April Bible in a Year Blogger Book

Transcription

Low resolu on pictures
From Blog to Book.
cagleonline.com
2
Contents
1 2015
5
1.1 April . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Bible in a Year - Introduc on to I and II Samuel (2015-04-01 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Bible in a Year - Samuel arrives (2015-04-01 06:05) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
Bible in a Year - 2 Apr 2015 - The Ark changes hands (2015-04-02 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23
Bible in a Year - 3 Apr 2015 - We want a King! (2015-04-03 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
33
Bible in a Year - 4 Apr 2015 - A King over Israel (2015-04-04 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40
Bible in a Year - 5 Apr 2015 - Incomplete Obedience (2015-04-05 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
51
Bible in a Year - 7 Apr 2015 - Saul’s wants David dead (2015-04-07 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58
Bible in a Year - 8 Apr 2015 David Gathers His Men (2015-04-08 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
65
Bible in a Year - 9 Apr 2015 Death of Samuel (2015-04-09 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
72
Bible in a Year -10 Apr 2015 The Death of Saul (2015-04-10 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
79
Bible in a Year - 11 Apr 2015 Long live the King (2015-04-11 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
88
Bible in a Year -12 Apr 2015 King over Israel (2015-04-12 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
95
Bible in a Year - 13 Apr 2015 Retrieving the Ark of the Covenant (2015-04-13 06:00) . . . . . . . . .
103
Bible in a Year - 14 Apr 2015 David’s Great Sin (2015-04-14 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
114
Bible in a Year - 15 Apr 2015 Birth of Solomon (2015-04-15 06:40) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
124
BIble in a Year- 16 Apr 2015 David’s Flight and the False Servant (2015-04-16 06:00) . . . . . . . . .
133
BIble in a Year - 17 Apr 2015 Ba le of Mount Ephriam (2015-04-17 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
140
Bible in a Year- 18 Apr 2015 David returs to Jerusalem (2015-04-18 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
146
Bible in a Year- 19 Apr 2015 David’s Song of Deliverance (2015-04-19 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
156
Bible in a Year- 20 Apr 2015 David’s Sin in Numbering the People (2015-04-20 06:00) . . . . . . . . .
164
Bible in a Year - Summary of the Books of Samuel (2015-04-20 06:10) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
169
BIble in a Year - Introdu on to Kings (2015-04-21 05:50) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
177
Bible in a Year- 21 Apr 2015 David’s Charge to Solomon (2015-04-21 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
188
Bible in a Year- 22 Apr 2015 Solomon’s Prayer for Wisdom (2015-04-22 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . .
199
Bible in a Year Schedule - May (2015-04-22 08:06) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
206
3
4
Bible in a Year-23 Apr 2015 Solomon Begins to Build the Temple (2015-04-23 06:00) . . . . . . . . .
208
Bible in a Year-24 Apr 2015 The Ark of the Covenant brought In (2015-04-24 06:00) . . . . . . . . .
217
Bible in a Year - 25 Apr 2015 Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (2015-04-25 06:00) . . . . . . . . . .
220
Bible in a Year-26 Apr 2015 Prophecy Against Jeroboam (2015-04-26 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
223
Bible in a Year- 27 Apr 2015 Judah’s Apostacy (2015-04-27 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
226
Bible in a Year-28 Apr 2015 Prophecy Against Baasha (2015-04-28 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
229
Bible in a Year- 29 Apr 2015 God’s Tender Care of His Prophet (2015-04-29 06:00) . . . . . . . . . .
232
Bible in a Year- 30 Apr 2015 Ahab’s Doom (2015-04-30 06:00) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
235
1.
1.1
2015
April
Bible in a Year - Introduc on to I and II Samuel (2015-04-01 06:00)
This site is Dedicated to the Glory of GodIsa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not
return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
TODAY IS ABIB 11 on GOD’S CALENDAR Passover falls on 14 Abib at evening followed by the
Feast of Unleavened Bread 15 Abib – 21 and concluding with the Day of First-fruits on 22 Abib.
If you wish to celebrate Passover this year you may wish to read: Easter or Passover When was the Crucifixion? ;
New to Celebra ng Passover? ; and Food and Feast of Passover
What is Bible in a Year? Learn more.>>>
• Download the Bible in a Year Schedule
• Catch up on what you missed –
– January Schedule
– February Schedule
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
• Addi onal Resources for Bible in a Year Studies
The Books of I Samuel and II Samuel
INTRODUCTION (Adapted from Bible Commentaries by Keil and Deutch, and Tom Bradford Torah Studies)
You may wish to watch : Unlocking the Bible books of Samuel by David Pawson, or Listen to the Introduc on to
the Books of Samuel by Tom Bradford.
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/lL10NajR314
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/OQXPYysjDuY
Tom Bradford explains more fully that originally the two books of Samuel and the two books of Kings comprised one
book. Please listen to the audio for further understanding.
[playlist images=”false” tracklist=”false” ids=”237598”]
5
Also, if you have not studied the prior books of scripture, you will not fully grasp these books. In the VERY LEAST
you should study the book of Judges and Ruth to gain at least some understanding of what is going on around this
me in the history of the Hebrew people.
The books of Samuel originally formed one undivided work, and in the Hebrew MSS they s ll do. The division into two
books originated with the Alexandrian translators (lxx), and was not only adopted in the Vulgate and other versions,
but in the sixteenth century it was introduced by Daniel Bomberg into our edi ons of the Hebrew Bible itself. In the
Septuagint and Vulgate, these books are considered as belonging to the books of the Kings. In the Septuagint they are
called “books of the kingdoms,” evidently with reference to the fact that each of these works contains an account of
the history of a double kingdom: the books of Samuel, the history of the kingdoms of Saul and David; and the books
of Kings, that of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel.
This tle does not appear unsuitable, so far as the books before us really contain an account of the rise of the monarchy in Israel. Nevertheless, we cannot regard it as the original tle, or even as a more appropriate heading than the
one given in the Hebrew canon, “the book of Samuel,” since this tle not only originated in the fact that the first half
contains an account of the acts of the prophet Samuel, but was also intended to indicate that the spirit of Samuel
formed the soul of the true kingdom in Israel, or that the earthly throne of the Israeli sh kingdom of God derived its
strength and perpetuity from the Spirit of the Lord which lived in the prophet. The division into two books answers
to the contents, since the death of Saul, with which the first book closes, formed a turning-point in the development
of the kingdom.
The Books of Samuel contain the history of the kingdom of God in Israel, from the termina on of the age of the judges
to the close of the reign of king David, and embrace a period of about 125 years, from about 1140 to 1015 B.C.
The first book treats of the judgeship of the prophet Samuel and the reign of king Saul, and is divided into three
sec ons, answering to the three epochs formed by the judicial office of Samuel
• (1 Samuel 1-7), the reign of Saul from his elec on ll his rejec on
• (1 Samuel 8-15), and the decline of his kingdom during his conflict with David, whom the Lord had chosen to
be the leader of His people in the place of Saul
• (1 Samuel 16-31). The renewal of the kingdom of God, which was now thoroughly disorganized both within and
without, commenced with Samuel.
When Hannah asked for a son from the Lord, and Samuel was given to her, the sanctuary of God at Shiloh was thoroughly desecrated under the aged high priest Eli by the base conduct of his worthless sons, and the na on of Israel
was given up to the power of the Philis nes. If Israel, therefore, was to be delivered from the bondage of the heathen
it was necessary that it should be first of all redeemed from the bondage of sin and idolatry, that its false confidence
in the visible pledges of the gracious presence of God should be shaken by heavy judgments, and the way prepared for
its conversion to the Lord its God by deep humilia on. At the very same me, therefore, at which Samuel was called
to be the prophet of God, the judgment of God was announced upon the degraded priesthood and the desecrated
sanctuary.
• I Samuel opens with an account on the one hand of the character of the na onal religion in the me of Eli, and
on the other hand of the piety of the parents of Samuel, especially of his mother, and with an announcement
of the judgment that was to fall upon Eli’s house
• Then follows first of all the call of Samuel as prophet , and the fulfillment of the judgment upon the house of
Eli and the house of God ;
6
• secondly, the manifesta on of the omnipotence of God upon the enemies of His people, by the chas sement
of the Philis nes for carrying off the ark of the covenant, and the victory which the Israelites gained over their
oppressors through Samuel’s prayer;
• and lastly, a summary of the judicial life of Samuel.
The second sec on contains,
• the nego a ons of the people with Samuel concerning the appointment of a king, the anoin ng of Saul by the
prophet, and his elec on as king, together with the establishment of his kingdom ;
• a brief survey of the history of his reign, in connec on with which the only events that are at all fully described
are his first successful conflicts with the Philis nes, and the war against the Amalekites which occasioned his
ul mate rejec on
• Then we see there is a much more elaborate account of the history of Saul from his rejec on ll his death, since
it not only describes the anoin ng of David and his victory over Goliath, but contains a circumstan al account
of his a tude towards Saul, and the manifold complica ons arising from his long-con nued persecu on on the
part of Saul, for the purpose of se ng forth the gradual accomplishment of the counsels of God, both in the
rejec on of Saul and the elec on of David as king of Israel, to warn the ungodly against hardness of heart, and
to strengthen the godly in their trust in the Lord, who guides His servants through tribula on and suffering to
glory and honor.
The second book contains the history of the reign of David, arranged in four sec ons:
1. His reign over Judah in Hebron, and his conflict with Ishbosheth the son of Saul, whom Abner had set up as king
over the other tribes of Israel
2. The anoin ng of David as king over all Israel, and the firm establishment of his kingdom through the conquest
of the citadel of Zion, andthe eleva on of Jerusalem into the capital of the kingdom;
(a) the removal of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem; the determina on to build a temple to the Lord;
(b) the promise given him by the Lord of the everlas ng dura on of his dominion;
(c) the subjuga on of all the enemies of Israel , to which there is appended a list of the principal officers of
state
(d) and an account of the favor shown to the house of Saul in the person of Mephibosheth
3. The disturbance of his reign through his adultery with Bathsheba during the Ammoni sh and Syrian war, and
the judgments which came upon his house in consequence of this sin through the wickedness of his sons, via,
the incest of Amnon and rebellion of Absalom, and the insurrec on of Sheba :
4. The close of his reign, his song of thanksgiving for deliverance out of the hand of all his foes, and his last prophe c
words concerning the just ruler in the fear of God .
The way is prepared for these, however, by an account of the expia on of Saul’s massacre of the Gibeonites, and of
various heroic acts performed by his generals during the wars with the Philis nes ; whilst a list of his several heroes is
a erwards appended in 1 Samuel 23:8-29, together with an account of the numbering of the people and consequent
pes lence , which is placed at the close of the work, simply because the punishment of this sin of David furnished the
occasion for the erec on of an altar of burnt-offering upon the site of the future temple. But note: the sin of David
7
was not in numbering the people, but in the REASON for this ac on as we will discover.
His death is not men oned here, because he transferred the kingdom to his son Solomon before he died; and the
account of this transfer forms the introduc on to the history of Solomon in the first book of Kings, so that the close
of David’s life was most appropriately recorded there.
So far as the character of the historical wri ng in the books of Samuel is concerned, there is something striking in the
contrast which presents itself between the fulness with which the writer has described many events of apparently
trifling importance, in connec on with the lives of persons through whom the Lord secured the deliverance of His
people and kingdom from their foes, and the summary brevity with which he disposes of the greatest enterprises of
Saul and David, and the fierce and for the most part tedious wars with the surrounding na ons; so that, as Thenius
says, “par cular por ons of the work differ in the most striking manner from all the rest, the one part being very brief,
and wri en almost in the form of a chronicle, the other elaborate, and in one part composed with really biographical
fulness.”
This peculiarity is not to be accounted for from the nature of the sources which the author had at his command;
for even if we cannot define with precision the nature and extent of these sources, yet when we compare the accounts contained in these books of the wars between David and the Ammonites and Syrians with those in the books
of Chronicles (2 Samuel 8 and 10 with 1 Chronicles 18-19), we see clearly that the sources from which those accounts
were derived embraced more than our books have given, since there are several places in which the chronicler gives
fuller details of historical facts, the truth of which is universally allowed.
The prepara ons for the building of the temple and the organiza on of the army, as well as the arrangement of
the official du es of the Levites which David undertook, according to 1 Chronicles 22-28, in the closing years of his
life, cannot possibly have been unknown to the author of our books. Moreover, there are frequent allusions in the
books before us to events which are assumed as known, though there is no record of them in the wri ngs which have
been handed down to us,
• such as the removal of the tabernacle from Shiloh, where it stood in the me of Eli, to Nob, where David received
the shew-bread from the priests on his flight from Saul ;
• the massacre of the Gibeonites by Saul, which had to be expiated under David
• the banishment of the necromancers out of the land in the me of Saul
• and the flight of the Beerothites to Gi aim.
From this also we must conclude, that the author of our books knew more than he thought it necessary to men on
in his work. But we certainly cannot infer from these peculiari es, as has o en been done, that our books are to
be regarded as a compila on. Such an inference as this simply arises from an u er disregard of the plan and object,
which run through both books and regulate the selec on and arrangement of the materials they contain.
That the work has been composed upon a definite plan, is evident from the grouping of the historical facts, in favor of which the chronological order generally observed in both the books has now and then been sacrificed.
Thus, in the history of Saul and the account of his wars, the fact is also men oned, that he smote the Amalekites;
whereas the war itself, in which he smote them, is first described in detail in 1 Samuel 15, because it was in that war
that he forfeited his kingdom through his transgression of the divine command, and brought about his own rejec on
on the part of God. The sacrifice of the chronological order to the material grouping of related events, is s ll more
evident in the history of David.
8
In 2 Samuel 8 all his wars with foreign na ons are collected together, and even the wars with the Syrians and Ammonites are included, together with an account of the booty taken in these wars; and then a er this, in 1 Samuel
10-12, the war with the Ammonites and Syrians is more fully described, including the circumstances which occasioned
it, the course which it took, and David’s adultery which occurred during this war.
Moreover, the history of Saul, as well as that of David, is divided into two self-contained periods, answering indeed
to the historical course of the reigns of these two kings, but yet so dis nctly marked off by the historian, that not only
is the turning-point dis nctly given in both instances,
• the rejec on of Saul
• the grievous fall of David,
but each of these periods is rounded off with a comprehensive account of the wars, the family, and the state officials
of the two kings .
Similarly in the history of Samuel, a er the victory which the Israelites obtained over the Philis nes through his
prayer, everything that had to be related concerning his life as judge is grouped together before the introduc on
of the monarchy is described; although Samuel himself lived ll nearly the close of the reign of Saul, and not only
ins tuted Saul as king, but a erwards announced his rejec on, and anointed David as his successor.
These comprehensive accounts are anything but proofs of compila ons from sources of different kinds, which ignorance of the peculiari es of the Semi c style of wri ng history has led some to regard them as being; they simply
serve to round off the different periods into which the history has been divided, and form res ng-places for the historical review, which neither destroy the material connec on of the several groups, nor throw any doubt upon the
unity of the authorship of the books themselves. And even where separate incidents appear to be grouped together,
without external connec on or any regard to chronological order, on a closer inspec on it is easy to discover the
rela on in which they stand to the leading purpose of the whole book, and the reason why they occupy this posi on
and no other.
If we look more closely, however, at the contents of these books, in order to determine their character more precisely, we find at the very outset, in Hannah’s song of praise, a prophe c glance at the anointed of the Lord , which
foretells the establishment of the monarchy what was a erwards accomplished under Saul and David.
And with this there is associated the rise of the new name, Jehovah Sabaoth, (God Lord of Hosts) which is never
met with in the Pentateuch or in the books of Joshua and Judges; whereas it occurs in the books before us from the
original in I Samuel to the close.We will look at the significance of this later.
NOTE: This commentary uses Jehovah as a transla on of YHWH , God.
When Israel received a visible representa ve of its invisible God-king in the person of an earthly monarch;
• Jehovah, the God of Israel, became the God of the heavenly hosts.
• Through the establishment of the monarchy, the people of Jehovah’s possession became a “world-power;”
• the kingdom of God was elevated into a kingdom of the world, as dis nguished from the other ungodly kingdoms
of the world, which it was eventually to overcome in the power of its God.
9
In this conflict Jehovah manifested himself as the Lord of hosts, to whom all the na ons and kingdoms of this world
were to become subject. Even in the mes of Saul and David, the heathen na ons were to experience a foretaste of
this subjec on.
• When Saul had ascended the throne of Israel, he fought against all his enemies round about, and extended his
power in every direc on in which he turned
• But David made all the na ons who bordered upon the kingdom of God tributary to the people of the Lord, as
the Lord gave him victory wherever he went
• so that his son Solomon reigned over all the kingdoms, from the stream (the Euphrates) to the boundary of
Egypt, and they all brought him presents, and were subject to him as we will read in Kings.
But the Israeli sh monarchy could never acquire the power to secure for the kingdom of God a victory over all its foes,
except as the king himself was diligent in his endeavors to be at all mes simply the instrument of the God-king, and
exercise his authority solely in the name and according to the will of Jehovah.
And as the natural selfishness and pride of man easily made this concentra on of the supreme earthly power in a
single person merely an occasion for self-aggrandizement, and therefore the Israeli sh kings were exposed to the
tempta on to use the authority entrusted to them even in opposi on to the will of God; the Lord raised up for Himself organs of His own Spirit, in the persons of the prophets, to stand by the side of the kings, and make known to
them the will and counsel of God.
The introduc on of the monarchy was therefore preceded by the development of the prophe c office into a spiritual power in Israel, in which the kingdom was to receive not only a firm support to its own authority, but a strong
bulwark against royal caprice and tyranny. Samuel was called by the Lord to be His prophet, to convert the na on
that was sunk in idolatry to the Lord its God, and to revive the religious life by the establishment of associa ons of
prophets, since the priests had failed to resist the growing apostasy of the na on, and had become unfaithful to their
calling to instruct and establish the congrega on in the knowledge and fear of the Lord.
Even before the call of Samuel as a prophet, there was foretold to the high priest Eli by a man of God, not only
the judgment that would fall upon the degenerate priesthood, but the appointment of a faithful priest, for whom the
Lord would build a permanent house, that he might ever walk before His anointed .
The first revela on which Samuel received from God had reference to the fulfillment of all that the Lord had spoken against the house of Eli.
• The announcement of a faithful priest, who would walk before the anointed of the Lord,
• A predic on of the establishment of the monarchy, which foreshadowed its worth and great significance in
rela on to the further development of the kingdom of God.
And whilst these predic ons of the anointed of the Lord, before and in connec on with the call of Samuel, show the
deep spiritual connec on which existed between the prophe c order and the regal office in Israel; the inser on of
them in these books is a proof that from the very outset the author had this new organiza on of the Israeli sh kingdom of God before his mind, and that it was his inten on not simply to hand down biographies of Samuel, Saul, and
David, but to relate the history of the Old Testament kingdom of God at the me of its eleva on out of a deep inward
and outward decline into the full authority and power of a kingdom of the Lord, before which all its enemies were to
be compelled to bow.
