this becomes "Elipha the son of Ur, Hepher the Mecherathite." If the text here is correct, Eliphelet must be a native of Beth-Maachah, a town in Naphtali (2Sa_20:14). Eliam the son of Ahithophel the Gilonite. Instead of this, we find "Ahijah the Pelonite" in 1Ch_11:36. Eliam is supposed by many to have been Bathsheba’s father (see note on 2Sa_11:3; and for Ahithophel the Gilonite, note on 2Sa_15:12).

35 Hezro the Carmelite, Paarai the Arbite,

BARNES, "

CLARKE, "

GILL, "Hezrai the Carmelite,.... Of Mount Carmel; or from Carmela, as the Targum, see 1 Samuel 25:2; he is called Hezro, 1 Chronicles 11:37,

Paarai the Arbite; or from Arab, as the Targum, a city in the tribe of Judah, Joshua 15:52; according to HillerusF18, the same with "Naarai the son of Ezbai", in 1 Chronicles 11:37.

PULPIT, "Hezrai. The Hebrew text has Hezro, as in 1Ch_11:37. His native place was Carmel, for which see note on 1Sa_15:12. Paarai the Arbite. A native of Arab, in Judah. In Chronicles he is called "Naarai the son of Ezbai.", "

K&D, "2Sa_23:35

Hezro the Carmelite, i.e., of Carmel in the mountains of Judah (1Sa_25:2). Paaraithe Arbite, i.e., of Arab, also in the mountains of Judah (Jos_15:52). In the Chronicles we find Naarai ben-Ezbi: the latter is evidently an error in writing for ha-Arbi; but it is impossible to decide which of the two forms, Paarai and Naarai, is the correct one.

151

36 Igal son of Nathan from Zobah, the son of Hagri, [12]

BARNES, "It is remarkable that we have several foreigners at this part of the list: Igal of Zobah, Zelek the Ammonite, Uriah the Hittite, and perhaps Nahari the Beerothite. The addition of Zelek to the mighty men was probably the fruit of David’s war with Ammon 2Sa_8:12; 10; 2Sa_12:26-31.

GILL, "Igal the son of Nathan of Zobah,.... kingdom in Syria, 2 Samuel 8:3; according to HillerusF19 the same with Joel, 1 Chronicles 11:38,

Bani the Gadite; who was of the tribe of Gad, as the Targum; in the room of this stands "Mibhar, the son of Haggeri", in 1 Chronicles 11:38.

K&D, "2Sa_23:36

Jigal the son of Nathan of Zoba (see at 2Sa_8:3): in the Chronicles, Joel the brother of Nathan. Bani the Gadite: in the Chronicles we have Mibhar the son of Hagri. In all probability the names inf the Chronicles are corrupt in this instance also.

PULPIT, "Igal the son of Nathan of Zobah. In Chronicles, "Joel the brother of Nathan," Igal and Joel in Hebrew being almost the same. If the text here is correct, he was by birth a Syrian of Zobah, for which see note on 2Sa_10:6. Bani the Gadite. In Chronicles, "Mibhar the son of Haggeri," "Mibhar" taking the place of "from Zobah;" "the son," ben, that of "Bani;" and Haggadi, "the Gadite," becoming "Haggeri."

37 Zelek the Ammonite, Naharai the Beerothite, the armor-bearer of Joab son of Zeruiah,

152

GILL, "Zelek the Ammonite,.... Who was so either by birth, and became a proselyte; so the Targum says, he was of the children of Ammon; or is so called, because he had sojourned some time in their land, or had done some exploits against them; unless he was of Chepharhaammonai, a city of the tribe of Benjamin, Joshua 18:24,

Naharai the Beerothite; native of Beeroth, a city in the same tribe, Joshua 18:25,

armourbearer to Joab the son of Zeruiah; Joab had ten of them, this perhaps was the chief of them, 2 Samuel 18:15; who was advanced to be a captain, and therefore has a name and place among the thirty, very likely for some military, exploits performed by him; he is in the list of David's worthies, though not Joab his master, as before observed; the reason of Joab being left out is either because he was over them all, as before noted; according to JosephusF20, Uriah the Hittite, after mentioned, was an armourbearer to Joab.

PULPIT, "Zelek the Ammonite. The presence of an Ammonite among the thirty reminds us of the fidelity of Shobi, the son of Nahash the Ammonite king, to David (see 2Sa_17:27). Armourbearer. The written text has the plural, "armourbearers," for which the K’ri has substituted the singular. The plural is probably right, and if so, both Joab’s chief armourbearers, or squires, were foreigners, Zelek being an Ammonite, and Nahari a Gibeonite (see note on 2Sa_4:2). In actual warfare we find Joab attended by ten esquires (2Sa_18:15).