10
Israel was to become a kingship of priests; a kingdom whose ci zens were priests and kings. The Lord had announced
this to the sons of Israel before the covenant was concluded at Sinai, as the ul mate object of their adop on as the
people of His possession (Exo _19:5-6). Now although this promise reached far beyond the mes of the Old Covenant,
and will only receive its perfect fulfillment in the comple on of the kingdom of God under the New Covenant, yet it
was to be realized even in the people of Israel so far as the economy of the Old Testament allowed.
Israel was not only to become a priestly na on, but a royal na on also; not only to be sanc fied as a congrega on of
the Lord, but also to be exalted into a kingdom of God. The establishment of the earthly monarchy, therefore, was
not only an even ul turning-point, but also an “epoch-making” advance in the development of Israel towards the goal
set before it in its divine calling. And this advance became the pledge of the ul mate a ainment of the goal, through
the promise which David received from God , that the Lord would establish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
With this promise God established for His anointed the eternal covenant, to which David reverted at the close of
his reign, and upon which he rested his divine announcement of the just ruler over men, the ruler in the fear of God.
Thus the close of these books points back to their commencement. The prophecy of the pious mother of Samuel, that
the Lord would give strength unto His king, and exalt the horn of His anointed , found a fulfillment in the kingdom of
David, which was at the same me a pledge of the ul mate comple on of the kingdom of God under the scepter of
the Son of David, the promised Messiah.
This is one, and in fact the most conspicuous, arrangement of the facts connected with the history of salva on, which
determined the plan and composi on of the work before us. By the side of this there is another, which does not
stand out so prominently indeed, but yet must not be overlooked. At the very beginning, in 1 Samuel 1, the inward
decay of the house of God under the high priest Eli is exhibited; and in the announcement of the judgment upon the
house of Eli, a long-con nued oppression of the dwelling-place (of God) is foretold . Then, in the further course of
the narra ve, not only is the fulfillment of these threats pointed out, in the events described in 1 Samuel 4; and 22;
but it is also shown how David
• first of all brought the ark of the covenant, about which no one had troubled himself in the me of Saul, out of
its concealment,
• had a tent erected for it in the capital of his kingdom upon Mount Zion, and made it once more the central point
of the worship of the congrega on;
• and how a er that, when God had given him rest from his enemies, he wished to build a temple for the Lord to
be the dwelling-place of His name;
• and lastly, when God would not permit him to carry out this resolu on, but promised that his son would build
the house of the Lord, how, towards the close of his reign,
• he consecrated the site for the future temple by building an altar upon Mount Moriah .
Even in this series of facts the end of the work points back to the beginning, so that the arrangement and composi on
of it according to a definite plan, which has been consistently carried out, are very apparent. If, in addi on to this, we
take into account the deep-seated connec on between the building of the temple as designed by David, and the confirma on of his monarchy on the part of God as exhibited in 2 Samuel 7, we cannot fail to observe that the historical
development of the true kingdom, in accordance with the nature and cons tu on of the Old Testament kingdom of
God, forms the leading thought and purpose of the work to which the name of Samuel has been a ached, and that
it was by this thought and aim that the writer was influenced throughout in his selec on of the historical materials
which lay before him in the sources that he employed.
11
The full accounts which are given of the birth and youth of Samuel, and the life of David, are in the most perfect
harmony with this design. The lives and deeds of these two men of God were of significance as laying the founda on
for the development and organiza on of the monarchical kingdom in Israel.
• Samuel was the model and type of the prophets; and embodied in his own person the spirit and nature of the
prophe c office, whilst his a tude towards Saul foreshadowed the posi on which the prophet was to assume
in rela on to the king.
• In the life of David, the Lord himself educa on the king of His kingdom, the prince over His people, to whom
He could con nue His favor and grace even when he had fallen so deeply that it was necessary that he should
be chas sed for his sins.
Thus all the separate parts and sec ons are fused together as an organic whole in the fundamental thought of the
work before us. And this unity is not rendered at all ques onable by differences such as we find in the accounts of
the mode of Saul’s death as described first and second Samuel, or by such repe ons as the double account of the
death of Samuel, and other phenomena of a similar kind, which can be explained without difficulty;
whereas the asser on some mes made, that there are some events of which we have two different accounts that
contradict each other, has never yet been proved, and, as we shall see when we come to the exposi on of the passages in ques on,
• has arisen partly from unscriptural assump ons,
• partly from ignorance of the formal peculiari es of the Hebrew mode of wri ng history,
• and partly from a mistaken interpreta on of the passages themselves.
With regard to the origin of the books of Samuel,
• all that can be maintained with certainty is, that they were not wri en ll a er the division of the kingdom
under Solomon’s successor. This is evident from the remark in 1Sa _27:6, that “Ziklag pertaineth unto the kings
of Judah unto this day.” For although David was king over the tribe of Judah alone for seven years, it was not
ll a er the falling away of the ten tribes from the house of David that there were really “kings of Judah.”
• On the other hand, nothing can be inferred with certainty respec ng the date of composi on, either from the
dis nc on drawn between Israel and Judah which evidently existed as early as the me of David, or from the
formula “to this day” . Since the dura on of the facts to which it is applied is altogether unknown; or lastly,
from such passages where explana ons are given of expressions and customs belonging to the mes of Saul
and David, as it is quite possible that they may have been altogether changed by the me of Solomon.
In general, the contents and style of the books point to the earliest mes a er the division of the kingdom; since we
find no allusions whatsoever to the decay of the kingdoms which a erwards took place, and s ll less to the cap vity;
whilst the style and language are classical throughout, and altogether free from Chaldaisms and later forms, such as
we meet with in the wri ngs of the Chaldean period, and even in those of the me of the cap vity.
The author himself is quite unknown; but, judging from the spirit of his wri ngs, he was a prophet of the kingdom
of Judah. It is unanimously admi ed, however, that he made use of wri en documents, par cularly of prophe c
records made by persons who were contemporaries of the events described, not only for the history of the reigns of
12
Saul and David, but also for the life and labors of Samuel, although no wri en sources are quoted, with the excep on
of the “book of Jasher,” which contained the elegy of David upon Saul and Jonathan ; so that the sources employed
by him cannot be dis nctly pointed out.
You may wish to download the book of Jasher or view this video version
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/ODQd46ndP8k
The different a empts which have been made to determine them minutely, are lacking in the necessary proofs which
hypotheses must bring before they can meet with adop on and support. If we confine ourselves to the historical
evidence, the first and last acts of king David, i.e., the events of his en re reign, were recorded according to the books
of Chronicles, in the “Libre of Samuel the seer, of Nathan the prophet, and of Gad the seer.”
These prophe c wri ngs no doubt were the leading sources from which our books of Samuel were also drawn, since,
• the two accounts of the reign of David in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles agree for the most part so thoroughly word
for word, that they are generally regarded as extracts from one common source;
• the prophets named not only lived in the me of David but throughout the whole of the period referred to in
the books before us, and took a very ac ve part in the progressive development of the history of those mes
• Moreover, there are “chronicles (diaries or annals) of king David” men oned, accompanied with the remark
that the result of the census appointed by David was not inserted in them, from which we may infer that all the
principal events of his reign were included in these chronicles.
• And they may also have formed one of the sources for our books, although nothing certain can be determined
concerning the rela on in which they stood to the wri ngs of the three prophets that have been men oned.
• Lastly, it is every evident from the character of the work before us, that the author had sources composed by
eye-witnesses of the events at his command, and that these were employed with an in mate knowledge of the
facts and with historical fidelity, inasmuch as the history is dis nguished by
– vividness of descrip on,
– by a careful delinea on of the characters of the persons engaged,
– and by great accuracy in the accounts of locali es,
– and of subordinate circumstances connected with the historical events.
Samuel II contains the history of David’s reign, arranged according to its leading features:
• the commencement of his reign as king of Judah at Hebron, whereas the other tribes of Israel adhered to the
house of Saul
• his promo on to be king over all Israel, and the victorious extension of his sway
• the decline of his power in consequence of his adultery
• the close of his reign .
• Parallels and supplements to this history, in which the reign of David is described chiefly in its connec on withthe
development of the kingdom of God under the Old Testament,
13
– given in 1 Chron 11-28, where we have an elaborate descrip on of the things done by David,
– both for the eleva on and organiza on of the public worship of God,
– also for the consolida on and establishment of the whole kingdom,
– and the general administra on of government.
David King Over Judah; and Ishbosheth King Over Israel
When David received the dings at Ziklag of the defeat of Israel and the death of Saul, he mourned deeply and sincerely for the fallen king and his noble son Jonathan .
• He then returned by the permission of God into the land of Judah, namely to Hebron, and was anointed king of
Judah by the elders of that tribe;
• whereas Abner, the cousin and chief general of Saul, took Ishbosheth, the only remaining son of the fallen
monarch, and made him king over the other tribes of Israel at Mahanaim
• This occasioned a civil war.
• Abner marched to Gibeon against David with the forces of Ishbosheth, but was defeated by Joab, David’s
commander-in-chief, and pursued to Mahanaim, in which pursuit Abner slew Asahel the brother of Joab, who
was eagerly following him
• Nevertheless, the conflict between the house of David and the house of Saul con nued for some me longer,
but with the former steadily advancing and the la er declining,
• un l at length Abner quarreled with Ishbosheth, and persuaded the tribes that had previously adhered to him
to acknowledge David as king over all Israel.
• A er the nego a ons with David for effec ng this, he was assassinated by Joab on his return from Hebron, an
act at which David not only expressed his abhorrence by a solemn mourning for Abner, but declared it s ll more
openly by cursing Joab’s crime
• Shortly a erwards, Ishbosheth was assassinated in his own house by two Benjaminites; but this murder was
also avenged by David, who ordered the murderers to be put to death, and the head of Ishbosheth, that had
been delivered up to him, to be buried in Abner’s tomb
Thus the civil war and the threatened split in the kingdom were brought to an end, though without any complicity on
the part of David, but rather against his will,
• through the death of Abner, the author of the split,
• and of Ishbosheth, whom he had placed upon the throne,
• both of whom fell by treacherous hands, and received the reward of their rebellion against the ordinance of
God.
David himself, in his long school of afflic on under Saul, had learned to put all his hope in the Lord his God; and
therefore, when Saul was dead, he took no steps to grasp by force the kingdom which God had promised him, or to
remove his rival out of the way by crime.
14
And so begins our study of the Books of Samuel and the Books of Kings. This study will last through about midMay. I hope you will follow along and I pray that God will show us all the truth and wisdom that can be found in these
books. For, as we learned in our study of the Book of Judges and the Books of Ruth (as will all the books of scripture
thus far) God has a Plan and we, today, are watching it unfold as surely as the Hebrew children of God witnessed the
unfolding of their history over 2000 years ago. Today Israel is s ll warring with the modern day Philis nes who are
demanding they ’accept’ their gods and their customs, while the Israelites are apparently determined, in their fallen
state, to hold ght to God Almighty and to do His will. Only me will see the hand of God in the final move against
the evil hearts of man.
This is a full- me work of service to God’s word of Truth. This site is for the Glory of God and NOT for
Profit. Any dona ons to sustain this work are appreciated. I do not adver se or sell on this site. Period.
This is only a study guide and personal commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpreta on of the Bible. I have provided only a li le of my insight to these chapters, and they are not necessarily always
the best interpreta on for you. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpreta on. You must not relinquish this to a commentator. You must always seek the truth in scripture, take
no man’s (or my) word for anything. For history proves the fickle nature we all possess. The only true interpreta on
of scripture is that of the writer…and you can Believe… 2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspira on of God, and is
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc on, for instruc on in righteousness:
Resources: My Primary resource is the King James Bible – Others include Print, online, and so ware commentaries
and databases. Please see the resources in the le sidebar and the drop down menu for many addi onal resources to
assist you in your studies.
• Download Bible in a Year Schedule
• King James Pure Bible Search(fast accurate search tool on your desktop)
• e-Sword (resources and commentaries available in this program)
• King James Pure Bible Search
I heavily research what I present, but I am in no way infallible.
PLEASE, do your own PRAYERFUL study.
Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line,
line upon line; here a li le, and there a li le; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and
taken.
I present only one interpreta on, mine, which is based in study, and research as well as considera on for many
commentaries from others. I pray God will con nue to guide me, and that nothing I share here will in any way hinder
your walk with God, but the ul mate responsibility FOR YOUR SALVATION lies with you! Got Jesus?
In Jesus Christ’s name I pray. Amen
15
Bible in a Year - Samuel arrives (2015-04-01 06:05)
TODAY IS ABIB 11 on GOD’S CALENDAR Passover falls on 14 Abib at evening followed by the
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of I Samuel 1-3
INTRODUCTION
The history of Samuel begins as early as that of Samson , even before he was born, as a erwards the history of
John the Bap st and our blessed Savior. Some are accounted for from the birth, and from the womb, and from the
concep on. What God says of the prophet Jeremiah is true of all: “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee,” Jer
_1:5. But some great men were brought into the world with more observa on than others, and were dis nguished
from common persons much earlier, as Samuel for example. God, in this ma er, acts as a free agent. The story of
Samson introduces him as a child of promise, Jdg. 13. But the story of Samuel introduces him as a child of prayer.
• Samson’s birth was foretold by an angel to his mother; Samuel was asked of God by his mother. Both together
in mate what wonders are produced by the word and prayer.
• Samuel’s mother was Hannah, the principal person concerned in the story of this chapter.
16
– Here is her afflic on - she was childless, and this afflic on aggravated by her rival’s insolence, but in some
measure balanced by her husband’s kindness
– The prayer and vow she made to God under this afflic on, in which Eli the high priest at first censured her,
but a erwards encouraged her
– The birth and nursing of Samuel
– The presen ng of him to the Lord
In chapter 2 we have,
• Hannah’s song of thanksgiving to God for his favor to her in giving her Samuel
• Their return to their family, with Eli’s blessing
• The increase of their family
• Samuel’s growth and improvement and the care Hannah took to clothe him
• The great wickedness of Eli’s sons
• The over-mild reproof that Eli gave them for it
• The justly dreadful message God sent him by a prophet, threatening the ruin of his family for the wickedness
of his sons
In the previous chapter we had Samuel a young priest, though by birth a Levite only, for he ministered before the
Lord in a linen ephod; in this chapter we have him a young prophet, which was more, God in an extraordinary manner
revealing himself to him, and in him reviving, if not commencing, prophecy in Israel. Here is,
• God’s first manifesta on of himself in an extraordinary manner to Samuel
• The message he sent by him to Eli
• The faithful delivery of that message to Eli, and his submission to the righteousness of God in it
• The establishment of Samuel to be a prophet in Israel
You May wish to listen to this sermon by David McClelland from sermonaudio en tled Hannah, the Praying Mother
of Samuel
[audio
mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2008.05.11.AHannah-the-Praying-Mother-David-McClelland-517081052314.mp3”][ /audio]
I Samuel 1-3
The book of Samuel opens with the genealogy and birthplace of Samuel. Samuel belonged
to the tribe of Levi, yet no specific men on is made of this fact because he owed his importance and rank as a judge
not to his Levi cal origin, but to the gi of prophecy, which was independent of the accidents of birth and sta on.
17
His parentage is given twice in the 1 book of Chronicles chapter 6 , the first is apparently the family genealogy and
the second taken perhaps from temple records. His name there appears as Shemuel, a transla on error perhaps or
perhaps the translators did not realize it was the same person.
The varia ons Elkanah, Jeroham, Elihu, Tohu, Zuph (1Sa _1:1); Elkanah, Jeroham, Eliab, Nahath,
Zophai (1Ch _6:26, 1Ch _6:27); Elkanah, Jeroham, Eliel, Toah, Zuph (ibid. 1Ch _6:34-35), are interesting as showing that the genealogies in Chronicles. were compiled from family documents, in which, as
was usual in the case of proper names, there was much diversity of spelling, or possibly of interpre ng
the cumbrous signs used for le ers in those early days. The varia ons, however, in Elihu (God is he),
Eliab (God is Father), and Eliel (God is God) were probably inten onal, as were certainly other changes
in names, such as that of Ishbaal into Ishbosheth. The name of Samuel’s father, Elkanah (God is owner),
is a common one among the Kohathites, to which division of the sons of Levi Samuel belonged. –Pulpit
commentaries
Ramathaim-Zophim, Samuel’s birthplace, this is the only place where it is so wri en in the Hebrew.
Ramah signifies a height, and the dual Ramathaim the double height, the town being situated on a hill ending in two
peaks. But which it was of the many Ramahs, or hill towns, in the Holy Land, is hotly contested; probably it was the
Ramah in Benjamin, about two hours’ journey northwest of Jerusalem. Its second name, Zophim, is taken from Zuph,
Samuel’s remote ancestor, with whom the genealogy here begins.
The informa on that Elkanah had two wives, tells us he was probably a wealthy man, as only the wealthy could afford
more than one wife. The other think to keep in mind is that there were mes when a second wife was necessary to
insure the line of the husband. If a first wife could not produce a son, a second was sought to secure the inheritance
would remain in the family line. This is also the reason for such things as the Levarite marriages as we learned while
reading and studying the book of Judges.
The statement that she was baren as well as her depression tell us more than a state of being sad. 1Sa
1:5 But unto Hannah he gave a worthy por on; for he loved Hannah: but the LORD had shut up her womb. This
should most likely been translated to something like, ’he loved her most, or best, or she was his favorite, rather that
what we take simply to mean he loved her. Another thing to understand that when is states that Peninnah was Hannah’s ”advisary” in the next verse, it is not saying they were rivals or enemies for the a en on or affec on of Elkanah.
What this is sta ng in the Hebrew understanding is that they were equal, or co-wives legally
under the law.
The name Hannah signifies gracefulness, while Peulnnah is the red pearl, translated coral in Job _28:18, but ruby in
Pro _3:15, etc. Its ruddy color is vouched for in Lam _4:7. The Hebrew names for women usually describe the affec on
and respect felt for them but the names for men are usually religious in nature.
18
The main facts implied or expressed in this sec on are—
1. A state of na onal degeneracy.
2. A scarcity of spiritual illumina on.
3. A family morally imperfect and troubled, yet rigidly observant of religious du es.
4. A Divine will using that family for the further unfolding of Messianic purposes.
It is not wise to import our modern ideas into the minds of those who, in the days of Jacob,
Moses, and the Judges, had not been fashioned by our inheritance of knowledge. It is through the study of scripture
that we begin to understand that:
• The historical Christ is to appear in the ”fulness of me,” not from the skies, but from a human line well authencated. Human factors are the transitory element in the Divine unfolding of salva on in Christ. Understanding
that God would use men, during a long succession of ages, as the channel through which his mercy should
embrace all the world, is as natural and reasonable as the understanding that he should perfect his will in the
beau ful order of the earth.
•
God did not make imperfect men perfect in order to use them; but showed his wisdom in training
and holding together the chosen race just as they were. Degenerate as they were during the period of the
Judges, they were not cut off forever, but chastened and quickened. Thus the process was con nued, un l the
purpose was ripe for the appearing of the Christ, and his proper iden fica on, by the combina on of history
and prophecy.
• The devout men and women of Elkanah’s me, having acquired knowledge of the existence of hosts of intelligent beings, took a wider concep on of God’s sovereignty than was possible to men of an earlier age and in
some was just as impossible for us today. . God conveys His truth in so far as men are able to bear it. It would be
as unnatural for Isaiah’s lo y teachings to follow at once on the scanty illumina on of the era of the Judges, as
for philosophical concep ons to be set before children. Divine wisdom shines through the graduated teaching
of Israel’s history
Every one must see the naturalness of Hannah’s grief. The ordinary course of nature fosters
hope; it is the basis of reasonable expecta ons. A well balanced mind lives in strong sympathy with nature’s ways,
for they are of God, and always beneficial in final outcomes. We need to understand that God is not displeased with
grief, nor discontent, when it comes in the order of Providence, even though the grief may rise from a wish that he
had ordered otherwise. Tears have been consecrated by Christ. The wail over Jerusalem was not unconnected with
blighted hope.
1Sa 1:10 And she was in bi erness of soul, and prayed unto the LORD, and wept sore.
But so far as men are concerned, the roots of their sorrow frequently lie in their ignorance
19
of God’s mes and methods. He does not willingly afflict or grieve the children of men, though he o en allows events
to unfold that cause one to turn back and seek Him. There is some undeveloped purpose for their good which will
yet vindicate God’s goodness. The people of this me understood that ALL THINGS were under the providence of
God Almighty. ALL THINGS. today we tend to think that only the good comes from God, or Jesus, and anything bad is
the work of the devil or Satan. This is simply not what the bible teaches, and it is something we should be striving to
understand for it affects us today in our rela onship with God.
1Sa 1:14 And Eli said unto her, How long wilt thou be drunken? put away thy wine from thee.
This speaks to me again of the idea that God looks at the heart while we see only the physical ac ons or body. Eli did
not understand her hear elt and silent prayers. He saw only what he misunderstood as the vague mumblings of a
drunken woman. How o en do we see someone and make judgments based on how they look, not knowing anything
about them, or if it is someone we know, not knowing the circumstances under which they are doing something?
Something we ALL should think carefully about.
So, Hannah has a child, her prayers are answered, and she must keep her vow. Today we might not understand
this, how a child so longed for could so quickly be turned over to another to be raised. 1Sa 1:24 And when she had
weaned him, she took him up with her, with three bullocks, and one ephah of flour, and a bo le of wine, and brought
But we need to put aside our
him unto the house of the LORD in Shiloh: and the child was young.
modern understanding and look back into the customs and understandings of the mes. In the case of Hannah, it
was not the child that was the issue, it was the ability to have a child. This is not to say she would not love and cherish
this first-born son (she will have others), but that she understands the honor he has been chosen for, to serve God all
his days. 1Sa 1:28 Therefore also I have lent him to the LORD; as long as he liveth he shall be lent to the LORD. And he
worshipped the LORD there. An honor any mother would be thrilled to see bestowed upon her son, no ma er what
pain it might cause in the physical. And we will see that she went, at least, yearly to see him and bring him a robe,
something like a cloak, that she made.
Posterity has seen that the long trial of Hannah was not without its blessed uses in sublimaon of her hopes, and deepening her piety. It is a first principle that trial to the devout is essen ally a good. The
spirit of the sufferer has to grow up to the Divine intent by meek submission. Like many mothers, Hannah might
have rested in the simple joy of bearing offspring had not a merciful God prepared means for direc ng her desires
to a higher good. When sympathy with the holy purposes of Christ is developed in the soul, natural desires will fall
into harmony with his will, and be laid at his feet. And the deepened piety of a mother tells most powerfully on the
subsequent nurture of her child.
1Sa 2:1 And Hannah prayed, and said, My heart rejoiceth in the LORD, mine horn is exalted in the LORD: my mouth is
enlarged over mine enemies; because I rejoice in thy salva on.
Hannah declares how, first, her heart, the center with the Hebrews, not merely of the physical, but also of the moral and intellectual life, rejoices in Jehovah; while the exalta on of her horn, the symbol of
strength and vigor, signifies that this inward joy is accompanied, or even occasioned, by the changed circumstances
of her outward lot. Her mouth, therefore, is opened wide over her enemies, yet not for cursing and in bi erness, but
20
for joyful praise of the God who has answered her prayers. It is his salva on, the being delivered by him, that makes
her thus burst forth into thanksgiving. It is a proof too of her faith and spirituality that she thus refers all to God. From
this prophe c element, common more or less to all the hymns of the Bible, most of them have been used in Chris an
worship, and s ll merit a place in it.
The facts implied and indicated in the song are—
1. Hannah’s deliverance from grief and realiza on of desire are perfected.
2. God is recognized as the author of the great salva on.
3. Under Divine inspira on Hannah sees in her own personal experience a type of various triumphs which God
achieves for his people.
4. She is conscious of an overwhelming joy in her own deliverance, and in the prevision of future triumphs of the
Church.
5. A clear and joyous recogni on of Christ’s final triumph as the climax of all. The burden of this glorious song is the
salva on wrought by God, and this may be considered as—
The term ”salva on” is very common in the Old Testament, and its applica on is ”exceeding broad,”
being inclusive of deliverance from evils and a realisa on of posi ve good. It may be applied to an episode
in personal experience, as in the case of Hannah, David, and others; a soul’s restora on to God through
Christ; a na on’s rescue from calamity and eleva on to rela ve influence, as when Israel was delivered
from the waters of the Red Sea, and later, from the Assyrian hosts; the deliverance of the Church from
persecu on, as in apostolic days and subsequently; and especially the comple on of Christ’s triumph
over all enemies and the gathering into one of the redeemed children of God - Pulpit Commentary
We have here the deeds and processes by which salva on in each instance is effected:
1. Mercy, as seen in compassion shown to the sorrowful and helpless.
2. Holiness, inasmuch as the salva on is wrought out against evil powers and persons, for only good and pure issues,
by exac ng and nourishing into maturity holy, unselfish mo ves, and ordaining suffering and deferred good only for
pure and blissful ends.
3. Power, demonstra ng that ”beside” him ”there is none,” as seen in complete control over the hidden forces of
Nature, and full realiza on of all that is promised.
4. Wisdom, counterac ng the devices of the proud, and causing the bi erest grief and protracted suffering to
contribute at last to depth and fulness of joy.
5. Faithfulness, unshaken and firm as a ”rock,” insuring that all the strength and wisdom of the Divine nature shall be
exercised for the final endowment of the covenant blessings.
21
Men are now intent on studying the material framework of the universe; the day will come
when the best minds will study with unbounded delight the perfec ons of God as seen in the restora on of spiritual
order, beauty, and joy out of the chaos of sin and sorrow.
1Sa 2:4 The bows of the mighty men are broken, and they that stumbled are girded with strength.
In na onal affairs. The strength of Egypt sinks in the sea; the helplessness of Israel puts on the strength of
God. The boas ul na ons that in pride of their resources set aside the prac ce of righteousness, one by one are
brought low by the corrup on concealed beneath their material splendour; while the feeble people who live in the
fear of God go from strength to strength, and ”delight themselves in the abundance of peace.”
1Sa 2:7 The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and li eth up.
Eli’s own sons, Priests to God, were not ac ng very priestly. they were taking the women that
came to the temple to pray and make sacrifice and they ”lay” with them. They took the por ons of the sacrifice
that were meant to go to God, and certainly all manner of things which were just plain wrong in the sight of God.
So God tells Eli, through a dream vision to the young Samuel, 1Sa 2:34 And this shall be a sign unto thee, that shall
come upon thy two sons, on Hophni and Phinehas; in one day they shall die both of them. that Eil’s sons, would die
in one day because of these sins. It was too late! But, this would not come about for some me, they would die in
the ”flower of their age. I have sons now, in the ’flower of their age”, you might say. I cannot even imagine the pain
losing them would cause, especially if it were because they were doing such bad things that they brought it upon
themselves, So, I can see, this is surely a lesson we should study, for our own and our family’s salva on.
1Sa 3:1 And the child Samuel ministered unto the LORD before Eli. And the word of the LORD was precious in
those days; there was no open vision.
Imagine, God was not talking to His priests or others, but for, it seems, Samuel, a child.
Not surprising when we read what was going on in those days (refer back to the book of Judges), the sons of Eli are
most probably given as examples of the general atmosphere of the area.
1Sa 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other mes, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered,
Speak; for thy servant heareth.
Most of the commentaries I read miss part of this. No ce the LORD CAME, and STOOD, and CALLED. The
presence is called, not hazon, a sight seen when in a state of ecstasy, but march, something seen when wide awake,
and in the full, calm possession of every faculty. So, much as with Moses perhaps, Samuel was in the Presence of the
Lord. And so Samuel, though fearful, relays the vision to Eli, and he said, It is the Lord; let him do what seemed him
22
good. And so their lives con nued, Samuel serving God, the sons of Eli shirking their priesthood by their ac ons, and
Eli, wai ng I am sure. 1Sa 3:20 And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established to be a
prophet of the LORD.
And the Lord would appear to Samuel again in Shiloh...
This is only a study guide and personal commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpreta on of the Bible. I have provided only a li le of my insight to these chapters, and they are not necessarily
always the best interpreta on for you. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit
are priority in interpreta on. You must not relinquish this to a commentator. You must always seek the truth in
scripture, take no man’s (or my) word for anything. For history proves the fickle nature we all possess. The only true
interpreta on of scripture is that of the writer…and you can Believe… 2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspira on
of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc on, for instruc on in righteousness:
Resources: My Primary resource is the King James Bible – Others include Print, online, and so ware commentaries and databases. Please see the resources in the le sidebar and the drop down menu for many addi onal
resources to assist you in your studies.
Isaiah 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line,
line upon line; here a li le, and there a li le; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and
taken.
Bible in a Year - 2 Apr 2015 - The Ark changes hands (2015-04-02 06:00)
23
TODAY IS 11 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR Passover falls on 14 Abib at evening followed by the
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of I Samuel Chapters 4-7
INTRODUCTION
You May wish to listen to this sermon: Consequences of viola ng God’s Holiness by Dr. Rhe Dodson from Sermon Audio
[audio
mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2006.10.29.AViola ng-Gods-Holiness-Dr.-Rhe -Dodson-1140691235.mp3”][/aud io]
The Israelites a acked the Philis nes, and were beaten . They then fetched the Ark of the
covenant into the camp according to the advice of the elders, that they might thereby make sure of the help of
the almighty covenant God; but in the engagement which followed they suffered a s ll greater defeat, in which Eli’s
sons fell and the ark was taken by the Philis nes .
• The aged Eli, horrified at such a loss, fell from his seat and broke his neck
• His daughter-in-law went into sudden labor, and died a er giving birth to a son
• With these occurrences the judgment began to burst upon the house of Eli. But the disastrous result of the war
was also to be a source of deep humilia on to all the Israelites.
• Not only were the people to learn that the Lord had departed from them, but Samuel also was to make the
discovery that the deliverance of Israel from the oppression and dominion of its foes was absolutely impossible
without its inward conversion to its God.
24
Now we see the Humilia on of the Philis nes by Means of the Ark of the Covenant
• Whilst the Israelites were mourning over the loss of the ark of God, the Philis nes were also to derive no
pleasure from their booty, but rather to learn that the God of Israel, who had given up to them His greatest
sanctuary to humble His own degenerate na on, was the only true God, beside Whom there were no other
gods.
• Not only was the principal deity of the Philis nes thrown down into the dust and dashed to pieces by the glory
of Jehovah; but the Philis nes themselves were so smi en, that their princes were compelled to send back the
ark into the land of Israel, together with a trespass-offering, to appease the wrath of God, which pressed so
heavily upon them.
We then have the return of the ark to the land of Israel,
• How the Philis nes dismissed it, by the advice of their priests with rich presents to the God of Israel, to make
an atonement for their sin
• yet with a project to bring it back, unless Providence directed the kine, contrary to their inclina on, to go to the
land of Israel
• How the Israelites entertained it.
– With great joy and sacrifices of praise
– With an over-bold curiosity to look into it, for which many of them were struck dead, the terror of which
moved them to send it forward to another city
To complete today’s reading we have,
• The eclipsing of the glory of the ark, by its privacy in Kirjath-jearim for many years
• The appearing of the glory of Samuel in his public services for the good of Israel, to whom he was raised up to
be a judge, and he was the last that bore that character.
This chapter gives us all the account we have of him when he was in the prime of his service; for what we had before
was in his childhood ; what we have of him a er was in his old age. We have him here ac ve,
• In the reforma on of Israel from their idolatry
• In the reviving of religion among them
• In praying for them against the invading Philis nes over whom God, in answer to his prayer, gave them a glorious
victory
• In erec ng a thankful memorial of that victory
• In the improvement of that victory
• In the administra on of jus ce
25
And these were the things for which God was preparing and designing him, in the early days of bestowing His grace
to him.
I Samuel Chapters 4-7
1Sa 4:1 And the word of Samuel came to all Israel. Now Israel went out against the Philis nes to ba le, and
pitched beside Ebenezer: and the Philis nes pitched in Aphek.
Samuel is no longer a child learning under the High Priest Eli. He is now nearing middle-age
and has earned a reputa on for himself. The people accepted that he was accurate and enlightened in manners
concerning the righteous judgments of the lands and so, ALL twelve tribes had come to consider Samuel a leader.
This is important to understand because prior to this, through the me of the Judges and before, in fact back to the
days of Moses, there had no been one other person aside from Moses who was the leader over all the tribes. Those
Judges we read about were only over por ons of the tribes, so this is a point to take note of.
HOWEVER; we also must note that as yet, Israel was s ll only a collec on of twelve individual, yet connected
tribes. They had no common King, and were not yet what would be considered a na on. The Philis nes, on the
other hand, had a King and a paid, full me, professional army. So we will see these rag-tag Israel farmer-mili a-men
confront the warrior tribes of their enemies.
So, WITHOUT apparently seeking advice from God, the Israelites decided it was me to rid the lands of the
Philis nes so they went against them in ba le, but were quickly overcome by the Philis nes and 4000 men died.
the leaders of the people or the elders,
Now, the survivors went running back to the priests,
and asked what ’had they done wrong’ because God had not been with them. Reading this we obviously see that
one thing was to move ahead with the war they desired instead of following the direc ons of what God wanted, but
apparently these people did not see this. So, the elders suggest they take the Ark of the Covenant into the ba le.
Surely with God they would win.
What is going on here? Well, the people wanted a defeat of the Philis nes. We are not given many specifics
of this par cular instance, but suffice it to say that perhaps the people had decided to FINALLY do God’s will; So,
be er late than never, right? Well, apparently not, but the elders figure they could ”force The Lord of Hosts” to go
with them into ba le if they took the Ark, the place where He ’rested’ in the tabernacle. WOW! Could that really be
what they thought for it certainly seems like it. So, the send the Ark into ba le and all the people cheer.
1Sa 4:5 And when the ark of the covenant of the LORD came into the camp, all Israel shouted with a great
shout, so that the earth rang again. Actually it was more like the blowing of the shofar. Listen to one, then imagine
hundreds of shofar being blown at once when the Ark arrived in the camp.
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/shofar.mp3”] [/audio]
Now, it is easy to understand the Philis nes reac on. They understood that the Gods of Israel had arrived.
26
1Sa 4:8 Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that
smote the Egyp ans with all the plagues in the wilderness.
Here we no ce something interes ng; they kept referring to the “gods” (plural) of Israel. The same gods who
had wrecked Egypt on behalf of these Hebrews. The word that is being translated as “gods” is elohim. Now most of
the me this is NOT translated as plural, but singular WHEN it is referring to the God of Israel. So how do we know
to translate this as “gods” and not “god” (one god) in this case? As always when in doubt, look at the context. When
a common foreigner is speaking about the Hebrew deity and the term elohim is used, it is to be thought of in the
common way of speaking among pagans and therefore indicates “mul ple gods”. On the other hand when a Hebrew
is speaking about the God of the Hebrews and u ers the word “elohim”, then it is in the gramma cal form called the
plural of majesty and it simply means “God”.
But, Why didn’t the Philis nes know that the Israelites worshiped ONLY ONE GOD? A er
all they had been living with or near the Israelites for some me, intermarrying with them, doing business with them.
So, what is up with this. And this is a point of this study. There was ample opportunity for the Philis nes to hear
about YHWH.
But, the people called Israel, God’s people, was by now so dysfunc onal and casual in their worship of Almighty God
that it made no impression on their neighbors. Instead of Israel influencing the Canaanites and the Philis nes, Israel
began to look a lot like the Canaanites and the Philis nes. Instead of the Philis nes fully understanding that the
Israelites recognized but one unique and all-powerful God, they saw nothing special or terribly different about how
Israel went about their religion; they looked pre y much like everybody else.
Idolatry was running rampant not just throughout the common folk of the 12 tribes but also their leadership
and even the Levite Priesthood. Remember the way Eli’s sons were behaving in the beginning of this book?
Remember the warning God sent to Eli about his sons, AND his own failure to correct them? And even if the
Levite Priesthood wasn’t necessarily directly worshiping other known dei es, they were abandoning Gods laws and
commands in favor of rituals and prac ces that they invented and preferred (and most of these were borrowed from
their Canaanite neighbors). I have to agree, again, with Tom Bradford when he explains:
Here’s another of those Old Testament happenings where we modern Believers tend to be a li le
arrogant and shake our heads in disgust at these awful Hebrews, while being u erly blind to the similarity
between that and many of our own prac ces within the modern Church. Naturally I’m generalizing and
in no way am I issuing some all-encompassing indictment. But as you surf the Internet or drive down the
streets of our communi es we’ll find Gay churches, churches that do not acknowledge the deity of Christ,
churches that scoff at a virgin birth or even the possibility of resurrec on, churches that preach that the
be-all end-all of our existence is for God to make us wealthy, and denomina ons who say that any kind of
faith in any kind of god is a good, respectable, and valid faith. If a non-Believer didn’t see us pull up into
the parking lot of a church building o en mes they’d have no idea we were any different than they are;
and that’s because they have influenced us far more than we have influenced them. We sure don’t read
of any Philis nes worshiping Yehoveh, or conver ng to become Hebrews, or even knowing much about
the Hebrew religion. But we see plenty of Hebrews adop ng the Philis ne religious system, marrying into
the Philis nes, and at the least being quite familiar and intrigued with the Philis ne gods. Not much new
under the sun, is there? - Tom Bradford
27
He goes on to explain in his sermon on this topic that many a wonderful theologian has no ced this a tude and
commented on this par cular passage of Scripture, but few as wonderfully and eloquently put as from an anonymous
contributor to the Berleburger Bible (a German transla on) from the early 1700’s:
“It is just the same now, when we take MERELY a historical Christ outside of us for our Redeemer. He must prove His
help chiefly internally by His Holy Spirit, to redeem us out of the hand of the Philis nes; though externally he must
not be thrown into the shade, as accomplishing our jus fica on. If we had not Christ, we could never stand. For there
is no help in heaven and on earth besides Him. But if we have Him in no other way than merely without (outside) of
us and under us, if we only preach about Him, teach, hear, read, talk, discuss, and dispute about Him, take His name
into our mouth, but will NOT let Him work and show His power in us, He will be of no more help to us than the Ark
helped the Israelites”.