38 Ira the Ithrite, Gareb the Ithrite

GILL, "Ira an Ithrite, Gareb an Ithrite. These were of Jether, as the Targum, a descendant of Caleb, of the tribe of Judah, 1 Chronicles 2:50 1 Chronicles 4:15. '

K&D, "2Sa_23:38

Ira and Gareb, both of them Jithrites, i.e., sprung from a family in Kirjath-jearim (1Ch_2:53). Ira is of course a different man from the cohen of that name (2Sa_20:26).

PULPIT, "Ithrite. Of the family of Jether, of Kirjath-jearim (1Ch_2:53). unless Ira and Gareb were two brothers of Amasa, and sons of Jether the husband of Abigail, David’s sister (2Sa_17:25).

153

39 and Uriah the Hittite. There were thirty-seven in all.

BARNES, "Thirty and seven in all - This reckoning is correct, though only 36 “names” are given, the names of only two of the second triad being recorded, but 31 names are given from 2Sa_23:24 to the end, which, added to the two triads, or six, makes 37. Joab as captain of the whole host stands quite alone. In 1Ch_11:41-47; after Uriah the Hittite, there follow sixteen other names, probably the names of those who took the places of those in the former list, who died from time to time, or who were added when the number was less rigidly restricted to thirty.

CLARKE, "Uriah the Hittite: thirty and seven in all - To these the author of 1Ch_11:41 adds Zabad son of Ahlai.

1Ch_11:42 - Adina the son of Shiza the Reubenite, a captain of the Reubenites, and thirty with him.

1Ch_11:43 - Hanan the son of Maachah, and Joshaphat the Mithnite,

1Ch_11:44 - Uzzia the Ashterathite, Shama and Jehiel the sons of Hothan the Aroerite,

1Ch_11:45 - Jediael the son of Shimri, and Joha his brother, the Tizite,

1Ch_11:46 - Eliel the Mahavite, and Jeribai, and Joshaviah, the sons of Elnaam, and Ithmah the Moabite,

1Ch_11:47 - Eliel, and Obed, and Jasiel the Mesobaite.

The 4th and 5th verses are very obscure; L. De Dieu gives them a good meaning, if not the true one: -

“The perpetuity of his kingdom David amplifies by a comparison to three natural things, which are very grateful to men, but not constant and stable. For the sun arises and goes down again; the morning may be clear, but clouds afterwards arise; and the tender grass springs up, but afterwards withers. Not so, said he, is my kingdom before God; it is flourishing like all these, but perpetual, for he has made an everlasting covenant with me, though some afflictions have befallen me; and he has not made all my salvation and desire to grow.”

De Dieu repeats כ ke, the note of similitude, thrice; and the following is his version: -

“The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake unto me, (or concerning me): The just man ruleth among men; he ruleth in the fear of God. And, as the sun ariseth with a shining light; as the morning is without clouds by reason of its splendor; as, from rain, the tender grass springeth out of the earth; truly so is not my house with God:

154

because he hath made an everlasting covenant with me; disposed in all things, and well kept and preserved in that order. Although he doth not make all my deliverance and desire to grow, i.e., though some adversities happen to me and my family; yet, that always remains, which, in the covenant of God made with me, is in all things orderly, disposed, and preserved.”

See Bishop Patrick on the place.

Once more I must beg the reader to refer to the First Dissertation of Dr. Kennicott, on the present state of the printed Hebrew text; in which there is not only great light cast on this subject, several corruptions in the Hebrew text being demonstrated, but also many valuable criticisms on different texts in the sacred writings. There are two Dissertations, 2 vols. 8 vo.; and both very valuable.

GILL, "Uriah the Hittite,.... The husband of Bathsheba; of whom See Gill on 2 Samuel 11:3,

thirty and seven all; reckoning the three mighty men of the first class, the three of the second, and the third class consisting of thirty men, whose names are as above, and Joab the general and head of them all. In 1 Chronicles 11:41, Zabad the son of Ahlai follows Uriah as one of this catalogue; he succeeding in honour one that soon died, particularly Elika, 2 Samuel 23:25, who is omitted in Chronicles, where a list of fifteen more is given, 1 Chronicles 11:42; at the head of which stands Adina a Reubenite, "and thirty" are said to be "with him", according to our version; but should be rendered, as by Junius and Tremellius, "but the thirty were superior to him", that is, the above thirty; for these fifteen, though brave men, were of lesser note.

K&D, "Uriah the Hittite is well known from 2Sa_11:3. “Thirty and seven in all.” This number is correct, as there were three in the first class (2Sa_23:8-12), two in the second (2Sa_23:18-23), and thirty-two in the third (vv. 24-39), since 2Sa_23:34contains three names according to the amended text.

PULPIT, "Uriah the Hittite (see note on 2Sa_11:3). Thirty and seven in all."The thirty" became a technical name, and might receive additional members. But if we suppose Asahel’s place to have been filled up, the number is exact, there being thirty ordinary members, three chiefs of the first class, and three of the second, of whom, however, one name is omitted. In Chronicles sixteen additional names are given, who were probably men admitted to the order to fill up vacancies.

155