But even more is this in the New Testament : Hebrews 5:11 We have much to say about this subject, but it is hard to
explain, because you have become sluggish in understanding. 12 For although by this me you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you the very first principles of God’s Word all over again! You need milk, not solid food!
13 Anyone who has to drink milk is s ll a baby, without experience in applying the Word about righteousness. 14 But
solid food is for the mature, for those whose facul es have been trained by con nuous exercise to dis nguish good
from evil.
So, the Israelites ba led the Philis nes and again lost, and even worse, their enemies captured
the Ark of the Covenant, the seat of the Lord of Hosts and it was now lost to them. This was absolutely a horrific
event. It meant that their God had le them. He had gone out from them. And when Eli heard the news that not only
had his two sons been killed but that the Ark had been captured, he fell over dead, as did his daughter-in-law who
went immediately into labor and delivered her child, her last breath giving his name as Ichabod, meaning the glory
is departed from us. 1Sa 4:22 And she said, The glory is departed from Israel: for the ark of God is taken. Imagine
knowing that on the day you were born GOD departed from your people, and each me your name is called or spoken
it is a reminder to the people of this fateful day.
The unthinkable had happened. To the people of Israel it meant that God was gone. And if
God was gone, then the guarantor of the Covenants was gone. And if the guarantor of the Covenants was gone then
the Covenants were no longer valid. And if the Covenants were no longer valid then all rights to their land inheritance
of Canaan ceased. Calamity is simply not a big enough word; the closest thing I can use as a parallel is to be thrown
into the Lake of Fire. In fact, in Jewish history, this event of the loss of the Ark of God to the Philis nes is thought
of as on par with the destruc on of Jerusalem and exile into Babylon. Every element of Hebrew society was either
affected or abolished.
1Sa 5:1 And the Philis nes took the ark of God, and brought it from Ebenezer unto Ashdod.
But as we read we discover that God, while not in the presence of His people, He was s ll working to bring about
His divine will. Let us not forget in all this that the Philis nes were idolaters and they had subtly been working all
along to undermine the faith and religious prac ces of the Israelites, if not on purpose, then by common agreements,
28
and apathy.
So, they now have the Ark of God in the Philis ne camp and the first thing they do is to offer it up to their god, Dagon, as a tribute for his helping them win. But. lo and behold, the next morning they find
their god, Dagon, laying on the floor at the foot of the Ark, in appearance, bowing to the Ark of the God of the Israelites. IMAGINE! But, they picked up Dagon and set everything to rights and le , only to find the next day that not
only had Dagon ”fallen” at the Ark of God, but that the hands and head were cut off. So, this li le box, The Ark of
the Covenant with the mercy seat of God Almighty, an inanimate object had caused their statue of Dagon, also only a
carved image in stone, to fall and break. Perhaps there really is a God ’si ng there’ and obviously He is not willing to
become the footstool of any ”stone” god. Oh, but HE told us that before, back in Sinai. too bad the Philis nes didn’t
know about that, and even sadder that none of the Israelites who lived among them had bothered to share.
But that’s not all! They were stricken with plagues. And they moved the Ark from city to city, but the people, hearing
of what is going on absolutely refuses to have the ”thing” anywhere near them. they begin demanding it be sent back
to the Israelites, but this would be unthinkable to the leaders of the Philis nes. It would be total humilia on, it didn’t
ma er that their people were suffering. 1Sa 5:12 And the men that died not were smi en with the emerods: and
the cry of the city went up to heaven.
Now there are a couple of things I wanted to point out.
1. The Ark is only an object, like the cross, and God does not reside in or with the Ark, as Jesus is not in or on the
cross.
2. In this case, God used the Ark as the first ”Trojan Horse” if you will, bringing destruc on on the Philis nes with
its arrival rather than destroying them at the hands of the Israelites. This was to teach the people, all the people
something.
3. God Almighty, YHWH, is the God over history. Not just Israel’s history but all of the history of mankind.
4. The God of Israel merely used their arrogance as a means to wreak havoc upon both the Israelites and the
Philis nes.
Now, it says that the Philis nes were smi en with the ”emerods”. Again I had to do a li le of research on this, but
according to Tom Bradford’s Torah lesson, well, here is what he offers:
What were these emrods or “tumors” in their private parts ? Well, if you compare various bible
transla ons you’ll find various solu ons. In Hebrew the word is ophalim, which can be translated as
“swellings”. Ophalim is from the root ophel that can mean mound or hill. In fact, in the Old City of
Jerusalem, the City of David was built up a steep hillside star ng from the bo om of a deep ravine. At the
highest point of the hill was Mt. Moriah and there the Temple was built. The area in between the City
of David and the Temple Mount was called the Ophel, the mound. Folk Tradi on changed meanings - So
these were some kind of swellings or mounds on the body. However over me the use of the word began
to change, and in me it referred to a part of the body that was considered a kind of swollen mound: the
bu ocks. They didn’t want to use the formal word for the bu ocks (they found it a bit crude) so instead
they began to refer to it as a person’s ophel. From this inference some scholars have decided that the
swelling, the tumor, was essen ally a painful swelling of a swelling: hemorrhoids. And you’ll perhaps find
that exact transla on in your own bible. I don’t think it’s correct, but it is kind of comical.
29
God’s Laws are ONLY for God’s elect
Another ques on is, How did the Philis nes handle the Ark if God instructed only certain Levites could even touch it.
We know that before men were killed just for pu ng a hand on it. What we MUST understand is that the Philis nes
(all non-believers) were not under the covenant and therefore not subject to it law. It is ONLY those who have accepted the covenant, (Jesus for us) that are bound by the law. So, the Philis nes were not subject to the same fates.
This does not mean, however, that the pagans were not subject to Jus ce. ALL MEN and women, shall be Judged.
The difference is that we have Jesus, our lawyer so to speak, and they stand before God alone and with no defense.
There is (in general) no requirement for a pagan to abide by the 10 Commandments. There is no requirement for
the heathen to avoid worshiping the heavenly bodies; in fact the Bible makes it clear that the Lord put those luminaries in the sky just for that purpose. The Torah, the Law, Jesus Christ (and all the covenants of God with humans) are
ONLY for those with whom He has His covenant. And the ONLY people He has EVER created a covenant with were the
Hebrews, but He did make provision that those gen les who wished to join themselves to Israel’s covenants made
with Israel’s God would be accepted into the Kingdom of God. Un l Jesus’s day that joining had to be a physical joining,
usually accompanied with a pledge of na onal allegiance to Israel, even involving circumcision if the foreign convert
was a male. But since Jesus the joining with Israel’s covenants by an outsider is a be er joining, a spiritual joining, by
means of faith in the Jewish Messiah (Jesus of Nazareth).
1Sa 6:1 And the ark of the LORD was in the country of the Philis nes seven months.
Seven is the number of comple on in the bible, so in those seven months, GOD did what he planned to do with
the Philis nes. They apparently had knowledge of the events in Egypt almost 400 years earlier, and now the people
pleaded with the leaders not to harden their hearts like Pharaoh had or else they too would fall into ruin. So, they
knew the history, but were they simply like us, relega ng the stories (as yet mostly only oral) to the annals of myth? It
seems so, for I see no indica on before the plagues come that they thought this God of the Hebrews was either real,
or special, or powerful, or anything more than the many gods they were used to.
1Sa 6:6 Wherefore then do ye harden your hearts, as the Egyp ans and Pharaoh hardened their hearts? when he
had wrought wonderfully among them, did they not let the people go, and they departed?
It is interes ng to note that they had some understanding of the Hebrew sacrificial system, or
at least had someone to consult, as is evidenced by the manner in which they chose to return the Ark to the Hebrews.
No ce also that they contrived a ”sure test” by choosing ”kine” or cows to pull the cart. That they were young mothers
(who would not willingly leave their calves) and that they had never been yoked (pulled a cart) was a sure sign that if
they managed to pull the cart straight back to the Hebrews it MUST be interven on from God. And of course....they
did, making a bee line for the Hebrew town of Beth-shemesh. Beth-shemesh means House of the Sun and it is one of
the 48 ci es of the Levites men oned in the book of Joshua.
Well, the people our in the fields harves ng the wheat were obviously overjoyed. But, they were so overcome that
they forgot to give the due reverence to the Ark. God killed the men. Now, it says 50,070 men were killed, but according to Jewish tradi on and other resources, it was probably more like 70 men. This is due to first, a probable
transla on error as le ers stand for numbers in Hebrew, and second the city of Beth-shemesh itself would not have
been anywhere near big enough to have such a popula on.
Also, the text says in some versions 5 gold ephods and 5 gold mice. Based on the Original Jewish Bible and the
Hebrew transla ons this should most likely read 5 gold ”lumps” in the shape of rodents. This would be one large
30
rodent shaped lump of gold for each of the 5 Philis ne towns, which would be more in line with the mes and
customs.
1Sa 6:20 And the men of Bethshemesh said, Who is able to stand before this holy LORD God?
and to whom shall he go up from us? It seems that the people, upon seeing the Ark being returned had forgo en
the laws of the care and transport of the Ark as given by Moses. They perhaps had even forgo en how to look them
up, it seems. So, they had to call on Kirjathjearim’s priests to come get and take care of the ark. This seems just
another indica on of how far Israel had fallen from where they were when they entered this land God had set aside
for them. The point is that un l David became King and sent for the Ark and established a whole new sanctuary in
Jerusalem, several decades passed where some kind of contrived system of Hebrew holy sites, and sanctuaries, and
altar loca ons existed as the 12 tribes couldn’t agree on much of anything and the Levites seemed to have li le to
no power to force their will upon the tribes. The Law of Moses existed in name only for Israel.
While these verses don’t specifically say that this man name Avinadav and his son Elazar were authorized
Levite Priests, later biblical genealogies show that not only was Avinadav’s son Eleazar a priest, but that he had two
more sons Uzzah and Ahio who were also priests. There can be no doubt that Avinadav was a recognized Levite
Priest at this me.
1Sa 7:2 And it came to pass, while the ark abode in Kirjathjearim, that the me was long; for it was twenty
years: and all the house of Israel lamented a er the LORD.
So, now they had their Ark back, but we see that for 20 years they lamented, or cried, to God. From the text
we see that they had not repented with all their hearts, and so, God simply was not paying any a en on. Finally,
a er 20 years Samuel, now having been their leader for many years, instructed them as to what they needed to do
and so, they complied, serving only the LORD God.
Over a period of years the people of Israel were beginning to feel the distance between
them and God; they could inwardly sense that they were isolated in some way from God. I doubt they could have
put it into words, anymore than we can when we find ourselves in this situa on, and they apparently didn’t know
how to move this beyond a sense of longing, a mere emo on. Something is just missing, not right. But Samuel, God’s
prophet, said that IF they really wanted to repair the rela onship with their God then two things was of immediate
importance: they had to take physical ac on AND they had to take mental ac on.
This is important to take note: In ancient mes (the en re bible era, Old and New Testament) the heart was
thought to be the center of conscious thought. The heart was more or less seen then as how we today think of
the brain. But due to the later Greek and Roman influences, the heart (in Western culture at least) came to be a
metaphorical associa on with feelings, emo ons. In the bible the heart has nothing to do with emo ons, it means
“mind”.
But what we witness at this point in the book of 1st Samuel is also the next stage of the God-pa ern that was
so well established during the period of the Judges: faithfulness to God, followed by apostasy, followed by oppression of God’s followers by the enemy, followed by repentance, culmina ng in deliverance.
31
PLEASE Listen to the teaching by Tom Bradford gives a very good explana on of this chapter.
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/DTCwk10.mp3” ][/audio]
So, the Ark was returned to the people of Israel, and once again they repented and turned back to God. 1Sa
7:15 And Samuel judged Israel all the days of his life.
Prac cal lessons:—
• We should seek self-knowledge if we would avoid errors in conduct and make the best use of a Chris an life.
• When the results of effort are not sa sfactory, strict a en on should be given to causes within self.
• When cons tu onal or acquired weakness is discovered, it may be counteracted by a care to exercise as much
as possible the opposite posi ve virtue.
• Let us keep watch over the first risings of a spirit of levity.
• Cul vate in young and old, by all conceivable means, reverence for all things connected with the worship of
God.
• Remember that the severity of God is really mercy to his creatures as a whole.
• It is very useful in private, domes c, and Church life occasionally to take a solemn review, with appropriate
religious exercise, of progress made, and of what God has done for us.
• We should study more carefully the forma ve power of a frequent considera on of the mercies of God.
• When engaged in actual religious work and worship to which God has clearly called us, we may be certain that
our general interests will not be allowed to suffer from the hand of enemies, seen or unseen.
• If we honor God to the extent of our spiritual a ainments, power will come for doing him s ll greater honor.
This is a full- me work of service to God’s word of Truth. This site is for the Glory of God and NOT for Profit.
Any dona ons to sustain this work are appreciated. I do not adver se or sell on this site. Period. If these posts have
helped you won’t you help me keep this site going? No obliga on, no requests for ’membership’, nothing to have to
sign up for, just your pocket change, a couple of dollars, can go a long way to keeping this site live. I THANK YOU, and
may God bless your gi .
Por ons of this post adapted from the Torah Class Teachings of Tom Bradford
32
Bible in a Year - 3 Apr 2015 - We want a King! (2015-04-03 06:00)
TODAY IS 13 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR Passover falls on 14 Abib at evening followed by the
Feast of Unleavened Bread 15 - 21 Abib and concluding with the Day of First-fruits on 22 Abib.
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
33
Please READ or Listen to the Book of I Samuel Chapters 8-10 and chapter 11
Before we get started PLEASE Listen to this teaching by Tom Bradford. He lays out some vital informa on we all
need to understand. It is the best I have found thus far. I would tle this ”Opening the can of worms”.
[audio
ng-a-Can-of-Worms.mp3”][/audio]
mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/DTCwk12-Openi
INTRODUCTION
• Because of the ill government of Samuel’s sons, the Israelites ask fora king;
• Samuel praying in grief, is comforted by God; He tells the manner of a king;
• God wills Samuel to yield unto the importunity of the people.
• Then: Saul despairing to find his father’s asses, by the counsel of his servant, and at the direc on of some young
maidens, according to God’s revela on, comes to Samuel;
• Samuel entertains Saul at the feast;
• Samuel, a er secret communica on, brings Saul on his way.
• Samuel anoints Saul;
• He confirms him by predic on of three signs;
• Saul’s heart is changed, and he prophesies;
• He conceals the ma er of the kingdom from his uncle;
• Saul is chosen at Mizpeh by lot;
• The different affec ons of his subjects.
• Nahash offers them of Jabesh-gilead a reproachful condi on;
• They send messengers, and are delivered by Saul;
• Saul thereby is confirmed, and his kingdom renewed.
1Sa 8:5 And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us
like all the na ons.
I Samuel Chapters 8-10 and chapter 11
• Rule number 1: God is Always Right...
• Rule number 2: when in doubt refer back to rule number 1
34
No, I am not making a joke. This is what we should think any me we come up against any controversy. I hope you listened to the audio I have included on this page. It will, I hope, open you up to the word of God,
apart from any preconceived no ons you have assimilated over your life me. I know it has helped me quite a bit.
So, we open with an aged Samuel who has now appointed his sons as judges over Israel. Recall that
at this point, ALL of the tribes deferred to Samuel’s leadership. But, like with Eli, Samuel’s sons were not following
God’s commands. They were taking bribes and perver ng judgments. lucre from H1215 betsa‛ beh’-tsah ; plunder;
by extension gain (usually unjust): - covetousness, (dishonest) gain, lucre, profit. Essentually this is saying ’ill go en
gain’.
1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted a er, they have erred from the
faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
And so the people come and demand a King, like those of the other na ons. 1Sa 8:5 And said unto him, Behold,
thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the na ons. This is the pivotal
u erance that so offended God.And so Samuel, in his sorrow, takes the ma er to God. And God instructs him to
first warn the people, Be careful what you wish for, and then God tells Samuel to give them what they want. And so
unfolds the story of the soon to be appointed King Saul. Samuel too was offended, but he was shown that it was not
him but God that the people were rejec ng.
• 1st, these men were insinua ng that Samuel could no longer handle his du es to lead Israel and so he felt
rejected a er all these years of serving his fellow Hebrews and pu ng them before himself.
• 2nd, these men didn’t want Samuel’s sons to lead them and so his family’s influence would end upon his death.
And
• 3rd, these leaders wanted to adopt a whole new form of governance that used their heathen neighbors as its
model. As a prophet of God this greatly troubled Samuel.
1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they
say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
But lets look at what God told Samuel to warn the people about concerning a human king. first, by demanding a
human king, the people were in effect abandoning God. This is not to say they no longer believed, but that their faith
was now in a human king. Thus the commandments, already in many aspects being ignored by a majority in favor of
adap ng to the surrounding cultures (idolatry for example), and now they were telling Samuel, and God, that they
did not want God to be their king, their leader. So we have a list of things that God forewarns the people to expect
from a human king. Among these things are:
• This human King would take their sons and appoint them for himself, - to work for him
35
• He would appoint rulers oven them and command them to ”reap his harvest” and to make tools of war and
transporta on (hard labor, or work for li le pay)
• He would take the daughters to work for him as house maids
• He will take the ’fruit our your labors’ and give it to his servants
• He will collect taxes ( a 10th of seed) to pay his servants
• He will take the best of your young men and women and put them to work for him, (including sending them to
war)
• He will take a tenth of your sheep ( your livelihood) and make you his servants
1Sa 8:18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not
hear you in that day.
Now when I read this por on I have to say, What Have We Done to ourselves, for today all
this has mul plied and whether we know it or not, we are in even worse condi on that those ancient Hebrews. Now,
(if you listened to the audio) you should begin to understand that while many claim this is a contradic on, God approves of Israel having a king, or God doesn’t. Did God change His mind? No, he has not. What we are reading here is
that God gave the children of Israel what they wanted, not because he changed His mind, but because, first, I believe
God was somewhat fed-up with the cycles of the faithfulness and apostasy of these people, and Second, I see a loving
father giving in to something He understands is a bad thing, in order to teach His children a lesson.
Think of it this way. As a parent we warn our children about many things. Let’s take the issue of strangers for an example. We tell our children not to talk to strangers. We warn and warn. Perhaps we even punish a child found talking to
a stranger we see as dangerous. The child simply does not listen to us. Perhaps, when we are looking, they obey, but
then, when the get a li le older and are out of our sight, they begin associa ng with people who are strangers (to the
beliefs of your household). These strangers introduce things that are bad for our child’s health and safety. Perhaps
just drinking, or perhaps drugs, or maybe it is fast cars, or shopli ing for fun.
Now, we would naturally con nue to try to warn the child, perhaps bailing them out or nursing
them through a hangover, or whatever, but at some point we will tell them, if you con nue to do this, I cannot be
there to help you when trouble comes. And so, when they face the consequences of their ac ons we are helpless to
do anything. They made a choice.
I know this feeling well. I have had this happen with my children, and the consequences cost one child four years of
his life behind bars, and I have friends whose children are on a fast track to an early grave because they refuse to
listen. But the point is that some mes, a parent, God our Father, must allow us to go in the direc on we chose even
though He knows the outcome. Thus, God agreed to have Samuel appoint a king over the people. He did not change
His mind, He is (and I use the present tense on purpose) allowing His children to learn a lesson the hard way.
1Sa 8:22 And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the
men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.
God was to be their spiritual king, judge, law giver, protector, sustainer, deliverer, and more. Everything that
Israel needed God was prepared to provide. The other na ons (by defini on, all gen le na ons) did not have this
advantage; they were on their own. They reaped whatever their human hands sowed. But now a goodly por on of
God’s own people were ready to exchange perfect divine glory for status in the eyes of the world as defined by the
36
world.
And so unfolds the selec on of Saul. He was of the tribe of Benjamin, the son of Kish a
powerful man. Now here I will interject, recall we learned that the tribe of Benjamin was one of those who did not
drive out the people from the promised land as God commanded. They had assimilated into the culture of those
whom they were to have eliminated. They were prac cing pagan customs and all manner of perversions in the sight
of God. But from this ’bad seed’ God chooses a leader for the people.
1Sa 9:2 And he had a son, whose name was Saul, a choice young man, and a goodly: and there was not
among the children of Israel a goodlier person than he: from his shoulders and upward he was higher than any of
the people.
He was tall and a rac ve. How o en, especially in the days since the advent of broadcast television, have we
chosen leaders because of how they looked, rather than because of their character? Here is a li le trivia. Did you
know that of all the presidents elected since television began broadcas ng the elec on race have been the taller of
the two candidates? (I read this years ago in conjunc on with a paper I did for college - much to my surprise).
So, God sent Saul to Samuel by way of a task given by his father. He was sent to find some
missing livestock and his search took him quite some way. When asking for direc ons to someone (a seer) who could
help him, he was brought into the presence of Samuel just when God had told Samuel He would send someone to
be king. 1Sa 9:15-16 Now the LORD had told Samuel in his ear a day before Saul came, saying, To morrow about this
me I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be captain over my people
Israel, that he may save my people out of the hand of the Philis nes: for I have looked upon my people, because
their cry is come unto me.
Keep in mind, this is the kind of King the people wanted, but NOT the one God wanted for them. But, as in
my example above, God relented and allowed His children to get what they wished for. So Samuel shares a meal
with Saul, and as he was preparing to go about his business, Samuel tells him to send his servant ahead.
1Sa 9:27 And as they were going down to the end of the city, Samuel said to Saul, Bid the servant pass on before us, (and he passed on,) but stand thou s ll a while, that I may shew thee the word of God.
So Samuel tells Saul things that will come about on his journey. He anoints Saul with oil and sends him on his
way. Saul is looking for these things to come about because Samuel has told him 1Sa 10:6 And the Spirit of the LORD
will come upon thee, and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into another man. 1Sa 10:9 And it was
so, that when he had turned his back to go from Samuel, God gave him another heart: and all those signs came to
pass that day.
So when Saul returned home he prophesied and astonished the people. Meanwhile, Samuel was preparing the
people.
37
1Sa 10:19 And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversi es and your
tribula ons; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before the
LORD by your tribes, and by your thousands.
And so once again, as in the wilderness, the tribes gathered and were divided by tribes and by families. From
the tribe of Benjamin Saul’s father was not found, so he was sent for. And among this family stood Saul. He stood, a
newly called prophet of God. He stood, head and shoulders above all the others.
1Sa 10:24 And Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the LORD hath chosen, that there is none like
him among all the people? And all the people shouted, and said, God save the king.
But not everyone was elated. So we are told that the children of Belial despised him and did not pay tribute
to him. But Saul held his tongue. And so we read now of the assembly of Israel’s army.
The Ammonites were bad neighbors to those tribes of Israel that lay next them, though descendants from just
Lot, and, for that reason, dealt civilly with by Israel.Some of the tribes being threatened by the Ammonites, the
people turn to Saul for guidance and help. And so he sends a message to all the tribes telling them that they
would assemble and help or their ca le would be destroyed. And so they did and the men of the threatened city,
Jabeshgilead, had help in the form of an army of over 300,000 men assembled form all the tribes under the orders
of Saul.
Jephthah, in his me, had humbled them, but now the sin of Israel had put them into a capacity to make head again, and avenge that quarrel. The city of Jabesh-Gilead had been, some ages ago, destroyed by
Israel’s sword of jus ce, for not appearing against the wickedness of Gibeah (Jdg _21:10); and now being replenished
again, probably by the posterity of those that then escaped the sword, it is in danger of being destroyed by the
Ammonites, as if some bad fate a ended the place. Nahash, king of Ammon (1Ch _19:1) laid siege to it.
• The besieged beat a parley : “Make a covenant with us, and we will surrender upon terms, and serve thee.” They
had lost the virtue of Israelites, else they would not have thus lost the valor of Israelites, nor tamely yielded to
serve an Ammonite, without one bold struggle for themselves.
– Had they not broken their covenant with God, and forsaken his service, they needed not to have courted
a covenant with a Gen le na on, and offered themselves to serve them.
• The besiegers offer them base and barbarous condi ons; they will spare their lives, and take them to be their
servants, upon condi on that they shall put out their right eyes,
– The Gileadites were content to part with their liberty and estates for the ransom of their blood; and, had
the Ammonites taken them at their word, the ma er would have been so se led immediately, and the
Gileadites would not have sent out for relief. But their abject concessions make the Ammonites more
insolent in their demands, and they cannot be content to have them for their servants, but,
1. They must torment them, and put them to pain, exquisite pain, for so the thrus ng out of an eye would do.
38
2. They must disable them for war, and render them incapable, though not of labor (that would have been a loss to
their lords), yet of bearing arms; for in those mes they fought with shields in their le hands, which covered their
le eye, so that a soldier without his right eye was in effect blind.
3. They must put a reproach upon all Israel, as weak and cowardly, that would suffer the inhabitants of one of their
chief ci es to be thus miserably used, and not offer to rescue them.
• The besieged desire, and obtain, seven days’ me to consider of this proposal, If Nahash had not granted them
this respite, we may suppose the horror of the proposal would have made them desperate, and they would
rather have died with their swords in their hands than have surrendered to such merciless enemies: therefore
Nahash, not imagining it possible that, in so short a me, they should have relief, and being very secure of the
advantages he thought he had against them, in a bravado gave them seven days, that the reproach upon Israel,
for not rescuing them, might be the greater, and his triumphs the more illustrious. But there was a providence
in it, that his security might be his infatua on and ruin.
• No ce is sent of this to Gibeah. They said they would send messengers to all the coasts of Israel, which made
Nahash the more secure, for he thought, it would be a work of me, and none would be forward to appear if
they did not have one common head; and perhaps Nahash had not yet heard of the new-elected king. But the
messengers, either of their own accord or by order from their masters, went straight to Gibeah, and, not finding
Saul within, told their news to the people, who fell a weeping upon hearing it. They would sooner lament their
brethren’s misery and danger than think of helping them, shed their tears for them than shed their blood. They
wept, as despairing to help the men of Jabesh-Gilead, and fearing lest, if that fron er-city should be lost, the
enemy would penetrate into the very bowels of their country, which now appeared in great hazard.
1Sa 11:11 And it was so on the morrow, that Saul put the people in three companies; and they
came into the midst of the host in the morning watch, and slew the Ammonites un l the heat of the day: and it came
to pass, that they which remained were sca ered, so that two of them were not le together.
And some went to Samuel and demanded that the men that chose Saul be put to death, but Saul said that this would
not happen because the Lord had brought the salva on in Israel. And so Samuel tells the people to go to Gilgal and
renew the kingdom.
1Sa 11:15 And all the people went to Gilgal; and there they made Saul king before the LORD in Gilgal; and there
they sacrificed sacrifices of peace offerings before the LORD; and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly.
God-principle: there are some things that we choose that amount to a direct rejec on of the Lord and are so offensive to Him that He will allow us to live with our consequences more or less permanently. Don’t expect Him to fix
it; go to the king you preferred and chose over Him. Now that the direc on has been set and there is no use belaboring the point.
39
Links to my Contact Page for More Info
This is a full- me work of service to God’s word of Truth. This site is for the Glory of God and NOT for Profit. Any
dona ons to sustain this work are appreciated. I do not adver se or sell on this site. Period. If these posts have
Bible in a Year - 4 Apr 2015 - A King over Israel (2015-04-04 06:00)
40
Levi cus 23:5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’S passover.
TODAY IS 14 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR Passover begins at evening today. Ma hew 26:18 And he said, Go into the
city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My me is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with
my disciples.
It is followed by the Feast of Unleavened Bread 15 Abib – 21 and concluding with the Day of First-fruits on 22 Abib.
If you wish to celebrate Passover and the Feast of unleavened Bread this year you may wish to read: Easter or PassoverWhen was the Crucifixion? ; New to Celebra ng Passover? ; and Food and Feast of Passover
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of I Samuel Chapters 12-14
You May wish to listen to this sermon by Pastor Jonathan Stobbs en tled ”The Damage of Disobedience” from sermonaudio.
41
[audio
mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2009.01.04.EThe-Damage-of-Disobedience-Pastor-Jonathan-Stobbs-150925620.mp3”] [/audio]
INTRODUCTION
Recall: 1Sa 11:15 And all the people went to Gilgal; and there they made Saul king before the LORD in Gilgal; and
there they sacrificed sacrifices of peace offerings before the LORD; and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced
greatly. This is the end of the era of the Judges and the Beginning of the era of the Kings.
Here we have Samuel’s speech to the people, when he resigned the government into the hands of Saul, in which,
• He clears himself from all suspicion or imputa on of mismanagement, while the administra on was in his hands
• He reminds them of the great things God had done for them and for their fathers
• He sets before them good and evil, the blessing and the curse (
• He awakens them to regard what he said to them, by calling to God for thunder
• He encourages them with hopes that all should be well
This is his farewell sermon to that august assembly and Saul’s corona on sermon.
Those that desired a king like all the na ons fancied that, when they had one, they should look very great and considerable; but in this chapter we find it proved much otherwise. While Samuel was joined in commission with Saul
things went well. But, now that Saul began to reign alone, all went to decay, and Samuel’s words began to be fulfilled:
“You shall be consumed, both you and your king;” for never was the state of Israel further gone in a consump on than
in this chapter.
• Saul appears here a very silly prince.
– He was Infatuated in his counsels
– Invaded by his neighbors
– Deserted by his soldiers
– Disordered in his own spirit, and sacrificing in confusion
– Chided by Samuel
– Rejected of God from being king
• II. The people appear hear a very miserable people.
– Disheartened and dispersed
– Diminished
– Plundered
– Disarmed
This they got by cas ng off God’s government, and making themselves like the na ons: all their glory departed from
them.
42
We le the host of Israel in a very ill posture; we see in them no wisdom, nor strength, nor goodness, to give us
ground to expect any other than that they should all be cut off by the army of the Philis nes; yet here we find that
infinite power which works without means, and that infinite goodness which gives without merit, glorified in a happy
turn to their affairs, that s ll Samuel’s words may be made good: “The Lord will not forsake his people, for his great
name’s sake,”. In this chapter we have,
• The host of the Philis nes trampled upon, and triumphed over, by the faith and courage of Jonathan, who
unknown to his father , with his armor-bearer only, made a brave a ack upon them, encouraging himself in the
Lord his God
• He challenged them , and, upon their acceptance of the challenge, charged them with such fury, or rather such
faith, that he put them to flight, and set them one against another , which gave opportunity to Saul and his
forces, with other Israelites, to follow the blow, and gain a victory
• The host of Israel troubled and perplexed by the rashness and folly of Saul, who adjured the people to eat no
food ll night, which
– 1. Brought Jonathan to a praemunire (praemunire facias was a law which prohibited the asser on or maintenance of papal jurisdic on, imperial or foreign, or some other alien jurisdic on or claim of supremacy)
– 2. Was a tempta on to the people, when the me of their fast had expired, to eat with the blood,
• Jonathan’s error, through ignorance, had like to have been his death, but the people rescued him
In the close we have a general account of Saul’s exploits and of his family .
I Samuel Chapters 12-14
1Sa 12:2 And now, behold, the king walketh before you: and I am old and grayheaded; and, behold, my sons are
with you: and I have walked before you from my childhood unto this day.
Despite the divine providence and unseen holy guidance that shapes history and pushes forward
God’s redemp ve agenda, it is all miraculously carried out within the free will of humans (both evil and righteous).
And because this is the case it necessarily happens that human beings make decisions and choices in the context of
our own lives and daily circumstances, guided by the will of God, that some mes will bring us to ruin, and at other
mes bring about success. We cannot see the bigger picture. The biggest difference between one person and another
is not, therefore whether they are ’evil’ or ’good’ but whether they obey God.
When I was told my teaching posi on was being eliminated, I was devastated. I felt as if God had ripped my heart
out. But I understand now, that He had something else for me to do. He had put me in that teaching posi on to
reach someone, perhaps only one student. But now that was done and it was me to move on. It quickly began to
be apparent, at least in part, what God was doing in my life. I am so grateful that I had the faith to follow where He
was leading me. I cannot know if or how long God will guide me in this current ”job” but while I am here I will do my
best to listen and follow His lead.
It is important for the student of the Bible to understand : when the term Israel is used it MUST be used in the context
43
of me. Israel began as merely one man’s name (Jacob’s new name), then it became a clan, a er centuries in Egypt
the clan grew large enough to be seen as a separate people (meaning an separate ethnic group), then as each of
Jacob’s sons’ families grew large they were each given tribal status, then at Sinai God pronounced the tribes (when
taken together) to be a na on set apart for Him. However from a human government standpoint, as of 1st Samuel
chapter 11, the 12 tribe conglomerate did not hold a “na on” status. Na on status was probably the primary goal of
the northern alliance of Israelite tribes in they’re demand for a king; they greatly desired for their gen le neighbors
to regard them as a na on. As far as anyone knew in that era, in order to be considered a legi mate na on one had
to have a king. Otherwise you were just a tribe or an alliance of tribes and clans and families; without an iden fiable
and accepted central government there was no na on. (as explained by Tom Bradford)
These leaders felt that Israel was in big trouble and needed a military leader (a king) to protect them. So, the people now had the human King they wanted. The people are beginning to understand what they
had done, but it is too late. They have to admit that Samuel had never done any wrong to the people, but in their
zealous desire to be more like the gen le na ons surrounding them, they have snubbed their noses at God. But Now,
God has answered their demands for a human King to rule them, and so, the saga begins. But Samuel reminds the
people that while they have turned against God, But God is s ll their God and faithful so that IF they will turn back
and serve HIM and Him alone, 1Sa 12:24 Only fear the LORD, and serve him in truth with all your heart: for consider
how great things he hath done for you. then He will con nue to bless them through the kings, but 1Sa 12:25 But if
ye shall s ll do wickedly, ye shall be consumed, both ye and your king. IF they con nue on the path they have been
following then, well, they will end up as we are now, in a corrupt world, where the evils in the hearts of man con nue
con nuously. Therefore, a new covenant, of sorts, is entered into. However, their downfall, as we know in history,
would be complete, so far as to deny Jesus ’the Messiah’ in favor of keeping their tradi ons.
It is impossible for me to bypass this passage without a comment on a dangerous and erroneous
doctrine that is prevalent in Chris anity and has weakened and harmed us terribly; the doctrine that says
that Chris ans should have no fear of God since we bear no divine consequences for our rebellion and
sin. And this is because Yeshua has already paid for it all. This is the doctrine that says that God loves us
so much on account of Christ that He will not ever act against us; God will not discipline or punish you
IF you are redeemed, no ma er how great your rebellion and sin. Folks that simply doesn’t bear up to
what we just read or to the Biblical pa ern or to what the New Testament says. Over and over in the
Tanach we find the Lord punishing His people usually NOT with eternal separa on (not a cancella on of
their redemp on) but rather by using His (and by defini on Israel’s) enemies as a means to punish and
discipline. Typically Israel was punished for its transgressions by means of foreign oppression, but on a
couple of occasions that oppression rose to downright exile. –Torah Studies by Tom Bradford
Romans 11:22 ”Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee,
goodness, if thou con nue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.”
So, we should also note that Instead of being the visible poli cal and military leader of Israel, Samuel was now the
power behind the throne. Not only had he publicly anointed Saul as Israel’s first king but he also made it clear that
the new protocol for governing Israel was that Samuel would retain spiritual authority; he would pray and intercede
for the people; and he would present God’s direc ons and oracles to King Saul. This role included calling Saul on
the carpet (on God’s behalf) if need be. Samuel was essen ally defining the new role of the Prophet that would be
44
u lized all throughout the era of the Kings. And a Prophet would become as official an office in Israel as was king or
High Priest.
The ramifica ons of the people essen ally replacing the Judge Samuel with the King Saul was that they rejected
God’s form of government and administra on of jus ce in favor of one the people invented and preferred; one that
was modeled a er their gen le (pagan) neighbors. There was no returning to the “good old’ days” of the Judges, and
that the Lord saw what they had done in demanding a king as wickedness and rebellion, the logical ques on on their
minds was, “what now?”
Levi cus 23:5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’S passover.
What now? This concern is one that many of us may be confronted with right this very minute thinking: I have done
such evil in my life, even doing great evil as a redeemed person who knows Jesus as my Savior, how can God s ll love
me? Why would the Lord s ll put up with me? How can it possibly be that in this seemingly bo omless pit of diminished circumstances in which I now find myself (circumstances caused by my own destruc ve behavior and a tude),
that I have any reason for hope? Hope for a be er future or even hope for a restored rela onship with God?
And here is Samuel’s (God’s) answer to this humanly insolvable dilemma: “just don’t turn away from following God;
serve Him with all of your heart.” Today is the Passover as appointed by God. It is the day Chris ans should mark as
the day of the crucifixion of Jesus, and an appointment to turn back to God, and to once again obey Him, and walk
with HIM in our lives. It is not yet too late. God is wai ng for us. John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
God merely says, “Come home”. Grace. Come home, the door’s open. But you must come home on God’s terms, not
yours’.
KJV says that a er only two years we see Saul choosing 3000 men of Israel to man an army against the Philis nes.
The fact is that we don’t really know Saul’s age, but we do know that he had a grown son, Jonathan. He was probably
about 40 or older. There are no other ancient documents that give his age. The inser on of ”2 years” here is a modern
inser on. What is important is to know is that he is a grown, mature man, not a youngster. So, 1Sa 13:2 Saul chose
him three thousand men of Israel; whereof two thousand were with Saul in Michmash and in mount Bethel, and a
thousand were with Jonathan in Gibeah of Benjamin: and the rest of the people he sent every man to his tent.
The Philis nes were growing more powerful and had regained a foothold in Israel’s land holdings. Samuel had pushed
them back and struck them down hard enough to put a crimp in their plans of expansion, some years earlier. But
if the Philis nes were going to expand their sphere of influence it was going to be to the east, because they were
currently occupying mainly a strip of land along the Mediterranean Sea Coast. That was nice; they were seafarers and
sea merchants. But in order to have something to export, and a place to sell what they could buy from the incoming
ships, they needed land trade routes and all the land was to the east: Canaan. They really weren’t interested in adding
Israel’s land holdings (Canaan) to what they currently occupied, but they did want to lord over many areas in Canaan,
control the people, and have access to farm produce and labor, and the crisscrossing trade routes as a means to build
their wealth.
King Saul s ll did not have a professional standing army. His army was a mili a that served according to each tribal
45
leader’s whim and benefit. Many of the tribes and clans cut their own deals with the Philis nes so that not being
harmed was perhaps their main benefit. If a Hebrew soldier couldn’t see what was in it for him or his family or tribe
he wasn’t very interested in pu ng his life on the line for King Saul.
As much as history changes, the ways of men never change. As it is in most socie es while the
leadership might be anxious to make war for one cause or another the people usually aren’t (even when, perhaps,
they ought to be).
We only have to look at the 20th century, ( and even the world today) to see how long tyrants with world domina on
in mind were allowed to run amok before the more powerful na ons could muster the poli cal will to oppose them.
And even then the people were reluctant and all through the wars vocal opposi on con nued. So it was in the days
of Saul. Saul needed a cause to rally the people to him. Sound familiar?
1Sa 13:7 And some of the Hebrews went over Jordan to the land of Gad and Gilead. As for Saul, he was yet in Gilgal,
and all the people followed him trembling.
Now the rest of the people had hidden themselves in the caves and rocks, thickets and high places. They were in fear
of the gathering Philis ne armies. They were grossly outnumbered and besides they had nothing to even fight with.
We will see that the Philis nes had managed to prevent the Hebrews from even being able to sharpen the tools they
had unless they went to the blacksmiths of the Philis nes.
Note: “as many as the grains of sand on the seashore”, this is but hyperbole. It is a Middle Eastern saying that means
“a large number”. It doesn’t mean infinite or beyond the ability of our number system to count. It just is trying to
communicate a large but undefined or unknown quan ty.
Only a Levite Priest was allowed to offer the sacrifice
King Saul demonstrates here his casual disregard for God’s commands and ritual protocols. The ONLY Israelites legally
allowed to offer sacrifices were the priests; not even the Levite workers were allowed to do this. Certainly no king
(the poli cal leadership) was allowed such a high privilege. Remember seven is a number of divine completeness
indica ng this was a divine commission, but Saul decided he could not wait for God’s approval and so he ”did what
was right in his own eyes”. Again, we see this today, don’t we. Our leaders seem to go against everything that seems
46
right and just under God, and strike out doing whatever they decide is right, or more aptly, in their best interest.
1Sa 13:13 And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the LORD
thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the LORD have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.
Now we read about the ensuing conflict. No ce that the Hebrews had been effec vely disarmed. They had to go
to the Philis nes to have any sharp implements made or sharpened because they had no blacksmiths in all the lands
of Israel not under the control of the Philis nes. How convenient! 1Sa 13:19 Now there was no smith found throughout all the land of Israel: for the Philis nes said, Lest the Hebrews make them swords or spears: Today we have very
determined efforts being put forth to disarm the popula on. In a way this is the same thing that was accomplished
here. The people were forced to depend on the king’s forces to protect them. Unfortunately, when the king is corrupt,
the God retreats, and the people are then judged as a na on.
A er all, they demanded this
leader. Again, I must draw the parallel to us today. It is so human to turn to what we see, and to put our trust in
human leaders, rather than turning back to our creator, God Almighty. It amazes me that recently it was determined
(in several polls) that fully 80 % of Americans consider themselves Chris ans. Why then are the small minority of
those who are in rebellion against God in such prolific control of our lives and our communi es. Where are God’s
People?
NOTE: Tom Bradford explains:
Now (and I think this is kind of interes ng) watch how this issue of the High Priest subtly plays out but
at the same me has a pre y significant role in Israel’s history even though generally it goes unno ced
(although as we go along in Samuel, Kings, and so on I’m going to point it out to you). Eli and therefore his
descendants were of the line of Ithamar (the youngest son of Aaron). Achiyah was of Eli’s (and therefore
Ithamar’s) line, and therefore by the Law of Moses he had no divine right to the High Priesthood. The
High Priesthood was suppossed to go to the descendants of another son of Aaron, Eleazar. Somewhere
along the line a power struggle took place and Eli’s family won out.
So here we have two High Priests in existence and King Saul has the opportunity to do what is right,
and put the proper High Priest back into power according to the Torah, but he doesn’t. King Saul instead
decides that Achiyah was to con nue on as his government’s High Priest. Here’s the reason Saul made
this decision: Eli’s family was aligned with the 8 tribe northern coali on. Since Saul’s tribe Benjamin was
part of that same coali on naturally they recognized Achiyah as their High Priest and ignored the other
one. And Saul wasn’t about to rock the boat because he was mostly concerned with gaining loyalty from
his people.
Later, when David becomes King, a new High priest will be chosen.
So we see in this story of Saul that The Prophet, Samuel, presents the heavenly king’s divine agenda to the earthly
king but the earthly king always prefers his own. Conflict between king and prophet is inevitable. Saul’s story is the
story of the an -king, driven by human desires, rather than led by the will of God. 1Sa 13:22 So it came to pass in the
day of ba le, that there was neither sword nor spear found in the hand of any of the people that were with Saul and
Jonathan: but with Saul and with Jonathan his son was there found.
47
But we learn that Saul’s son goes up against the Philis nes. But no ce, He in essence, consulted
God first, asking God for a sign. 1Sa 14:10 But if they say thus, Come up unto us; then we will go up: for the LORD
hath delivered them into our hand: and this shall be a sign unto us. And so it came about that Jonathan went against
the Philis nes. When Saul discovered what was going on, he rushed with his few men, to help, but they found the
Philis nes figh ng themselves. In addi on, all the Hebrews that had aligned previously with the Philis nes, now
turned and rejoined the Hebrews in ba le against the Philis nes. And 1Sa 14:23 So the LORD saved Israel that day:
and the ba le passed over unto Bethaven.
Now we learn that King Saul had cursed anyone who would eat of the spoils of the fight, in fact, no one was to eat
that day. Apparently the people had begun slaughtering the ca le and were ea ng ”with the blood” so Saul builds
his first altar to God and commands the people to make the offering there. 1Sa 14:35 And Saul built an altar unto the
LORD: the same was the first altar that he built unto the LORD. And so he makes plans to go a er the Philis nes. But is
warned to consult God first. But God didn’t answer. So Saul suspects that someone had not followed his instruc ons
not to eat and he was determined to discover who it was, even if it was his son.
Now Jonathan, his son, did not hear this curse and so he tasted of some of the honey he found. When
the people learned of this they told Jonathan he had broken the rule of word from Saul, the king, and he was cursed.
And so when Saul learns that someone has broken his rule he asks the people, but they will not give up Jonathan
whom they now saw as a hero. Saul calls for a lot to determine the offender. 1Sa 14:41 Therefore Saul said unto the
LORD God of Israel, Give a perfect lot. And Saul and Jonathan were taken: but the people escaped. Remember, that
in those mes, the cas ng of lots was seen as a way to determine God’s will. So, it is discovered that it was Jonathan.
1Sa 14:42 And Saul said, Cast lots between me and Jonathan my son. And Jonathan was taken. He explains to his
father what happened but that he is willing to die, as God wills it.
Sort of hidden here is a lesson for us all about how the Lord makes use of those who inhabit His Kingdom and trust
Him in all things. In many ways Jonathan was just like his father, Saul: impetuous, kind of a show-off, hot-tempered,
and rash. Yet the difference is that
• Jonathan was as unselfish as Saul was selfish,
• and as noble as Saul was base.
• Jonathan was as determined in his faith and belief in God’s power and wisdom and ability to deliver as Saul was
determined that he would manipulate the Lord for his own purposes and risk nothing
48
Saul was being used by the Lord to show us everything that a leader in the Kingdom of God should
NOT be; Jonathan was a demonstra on of what can happen when a person focuses on God and not his circumstances.
King Saul was led by his own lusts, desires, and inner demons. Jonathan was led by the Holy Spirit. And despite the
deep faults and troublesome personality traits that characterized them both, their des nies were night and day apart
due to a single all-encompassing personal choice that each had made at some point in their lives: would they or would
they not obey the Lord at all costs.
So, the people saved Jonathan. It is perhaps more because they saw the difference between Jonathan and his father, but more likely simply because he was now a hero having conquered these Philis nes and given them hope of
success. 1Sa 14:45 And the people said unto Saul, Shall Jonathan die, who hath wrought this great salva on in Israel?
God forbid: as the LORD liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he hath wrought with God
this day. So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not.
We see the image of today’s poli cian in King Saul. He talked a good game, but wouldn’t act unless there was sufficient
personal benefit that at the same me also minimized any personal risk. He purported to be the leader of Israel, but
generally just observed where the parade was already headed and then grabbed a baton and jumped in front to take
the credit. His courage was measured primarily by the level of support from those who agreed with him; he melted
quickly if he felt the opposi on was too great. And while at mes he ordered the people to scrupulously obey the
Law of Moses or bear the consequences, he also played fast and loose with God’s commandments and felt he was
generally above the Law. In but a couple of years on the throne Saul has quickly adopted the a tude of a despot. His
men were cannon fodder, and all wars were about his personal pride and status among the na ons. The people on
the other hand fully understood that even though they were in a sense forced into to it, they had said “amen” to the
oath and now they were bound.
And so Saul went against the Philis nes. We are given a genealogy here : Saul’s sons are listed 5
mes in the Old Testament but among them only Jonathan and Ishui play a role in any of the stories recorded about
Saul and his offspring. Next his two daughters Merab and Michal are named, and only a er that his wife Ahinoam.
This kind of genealogy was always an important footnote to ancient wri ngs so as to provide evidence of exactly who
was being spoken of. We’re also informed that the top commander of Saul’s army was Avner, son of Ner; and Ner was
Sha’ul’s uncle. Note that Avner means “my father is Ner”. Also note that, as was usual, close family members were
given the choicest offices under the King because they were sure to be the most loyal (or at least they would help to
try and keep the accumulated wealth and power in the clan).
1Sa 14:52 And there was sore war against the Philis nes all the days of Saul: and when Saul saw any strong man,
or any valiant man, he took him unto him.
We should see Saul not as a depraved and inten onally wicked man, but rather as a fragile, insecure, ego-driven
man who o en succumbed to the same evil inclina on that is the ruin of us all. The poor judgment that this first King
of Israel constantly displayed was a result of these flaws, not of an inherent predisposi on to be a rebel. So we can (in
49
some ways) look upon King Saul with sympathy rather than condemna on, just as Jesus looked in sympathy at those
two men hanging on their crosses on either side of him (well aware that they were being punished for crimes that
they had knowingly and willingly commi ed).
Perhaps it is only a coincidence that this reading falls on this year’s passover, or perhaps, as we
are learning, God is at work and is direc ng our a en on to His truths. I tend to pick the la er. As we learn of god’s
character, and in our ’hear elt’ desire to follow Jesus, perhaps today would be a good day to look closely at what it
is we believe and follow. Do we follow God’s word under the blood of Jesus, or are we simply ’doing our own thing’
thinking that we are safe. For me, the answer is obvious.
I have, and con nue to sin and come short of the glory of God. I cannot ignore all that I have absorbed of this world,
not can I , on my own, fully turn away. I am weak and full of misunderstandings, and I do that which I do not want to
do. Yet, my heart seeks my Lord God. So, I ask, Please Jesus, help me. Open my eyes each day, guide my path, and
teach me how to follow you along the road to your Father’s house. Thank you for your grace and forgiveness. Amen.
50
I present only one interpreta on, mine, which is based in study, and research as well as considera on for many commentaries from others. I pray God will con nue to guide me, and that nothing I share here will in any way hinder your
walk with God, but the ul mate responsibility FOR YOUR SALVATION lies with you! Got Jesus?
Bible in a Year - 5 Apr 2015 - Incomplete Obedience (2015-04-05 06:00)
TODAY IS 15 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR It is the Second Sabbath of the First Month. It also begins the
Feast of Unleavened Bread at evening 15 Abib – 21 begins today. We conclude with the Day of First-fruits on 22 Abib.
And the evening and the morning cons tutes a day.
Exo 12:16 And in the first day there shall be an holy convoca on, and in the seventh day there shall be an holy
convoca on to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be
done of you.
Exo 12:18 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, un l the one
and twen eth day of the month at even.
If you wish to celebrate Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread this year you may wish to read: Easter or PassoverWhen was the Crucifixion? ; New to Celebra ng Passover? ; and Food and Feast of Passover
51
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of I Samuel chapters 15-16
INTRODUCTION
• Samuel sends Saul to destroy the Amalekites, and all their substance,
• Saul collects an immense army and comes against their city,
• He desires the Kenites to remove from among the Amalekites,
• He smites the Amalekites, and takes their king, Agag, prisoner, and saves the best of the spoil,
• The Lord is displeased, and sends Samuel to reprove him,
• The conversa on between Samuel and Saul, in which the la er endeavors to jus fy his conduct,
• He is convinced that he has done wrong, and asks pardon,
• Samuel causes Agag to be slain; for which he assigns the reasons,
Samuel is sent from Ramah to Bethlehem, to anoint David,
• The Spirit of the Lord departs from Saul, and an evil spirit comes upon him,
• His servants exhort him to get a skillful harpist to play before him,
• He is pleased with the counsel, and desires them to find such a person, They recommend David,
• He is sent for, comes, plays before Saul, and finds favor in his sight,
There is so much in these chapters of Samuel that I could never hope, in a post such as this, to do more than touch
on the very basics. To the end that the informa on in this sec on is so VITAL to our understanding of God, I am
including these teachings by Tom Bradford. these teachings are very detailed and include what appears to me to be
interpreta ons of God’s truth through the Holy Spirit. I hope they will be a blessing to you;
[playlist images=”false” ids=”237797,237798,237799,237800,237801,237802,237796”]
I Samuel chapters 15-16
The founda on of all good is to love God and to love your fellow man. The founda on of all sin and evil is
idolatry and sorcery. To love God is to obey God. To commit idolatry is to put our will above His. And that is exactly
what King Saul has done by making the decision to allow the Amalekite leader, Agag, to live and by not destroying all
the spoils. Let’s look deeper into this story.
While I will not say that this story of Saul is an exact image of the ba le of Armageddon, I will say agree that
there is a God Principle shown us here.
52
1Sa 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and u erly destroy all that they have, and spare
them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Perhaps this is a good place to point out our connec on to King Saul.
Although there is a growing movement to turn back to the old testament to learn the founda ons of our
faith, many s ll do not seem to understand how it connects to modern-day Chris ans. I hope that in this story of
Saul, you are beginning to recognize something important.
First, Saul BELIEVED in God. He had a ’measure of faith’ and, when it suited him, he turned to God.
BUT, as is common among today’s Chris ans, Saul tended to go about things ’in his own way’ and even when he did
seem to be in obedience, it was incomplete obedience. I know I am guilty of this s ll, are you? Can you admit this to
yourself and to Jesus? I believe it is something we need to look at quite truthfully. Saul is a type of an -chris an we
might say. While he made various a empts to obey God, it is more o en seen that he does so only within his own
way of thinking.
We are now in the season of the Passover, yet, we s ll hold onto a tradi on that says Easter is the
me we celebrate the Resurrec on. Yet, this is not biblical. Now, it is not really my job here to try to convince you
one way or the other, not am I condemning anyone for their choice. What I AM charged with is poin ng out that we
are doing things in PAGAN TRADITIONS that are not from God.
So we might consider that while we are
professing our faith and that we follow Jesus, we are not really doing so. We ”spare” the parts of our tradi ons from
scru ny, hanging on to them because they are comfortable, familiar, tradi on. So, I will leave off with that thought.
We return to the reading.
53
So Saul went out, in obedience, to take the Amalekites.
And so he conquered them, but not ALL of them and he did not destroy everything as God commanded. Instead,
Saul decided that he would spare certain of the people, their king, Agag, and all the spoil that was good (seemingly
by the descrip on they saved all the animals used for food), and only destroyed the things that they didn’t want. 1Sa
15:9 But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the
lambs, and all that was good, and would not u erly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they
destroyed u erly. And God was upset. Saul had not followed His commandments. So, hearing from God that he was
turning Saul away, Samuel was grieved and he cried to God all night. When Saul came to Samuel, bragging on his
conquests and reques ng a sacrifice be setup, Samuel rebukes him. Although Saul con nues to claim he has obeyed
God, Samuel details where he has not. 1Sa 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings
and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is be er than sacrifice, and to hearken than the
fat of rams.
Saul missed the mark. He was obeying under his own terms, not under God’s terms. He was misguided in his
own understanding. But, as we are told in the next verse, rebellion is as (bad as) the sin of witchcra , and stubbornness is as (bad as) iniquity and idolatry. And so, God has rejected Saul from being king. But Saul con nues to whine,
1Sa 15:24 And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy
words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice.
He begs Samuel to intervene with God on his behalf, but Samuel refuses, the Lord God had already made His
judgment. But Saul grabs his garment as Samuel turns to leave, and tears it. 1Sa 15:28 And Samuel said unto him,
The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is be er
than thou.
54
But Samuel, saddened by God’s decision, and because He
seems connected to Saul, he agrees to Saul’s request , then departs and does not see Saul again. Saul seems to have
repented, but a careful reading shows us it was only in an a empt to get ’back in the good graces’ of Samuel. No ce
that on several occasions Saul refers to God as ”thy God” not his God. 1Sa 15:35 And Samuel came no more to see
Saul un l the day of his death: nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul: and the LORD repented that he had made
Saul king over Israel.
The stage is set. Samuel is understandably saddened and in a state of mourning at the loss of Saul, his friend
and the King. He probably feels he has somehow failed. Did he? Do we, as Chris ans, feel that we have failed our
brethren and thereby we o en sit around feeling sorry for our own failings rather than leaving things in God’s hands,
having done all He commanded us, and con nuing on the path? Samuel was afraid of Saul as well. He was afraid
that Saul would kill him if he followed God’s command to leave. How o en do we fear repercussions from others if
we a empt to follow and obey God?
German Bible commentator C.F. Kiel says it so very well: “All conscious disobedience (to God) is actually idolatry because disobedience makes self-will (the human “I”, “me”) into a god”. When God says to
do this or don’t do that and we say “no” or do otherwise, we have put our own opinions, intellect, and
wills above the Lord’s. There is no be er defini on of idolatry than this.
So, by this story of Saul we are forced to ask ourselves, ’is knowing of and believing in God the same thing as trus ng
and obeying Him?’ And likewise, Is knowing of and believing in Jesus the same thing as trus ng Him and daily following in His ways?
55
1Sa 16:1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for
Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the
Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.
And so Samuel OBEYS God, and goes, in spite of his apprehensions about Saul who obviously did not abdicate his
throne on Samuel’s pronouncement that : 1Sa 15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcra , and stubbornness is as
iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
The process of naming the next King is embarked upon. Note, it is GOD that chooses the next king, not Samuel.
He is only the instrument God is using to proclaim His will. No ce what God told Samuel: 1Sa 16:7 But the LORD said
unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD
seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.
Not only do we see here the statement that God looks at the heart, but also that He does not see as a man sees. To me
this is a confirma on of the idea that we cannot know what God knows, cannot see how some things could possibly
work to His glory or His good. It is not up to us to ques on the will of God, but to Obey His direc on in faith.
David, youngest son of Jesse, is chosen: 1Sa 16:12 And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal
of a beau ful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.
1Sa 16:13-14 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of
the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah. But the Spirit of the LORD
departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.
And as we read, Saul, burdened with an evil spirit called for David to play his harp for him and
drive the spirits out. Now, obviously at this point Saul did not have any idea that David had been anointed as his
replacement on the throne. Can you see God at work here? He has placed David in posi on for the next stage of this
play.
Did David fully understand what was happening? Did he know he would be playing for the king he was to replace? Or
was he simply, in faith, following where God was leading him?
56
As I men oned, there is so much here that me and space does not allow me to expand upon. However, IF you
can take the me to listen to the audio files I have included, you will find some spiritual li ing insights and some
tough ques ons to ask yourself. I pray you will discover, as I am daily, that our God is a great, just, merciful, and awesome God, but He is not a sweet old grand-pa type we may take for granted, only talking to when we want something.
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the
will of my Father which is in heaven.
57
Bible in a Year - 7 Apr 2015 - Saul’s wants David dead (2015-04-07 06:00)
TODAY IS 17 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR Feast of Unleavened Bread 15 Abib – 21 and concluding with the Day of First-fruits on 22 Abib.
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 Samuel chapters 19-20 and chapter 21
INTRODUCTION
Jonathan pleads for David before Saul, who is for the present reconciled.
• David defeats the Philis nes; and Saul becomes again envious, and endeavors to slay him, but he escapes.
• Saul sends men to David’s house, to lie in wait for him; but Michal saves him through help and deceit.
• David flees to Samuel, at Ramah.
• Saul, hearing of it, sends messengers three several mes to take him; but the Spirit of coming upon them, they
prophesy.
• Saul, hearing of this, goes a er David himself, and falls under the same influence.
David complains to Jonathan of Saul’s enmity against him but Jonathan tries to comfort him.
58
• They walk out into the field, and renew their covenant,
• David asks Jonathan’s leave to absent himself from Saul’s court; and Jonathan informs him how he shall ascertain
the disposi on of his father towards him, 1
• David hides himself; is missed by Saul; Jonathan is ques oned concerning his absence; makes an excuse for
David; Saul is enraged, and endeavors to kill Jonathan,
• Jonathan goes out to the field; gives David the sign which they had agreed on, and by which he was to know
that the king had determined to take away his life,
• He sends his servant back into the city; and then he and David meet, renew their covenant, and have a very
heart felt par ng,
David comes to Ahimelech at Nob, receives provisions from him, and the sword of Goliath; and is no ced by Doeg,
one of the servants of Saul,
• He leaves Nob, and goes to Achish, king of Gath,
• But on being recognized as the vanquisher of Goliath by the servants of Achish, he pretends to be mad, and
Achish sends him away,
1 Samuel chapters 19-20 and chapter 21
Jonathan intercedes for David. Jonathan spoke kindly to Saul on David’s behalf. He brought
the two together again. Recall that David and Jonathan had made a covenant of friendship. In ancient Assyrian
royal records is found the standard loyalty instruc ons that the generals of Ashurbanipal (King of the vast Assyria
Empire) formally demanded that the kings and potentates of the many na ons that he conquered, declare. It said,
“ki-i-nap-shat-ku-nu-latar-a-ma-ni”; this translates to, “you must love him (Ashurbanipal) as you love yourselves”.
Thus we read 1Sa 18:3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. It is a vow
of loyalty to his friend.
David driven out again. Now Jonathan’s successes in ba le for King Saul were to no avail in
subduing Saul. Instead Saul’s fear of David con nued to escalate to an obsessive madness. Once again Saul tried to
kill David. When David escaped from his flying javelin, Saul sent messages to David’s home; and Michal, David’s wife
and Saul’s daughter, helped him to escape.
She then devised a plan to give David more me. By
59
using the household idol she created the impression that David was in bed sick, but Saul demands he be brought to
him, bed and all, and thereby discovers the deceit. Michal lies to her father, Saul, claiming David threatened to kill
her, surely to avoid his wrath in a growing fear of his instability concerning David.
David with Samuel. The old prophet Samuel was David’s good friend. Samuel and Saul had parted
company long ago. Samuel had been sent by God to anoint David to be king. David knew that he would find a friend
in Samuel. David fled to Ramah where Samuel lived and tells him what’s happened. It doesn’t take long before Saul
finds out where David is hiding.
But a strange thing happens: some of the prophets were prophesying and the soldiers too were overcome
and started prophesying and thus couldn’t fulfill their duty. When Saul heard about it, he sent another con ngent of
men to capture David and exactly the same thing happened to them. He did this a third me with iden cal results.
Frustrated, Saul decided he’d have to go there himself. 1Sa 19:20 And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when
they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God
was upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied.
This is about the me we believe David began to write the Psalms. Psalm 59 addresses this event in his life. But
something interes ng. No ce Psa 59:5 Thou therefore, O LORD God of hosts, the God of Israel, awake to visit all
the heathen: be not merciful to any wicked transgressors. Selah. David is asking God to bring His wrath upon ALL
heathens, meaning all na ons. But why? This is not an interna onal incident. What we are seeing here, might I
suggest, is that we are given a prophecy into our own futures. Psa 59:8 But thou, O LORD, shalt laugh at them; thou
shalt have all the heathen in derision. And Psa 59:13 Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be:
and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. Selah. These verses seem out of place but
they do seem to fit a future me when Jesus and all of His disciples are being persecuted not only by the heathen
na ons, but the Hebrew Believers are being persecuted even by their brother Hebrews who do not trust in Jesus
Christ for salva on. And of course it is the An -King/An -Christ’s ruler, Satan, who is ordering his demons and all
those humans who heed his voice to go out and pursue and kill those who are loyal to Christ and the God of Israel.
Twice Saul sends soldiers to capture David in Naioth, and twice they are ”overcome with the Spirit of God’
and begin to prophecy. In scripture this means simply to speak God’s truth. Now Saul decides to go himself, and
he too is overcome by the spirit of God. But, just as we read in the parables of the sewer, (Mark 4: 1-20) the seed
Saul received at that me was on shallow ground and as soon as the spirit departed from him, a spirit of evil once
again took hold. 1Sa 19:24 And he stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and
lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?
David’s appeal to Jonathan. Since Jonathan had helped David to return to Saul’s court at one me, David
sought him out again. Jonathan was s ll David’s friend and agreed to assist David, So Jonathan made excuses to
a empt to draw him out. Eventually he is successful, but has put himself in danger as
his father in an
well. By now it is apparent that not only Saul, but Jonathan, have a ’feeling’ that it will be David who succeeds to
the throne. The difference is that Jonathan make a choice to align with David while his father, Saul, is determined
60
to destroy him. I suppose the obsession with power sees beyond the grave. Thank God I have never felt such an
overwhelming passion to succeed at any cost. I guess I will never understand the idioms of the human mind. It
would seem to me that as long as David was not a emp ng a takeover of the throne, Saul should be content with
being on the watch, and perhaps warning his son, when his death loomed in sight. But, no, absolute power corrupts
absolutely, and so Saul is a emp ng to cement the throne, through his posterity, forever.
Jonathan’s plan. So, we read, Jonathan renewed his covenant with David and
agreed to
find out his father’s inten ons concerning David. He also arranged a plan whereby David would know the outcome of
Jonathan’s inquiry of his father. At the feast of the New Moon the king said nothing about David’s absence; instead
we are told that in his private thoughts Saul merely figured that David must have been in a ritually unclean state
(tamei) and thus disqualified to eat this “holy” meal. When Saul sees that David is absent on the second day, he
ques ons Jonathan and then flies into a rage. Note: The New Moon celebra on described is NOT what God had
commanded.
God Principle: That which is NOT prohibited by God does not mean that what is permi ed is holy, even if we
call them holy.. If you want to know what is holy, check with God’s Word. we have no authority to add to or subtract
from God’s list no ma er how good or pious the cause may seem to us. (Consider Easter, Christmas, New Years, and
all holidays, even birthdays, church altars etc.)
Saul’s a ack on Jonathan and David. When Saul found out that Jonathan was in touch with David he berated
Jonathan by insul ng his mother. We can see Saul’s growing fury with David. Why? Fear and jealously. Saul had an
irra onal fear of losing his throne and that his dynasty would die out if his son did not take the throne on his death.
He knew, apparently, that Jonathan had not been named the successor by God through an anoin ng by Samuel, but
he did know that someone, and it appears he suspected it was David, had been anointed. Remember, Saul believed
in God, it is just that he had li le faith in God and thus relied on his own plans. How o en is this true of us. Yes, we
believe in God the Father, we believe in Jesus Christ, we believe in the Holy Spirit, BUT, do we have the faithfulness
in our beliefs to give EVERYTHING into God’s hands? Do we have the faithfulness to obey God’s commands, without
twis ng them to fit what we want? Dear Jesus, forgive us and help us.
David’s and Jonathan’s par ng. When David learned of Saul’s implacable anger, he knew that he
could not return to the court. He knew that he was doomed to live the life of a fugi ve. The par ng with Jonathan
was sad, but in the best interests of both. This new covenant required David to show chesed (fidelity and faithfulness)
to Jonathan and to all of his descendants. And the reason that David owed this to Jonathan is because Jonathan
willingly forfeited his customary right to succeed his father, Saul, to the throne of Israel; and because Jonathan put
his own life on the line to show a greater loyalty to his friend David than to his own father.
This is a turning point in the history of the redemp on of God’s people. Up to now, David was in Saul’s court,
but now, they have become mortal enemies, through no real fault of David other than he was the one chosen by God.
It is from this pla orm that David will complete his unlikely rise to the throne of Israel as God’s anointed earthly king.
61
David on the move. The Ark of the covenant was not yet returned to the tabernacle. The
high priest was at Shiloh in the days of Samuel but a er the Ark was captured, the Tabernacle was evidently located
at Nob. David Is on the run now, in fear for his life. Arriving at Nob he encounters the priest who is the brother of
his personal priest, Achiyah, so he can’t be sure if he can trust Ahimelech. He makes up a whopper of a story by
telling the High Priest that King Saul has sent him on a secret mission and in order not to arouse suspicion the men
who are with him are hiding and will meet him shortly. The High Priest explains that at the moment the only bread
available is what has just been re red from serving as the consecrated bread in the sanctuary. The Priest is speaking
of Shewbread. The Law is that 12 loaves of specially prepared and consecrated bread are to be baked and placed in
the Tabernacle, before the Lord. Then every Sabbath, they are to be exchanged for fresh ones and the priests may
eat the week-old loaves.He found some help and friendship in the priests that were there. Not only could no one
but priests eat the week-old bread but it had to be consumed at the sanctuary. Thus we know there was some sort
of Tabernacle at Nob.
The reality is that the priest had no right to offer common men consecrated bread (lechem kodesh),
and the common men had no right to eat it. But the rules were so loosely applied in this era that Ahimelech didn’t
have any serious problem finding a way to comply with David’s request. Besides, under the circumstances, one has
to wonder just how “holy” these “holy loaves” actually were in God’s eyes. The High Priest had a hungry man in
front of him, who held himself up as represen ng the king on crucial mission and so compassion led him to “love
thy neighbor” at the expense of obeying the law on who could eat the consecrated bread. (See also ref. Mark 2:25)
David thought to ask for a weapon at a very unlikely place to find one (the sanctuary to YHWH), because he himself
had brought that sword there only a few years earlier and wondered if it might s ll be present. The reason for his
fleeing first to Nob (of all unlikely places) is becoming clearer.
It is not coincidental that we have such similarity and interconnectedness with David, the early shadow
of the Messiah (and presumably some of David’s followers), fleeing from the an -king (Sha’ul) on the
Sabbath; Jesus 1000 years later recalling this incident and correla ng it to a Sabbath controversy with
the Pharisees; and the prophecy of Ma hew 24 concerning the even later End Times appearance of the
an -king/an -Christ whereby God-followers are told to escape from Judah to the hills AND pray that this
event not occur in winter or ON THE SABBATH.–Tom Bradford
David is observed with Goliath’s sword. He is King Saul’s chief henchman and a foreigner, an Edomite,
not a Hebrew. Fi ngly the ungodly King of Israel had chosen this uncircumcised pagan to be his eyes and ears and
to be in charge of his bodyguards and his flocks.
David at Gath. Bread and sword in hand, David con nues his flight and goes to the city of Gath. David’s flight
62
to Philis a seems ill advised, but he must have thought that he would find help there. Since Saul was seeking to kill
him he might find safety among Saul’s Philis ne enemies. He fled to the city which had been introduced earlier as
the home of Goliath. It was a very important Philis ne city and ruled over by Achish, the king.
David,
the slayer of Goliath, carries Goliath’s unique sword with him to Goliath’s hometown, in hopes of being protected by
(of all people) the Philis nes!
But whatever David’s thoughts may have been, he quickly discovered he had been mistaken in the hope of
help from Israel’s enemies. His ac ng like a mad man saved his life. It was not yet in God’s ming to have him take
up his role as the King of Israel.
Tom Bradford explained that ’In those mes madness was viewed through the lens of supers on. Just as it
was that King Saul’s own inner court saw Saul’s fits of rage and irra onality as a kind of madness, and concluded that
since madness is caused by evil spirits they needed the mysterious an dote of music to counteract it, so for Achish
to have a madman in his presence or to kill him could cause evil spirits to bedevil him or his city.’ Besides, it appears
this king already had his fill of ’crazy people’ running around. Last thing he needed was a crazy foreigner. 1Sa 21:15
Have I need of mad men, that ye have brought this fellow to play the mad man in my presence? shall this fellow
come into my house?
WHAT CAN WE LEARN
Some men are determined to do evil. Some situa ons are of such an evil nature that no amount of good
seems able to prevail. Some men are so filled with evil thoughts that they will not be persuaded by any good
reasoning. Such seems to be the case with Saul. Chris ans will do well to realize this truth and cease to cast their
pearls before swine (Mat _7:6).
A man’s enemies may be those of his own house (Mat _10:36). Even though David was Saul’s son-in-law, Saul
was determined to kill him. Michal, David’s wife, seems to have lied about David’s threatening her. David must have
wondered if there was any good person to help him since those of this own family were against him.
A friend in need is a friend indeed. Samuel had brought the call of God to David when he anointed him in
Bethlehem. Now the side of events was going against David. David must have sorely needed the asylum afforded
him by the man of God in Ramah.
The value of faithful friends. At the risk of his own life Jonathan was willing to help David. Their friendship is
classic in its very nature. The two stand as examples of what friends ought to be to each other.
The vile fruits of jealousy. Saul became so intense in his hatred, fear and jealousy of David that he a empted
to kill his own son. He called his wife a “perverse, rebellious woman” . Such is the way of one who is proud and
selfish.
The strengthening of truth in adversity. The par ng of Jonathan and David is filled with heartwarming lessons.
The two wept unashamed, for their souls had been knit inseparably together by their experiencing danger together.
Such is the outcome of the fires of tes ng on friendship that is true.
63
“Let us go into the house of the Lord” (Psa _122:1). David sang this song which he taught Israel, but this was
evidently the tenor of his life long before he wrote the Psalm. Since he was in dire straits, he not only sought out the
priest of God but also went to the house of the Lord where he could worship in an acceptable way. Here he would
have opportunity to make a sacrifice unto God and to seek the will of the Lord for his life.
Poli cs make strange bedfellows. This old adage has been seen in many different instances. Once David had
fought against the Philis nes. He slew the champion of their army and caused them to flee from the armies of Israel.
Now he sought refuge among them. His reasoning was wise according to the ways of this world, but it fills us with
chagrin to see a man of God brought so low that he must affiliate himself with the enemies of God’s people in order
to save his own life.
The enemies of God’s people watch them closely. When David got to Achish in Gath, he found that they already knew the song which was sung in Israel credi ng David with slaying ten thousands of men whereas Saul had
slain only thousands. They also recognized him as being the one who was to become king of Israel. He was thus not
able to find safety among them. Chris ans would be surprised to find out how much non-Chris ans know about
their everyday ac vi es. We ought to realize that non-believers watch the believers very closely.
It is because of our fallen nature and of the fallen nature of the world in which we exist that all mankind is
caught on the horns of a dilemma. It was never supposed to be like this. Nothing operates as it should because
sin has become pervasive. God did not create a faulty crea on; rather mankind (beginning with Adam) perverted
it. Almost daily we will find ourselves situa ons that we are nearly forced to sin. How o en we’ll compliment
someone with a compliment that isn’t necessarily true but it is the graceful and merciful thing to do. Doctors,
policemen, emergency workers and others are needed to work on the Sabbath for the good of us all. We constantly
have to choose between obeying one law of God over another even though we may not consciously think about
it.–Tom Bradford, and I must say I believe he is 100 % right.
64
Bible in a Year - 8 Apr 2015 David Gathers His Men (2015-04-08 06:00)
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
65
You May wish to listen to this teaching from Tom Bradford’s Torah Class
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/dtcwk37-1-Sam uel-22-23.mp3”][/audio]
INTRODUCTION
People gather to David at Adullam;
• At Mizpeh he commends his parents unto the king of Moab;
• Admonished by Gad, he comes to Hareth;
• Saul going to pursue him, complains of his servants’ unfaithfulness;
• Doeg accuses Ahimelech;
• Saul commands to kill the priests;
• The footmen refusing, Doeg executes it;
• Abiathar escaping, brings David the news.
Now, David, inquiring of the Lord by Abiathar, rescues Keilah;
• God shows him the coming of Saul, and the treachery of the Keilites, he escapes from Keilah; ,
• In Ziph Jonathan comes and comforts him;
• The Ziphites discover him, repor ng to Saul;
• At Maon he is rescued from Saul by the invasion of the Philis nes;
• He dwells at En-gedi.
Saul being returned from following the Philis nes, renews his pursuit a er David, and they mee ng in a cave, where
David had the opportunity of taking away the life of Saul, only cut off the skirt of his robe,
• He held up to him to convince him he had his life in his hands, but spared it,
• he very pathe cally reasons with him about the unreasonableness and unrighteousness of his pursuit a er him,
to take away his life,
• This so affected Saul, that he confessed he was more righteous than he, and owned that the kingdom would be
his, and only desired him to swear to him not to cut off his offspring, which David did, and so they parted,
I Samuel 22-24
In a never ending series of divinely ordained “coincidences” unsuspec ng men, the righteous and the wicked, are
accomplishing God’s invisible will.
66
The prophet Gad and David. As David le Philis a and moved back through the land of Judah, he was
joined by members of his own family. All those who were in distress or in debt also joined David. 1Sa 22:2 And every
one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves
unto him; and he became a captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men.
Had Saul’s government been just and upright David would have had no followers; but Saul never rose above the
level of a soldier. He had developed all that arbitrariness which military command fosters in self-willed minds, and
seems en rely unaware of its being his duty to a end to the righteous administra on of the law. The Israelites had
in Saul the very king they had desired, but they found that a brave general might at home be a ruthless tyrant.
Debt was one of the worst evils of ancient mes. The rate of usury was so exorbitant that a loan was sure to end in
u er ruin, and not only the debtor, but his children might be made slaves to repay the debt . It was one of the first
du es of an upright governor to enforce the Mosaic law against usury ; but all such things Saul despised, and there
were probably many in the land impoverished by Saul’s own exac ons and favori sm 1Sa 22:7 Then Saul said unto
his servants that stood about him, Hear now, ye Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and
vineyards, and make you all captains of thousands, and captains of hundreds; , and made bi er of soul by his cruelty
and injus ce. All such were glad to join in what seemed to them the banner of revolt. A erwards at Ziklag David was
joined by nobler followers. With David we may compare Jephthah’s case in the old days of anarchy (Jdg _11:3-6), and
note that bad government leads to lawlessness just as surely as no government.
1Sa 22:3 And David went thence to Mizpeh of Moab: and he said unto the king of Moab, Let my father
and my mother, I pray thee, come forth, and be with you, ll I know what God will do for me. (Mizpeh means a watch
tower) A er David fled to Moab, God sent his prophet Gad to be with David and to instruct him not to flee outside the
land of Israel. David placed his father and mother under the care of the king of Moab. They had fled from Bethlehem
under the combined fear of Saul and the Philis nes, but were too old to bear the fa gues of David’s life. He therefore asks for a refuge for them with the king of Moab, probably on the ground that Jesse’s grandmother, Ruth, was
a Moabitess. But as Saul had waged war on Moab (1Sa _14:47), the king was probably glad to help one who would
keep Saul employed at home.
Gad, probably by Samuel’s command, came to be David’s counselor. The advice he gives is most important—Abide
not in the hold. I.e. do not remain in the land of Moab. Had David done so he probably would never have become
king. By remaining in Judah, and protec ng the people from the Philis nes, which Saul could no longer do, David grew
in reputa on and power, and from the list of those who joined him at Ziklag (1Ch _12:1-22) it is evident not only that
such was the case, but that there was a strong enthusiasm for him throughout not merely Judah, but all Israel.
• According to Josephus the cave Adullam was situated near a city of the same name which formed one of a group
of fi een in the Shephelah and its site has now been recovered .
• The forest of Hareth. Or, rather, Hereth. ”This lay on the edge of the mountain chain (of Hebron), where Kharas
now stands, surrounded by the thickets which properly represent the Hebrew yar, a word wrongly supposed to
mean a woodland of mber trees”. Yar is translated forest here. Hereth was about three miles from Adullam
–Conder, ’Tent Work,’ 2:88 as quoted in the Pulpit Commentary
67
Saul’s increasing jealousy. Saul not only berated the members of his own family, but he loosed a rade
against his officers and soldiers accusing them of being in a conspiracy with David. This caused Doeg to reveal David’s
brief associa on with the priests at Nob. When Saul heard that there was informa on concerning David and his men,
he held a solemn council, in which we see how simple was the dignity of his court, but how great the ferocity to which
he was now a prey. Saul was holding a formal court, to decide what steps should be taken now that David had openly
revolted from him. Saul had evidently failed in blending the twelve tribes into one na on. He had begun well, and his
great feat of delivering Jabesh Gilead by summoning the mili a of all Israel together must have given them something
of a corporate feeling, and taught them their power when united. Yet now we find him isolated, and this address to
his officers seems to show that he had aggrandized his own tribe at the expense of the rest. Moreover, he appeals to
the worst passions of these men, and asks whether they can expect David to con nue this favori sm, which had given
them riches and all posts of power. And then he turns upon them, and fiercely accuses them of banding together in
a conspiracy against him, to conceal from him the private understanding which existed between his own son and his
enemy.
Saul’s slaughter of the priests. Doeg’s sugges on that the priests were David’s allies at once
arouses all Saul’s worst passions. As if he had determined from the first upon the massacre of the whole body, he
sends not merely for Ahimelech, but for every priest at Nob. Shortly a erwards they arrived, for Nob was close to
Gibeah, and Saul himself accuses them before the court for treason, and recapitulates the three points men oned by
Doeg as conclusive proofs of their guilt.
There was s ll some fear of God among Saul’s men. When Saul ordered the killing of the priests none of his soldiers
would obey. Finally, Doeg killed all but one of the priests. 1Sa 22:19 And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with
the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen, and asses, and sheep, with the edge
of the sword. Abiathar only, the priest, with David, Escaping from the slaughter at Nob, Abiathar joined David in his
hideout in Keilah. Abiathar had a linen ephod, a dis nc ve garment of the priests and evidently served as the priest
for David and his men while they fled from Saul. 1Sa 22:22 And David said unto Abiathar, I knew it that day, when
Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy
father’s house.
But for this frigh ul crime we should not even have known that Saul had brought the ark into his own neighbourhood,
and restored the services of the sanctuary. 1Sa 22:20 And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named
Abiathar, escaped, and fled a er David. It seems as if Abiathar must have joined David even at an earlier date, for he
is represented as fleeing to him immediately a er the massacre of the priests at Nob. Now, gran ng that David’s stay
at Gath with Achish was very brief, he must have remained at Adullam a considerable me, inasmuch as men joined
him there in large numbers , which seems to show that his hiding place had become generally known. It was probably
this concourse of men to him that was ”discovered,” i.e. made known, to Saul, and, as being an act of formal revolt,
so raised his ire.
King Saul is the an -king; he is everything that humans desire and God hates in a government leader.
King Saul was real, and what we read about him is true and it happened; but he is also a type, a
shadow, and he established a pa ern for the great An -Christ who is about to appear in the present
era.–Listen to the audio by Tom Bradford above
1Sa 23:1 Then they told David, saying, Behold, the Philis nes fight against Keilah, and they rob the threshingfloors.
There is always a period when the threshing floors have to be watched to guard them from depreda on, and this was
68
the me chosen by the Philis nes for a foray in force. 1Sa 23:2 Therefore David enquired of the LORD, saying, Shall I
go and smite these Philis nes? And the LORD said unto David, Go, and smite the Philis nes, and save Keilah.
The return of David into his own land was quickly followed by exploits which not only increased his power, but turned
the eyes of all the people towards him as their protector.
David’s and Jonathan’s mee ng. Saul learned that David was hiding in Keilah and went out to get him. Jonathan, Saul’s
son arose and went to David into the forest around Keilah. The two met again and confirmed the covenant which they
had made earlier. This visit suggests two things:
• first, that, a er the scene in 1Sa _22:8, Saul was estranged from his son, and treated him harshly, regarding him
as a fellow conspirator with David;
• second, that there was a growing convic on, not only in Jonathan’s mind, but generally, that God had transferred
the kingdom from Saul to David, and that consequently David’s final success was inevitable.
He strengthened his (David’s) hand in God. Such a visit, and the expression of Jonathan’s strong convic on that God
was with David, must necessarily have had a powerful moral effect upon his mind. Under such trying circumstances
David must o en have been tempted to despair; but the assurance of Jonathan’s unbroken love for him, and the
knowledge that he and many more regarded him as chosen by God to be Israel’s king, would revive his courage and
make him content to bear the hardships of his present lot. Jonathan returned to his home but David remained in
hiding in Keilah.
”See Judah’s promised king bere of all;
Driven out an exile from the face of Saul.
To distant caves the lonely wanderer flies,
To seek that peace a tyrant’s frown denies.
His soul exults; hope animates his lays;
The sense of mercy kindles into praise;
And wilds familiar with the lion’s roar
Ring with ecsta c sounds unheard before”
Cowper.
Saul’s pursuit of David. The Ziphites came to Saul in Gibeah and told him where David was hiding. 1Sa
23:19 Then came up the Ziphites to Saul to Gibeah, saying, Doth not David hide himself with us in strong holds in the
wood, in the hill of Hachilah, which is on the south of Jeshimon?
in the hill of Hachilah, a ridge that ran along eastward of Maon. Conder recognises it in the long ridge called El
Kolah, running out of the Ziph plateau towards the Dead Sea desert. It lay on the south of Jeshimon, or rather ”on the
right hand of the desert.” Jeshimon is not a proper name, but means any desert (Psa _107:4; Isa _43:19), though it is
used specially of the desert of Sinai in Deu _32:10, and of that of Judah here and in Num _21:20; Num _23:28. Conder
calls it ”the dreary desert which extends between the Dead Sea and the Hebron mountains. It is called Jeshimon,
or ’Solitude,’ in the Old Testament, and ’wilderness of Judea’ in the New (Mat _3:1). It is a plateau of white chalk,
69
2000 feet lower than the watershed, and terminated on the east by cliffs which rise ver cally from the
Dead Sea shore to a height of about 2000 feet. The scenery is barren and wild beyond all descrip on. The chalky
ridges are scored by innumerable torrents, and their narrow crests are separated by broad flat valleys. Peaks and
knolls of fantas c forms rise suddenly from the swelling downs, and magnificent precipices of ruddy limestone stand
up like fortress-walls above the sea. Not a tree nor a spring is visible in the waste, and only the desert partridge and
the ibex are found ranging the solitude. –Pulpit Commentary
A God Truth: always God is first, and we are second to Him
With this informa on Saul made a bold a empt to capture David. He very nearly accomplished this. On one occasion
Saul went on one side of the mountain and David and his men were on the other side. David got away and con nued
his flight out of Saul’s presence. He then moved his hiding place to the caves on the west shore of the Dead Sea near
En-gedi.
David spares Saul’s life. David was hiding in a cave in En-gedi when 1Sa 24:3 And he came to the sheepcotes
by the way, where was a cave; and Saul went in to cover his feet: and David and his men remained in the sides of the
cave.
Saul came to relieve himself in the open mouth of the cave. (Some versions will say to rest but this
is not really correct according to Torah teachings) David crept forward and cut off the bo om of his robe. 1Sa 24:5
And it came to pass a erward, that David’s heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul’s skirt. When Saul le the
cave, David ran a er him to iden fy himself and to show him how he could have killed him if he had so desired. 1Sa
24:10 Behold, this day thine eyes have seen how that the LORD had delivered thee to day into mine hand in the cave:
and some bade me kill thee: but mine eye spared thee; and I said, I will not put forth mine hand against my lord; for
he is the LORD’S anointed. David complained of Saul’s listening to men’s words, which slanderously represented him
as lying in wait to kill the king. In answer to their calumnies he now pleads Saul’s own experience of his deeds. 1Sa
24:12 The LORD judge between me and thee, and the LORD avenge me of thee: but mine hand shall not be upon
thee.
David pleads for his life. David righ ully judged that many men had spoken false words about him
and his rela onship to Saul. He therefore asked Saul to listen to him and not to the false reports. He also asked that
the Lord judge between Saul and himself.
Saul accepts David’s plea. Saul knew that what David said was true. He admi ed that David was more righteous than
he and assured David that he would no longer pursue him. 1Sa 24:17 And he said to David, Thou art more righteous
than I: for thou hast rewarded me good, whereas I have rewarded thee evil. Saul then went home, but David and his
men stayed in the stronghold of Judah. 1Sa 24:22 And David sware unto Saul. And Saul went home; but David and
70
his men gat them up unto the hold.
God Principle: Not every opportunity that comes our way is of God
WHAT CAN WE LEARN
If we would escape undesirable judgments we should avoid, as much as possible, ambiguous ac ons and the appearance of evil. Nevertheless, in the cause of humanity we ought to be ready to act, even though men, not knowing
our feelings, may misinterpret us. We should hold our judgment in strong reserve when but par al knowledge is
within reach, even though plausible reasons appear to urge a cri cism. Proper weight should always be allowed for
the modifying influences of educa on, habit, and range of experience. We may take consola on in the knowledge
that God weighs conduct in reference to its inten on, and that He rules events so as to vindicate the just. If ever we
have wronged another by harsh and wicked judgment, we are bound to make some amend by word or deed.
God always raises up men to meet the needs of the hour. God has never been without men to meet the needs
of a par cular situa on. When David was in need of a man of God, God sent Gad his prophet to be with David. When
God needed a messenger to carry the gospel to the Gen les he called Saul of Tarsus to be His chosen vessel. God has
worked this way throughout human history, and Chris ans should always be thankful that there are those who are
willing to rise up and meet the call of God.
Man’s worst enemy is o en his own imagina on. Saul imagined that all of his men were against him. He fell into
such a depth of self-pity that he thought there was conspiracy in the ranks of his own soldiers. He thus alienated the
affec ons of many of his leaders. Too o en this happens in the ranks of Chris an workers today.
Nothing is holy to a man who has sold his soul to Satan. Most men would stop short of killing God’s anointed people.
When Saul ordered his men to slay the priests there was none at first to do his infamous will. Finally one who was
a stranger to the commonwealth of Israel and evidently a mercenary in Saul’s army fulfilled the mad king’s order. It
is hard to imagine anyone falling lower than Saul fell as he slew the priests, but when man sells his soul to Satan, he
falls to unbelievable depths.
God’s abundant provision for our needs. God not only sent a prophet to be with David but he also made it possible
for a priest to join David’s company. God always does more than we would expect.
The blessing of steadfast friends. David must have longed to see Jonathan. Jonathan must have known this. He came
to David and the two were able to
renew their covenant and David received strength to go on in his life as a fugi ve.
God’s good providence. Things happen in life that cannot be explained except that they are directed by the hand of
almighty God. When Saul went around one side of the mountain David was on the other. God must have been with
David.
Let God lead. David was not willing to take ma ers into his own hands to get rid of Saul. He knew, of course, that if
he killed Saul that he would himself become king. He would come to the throne under these circumstances with a
shadow of guilt over him. He therefore was willing to wait un l in God’s providence Saul’s reign would end. We need
to learn this lesson of pa ently following the Lord in all of our endeavors.
Let the Lord judge. David asked Saul to let God judge between the two of them. David knew that the Lord’s judgment
would be right. This is where all our judgment should originate.
“Overcome evil with good” . David’s goodness in sparing Saul’s life overwhelmed Saul and caused him to realize that
he had been wrong in trying to take his life. He therefore assured David that he would no longer pursue him. He also
asked David to make a covenant that David would not kill Saul’s descendants. David was willing to make this covenant,
and the pursuit was over for the me being.
71
Bible in a Year - 9 Apr 2015 Death of Samuel (2015-04-09 06:00)
72
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
INTRODUCTION
The death of Samuel,
• The history of Nabal, and his foolish behavior towards David and his men,
• David, determining to punish him, is appeased by Abigail, Nabal’s wife,
• Abigail returns, and tells Nabal of the danger that he has escaped: who on hearing it is thunderstruck, and dies
in ten days,
• David, hearing of this, sends and takes Abigail to wife,
• He marries also Ahinoam of Jezreel, Saul having given Michal, David’s wife, to Phal , the son of Laish,
The Ziphites inform Saul of David’s hiding place,
• Saul, with three thousand men, goes in pursuit of him,
• David sends out spies; and finds where Saul had pitched his camp; and he and Abishai come to the camp by
night, find all asleep, and bring away Saul’s spear, and the cruse of water that was at his head,
• David goes to the opposite hill; awakes Abner, captain of Saul’s host; chides him for being so careless of his
master’s life; and calls on Saul to send one of his servants for the spear; and severely chides him for his con nued
hos lity to him,
• Saul humbles himself to David; promises to persecute him no more; and returns to his own place,
73
David flees to Achish, king of Gath, who receives him kindly, and gives him Ziklag to dwell in, where he, his wives and
his men with their families live for a year and four months,
• David invades the Geshurites and Amalekites, and leaves neither man nor woman alive,
• He returns to Achish, and pretends that he had been making inroads on the Israelites, and Achish believes it,
I Samuel 25-27
What a lesson there is for every man, especially for followers of Jesus. We must be ever vigilant lest we think too
highly of ourselves, no ma er how godly our intents might be to us, our wicked natures lurk ready to pounce. How
o en do our evil inclina ons get in the way of our rela onship with our God and our service to Him? Some mes it’s
not as blatant as doing wrong; it’s as subtle as choosing a way that is not the way that God’s perfect will has for us. It
may not be that we don’t prosper from it; rather that the Kingdom of God was meant to prosper from it and didn’t.
1Sa 25:1 And Samuel died; and all the Israelites were gathered together, and lamented him, and buried him in his
house at Ramah. And David arose, and went down to the wilderness of Paran.
Samuel lived, as is supposed, about ninety-eight years; was in the government of Israel before Saul from sixteen to
twenty years; and ceased to live, according to the Jews, about four months before the death of Saul; but according
to Calmet and others, two years. But all this is very uncertain; how long he died before Saul, cannot be ascertained.
The grand prophet of God finally reached the end of his earthly pilgrimage. He was buried in his home at Ramah. Although men on is made of David’s ac vi es, it is not specified that he was able to be in Ramah at the me of Samuel’s
burial. Since he went farther south a er Samuel died, he probably felt he had lost a great friend and that he should
get farther away from Saul. Psa 116:15 Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints.
Nabal’s shameful treatment of David. David had befriended Nabal by protec ng his flocks from
me to me. He therefore felt that he had a right to ask for some considera on at the me of the shearing. Nabal
was churlish, however, and refused to send any provisions to David. David thus determined to fight against Nabal.
But, by divine providence David meets the wife of Nabal on the road. This was surely not a coincidence as we might
like to think. Abigail, Nabal’s wife, has been informed of her husband’s foolish response to David. Did she know he
would some day be king? We are not told, but perhaps she saw in David ’king material’. Regardless, she sets out to
stop him from making her a widow but more, she prevents his blood sin, thus insuring, at least in this case, that he
did not revert to the immorality of Saul.
Have you ever considered that without our even knowing it we are constantly invisibly guided; unaware the Lord intervenes in circumstance and deed. If He did not, we all would lose our way and destroy the very purpose for which
we were born. You didn’t get that job you coveted? Perhaps it was the Lord protec ng you from failure. You never did
amass the wealth you felt you needed to be happy? Perhaps the Father knew in His mercy that it was more than you
could handle and s ll remain true to Him. That girl you wanted to marry so desperately broke your heart when she
said “no”? Maybe the Lord has another, more perfect spouse for you that will help you fulfill your spiritual des ny
(one that you aren’t even aware of).
Here we have a very upset David who feels that he has been cheated; a man who is roiling this over in his mind, replaying his anger again and again. Just as for us in our me, this was David sort of enjoying being mad, holding ght
to a grudge we might say, and not par cularly anxious to let it go and move on. This is a prime example of sin that is
being displayed; it was so then, and it remains so today.
74
Abigail appeals to David. Her words were wise and David listened to her appeal. 1Sa 25:26 Now
therefore, my lord, as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, seeing the LORD hath withholden thee from coming to
shed blood, and from avenging thyself with thine own hand, now let thine enemies, and they that seek evil to my lord,
be as Nabal. Although David did not a ack Nabal, Nabal was overcome with fear when he heard how close to feeling
David’s wrath he had come. 1Sa 25:37 But it came to pass in the morning, when the wine was gone out of Nabal, and
his wife had told him these things, that his heart died within him, and he became as a stone. The Lord then smote him
and he died. 1Sa 25:39 And when David heard that Nabal was dead, he said, Blessed be the LORD, that hath pleaded
the cause of my reproach from the hand of Nabal, and hath kept his servant from evil: for the LORD hath returned
the wickedness of Nabal upon his own head. And David sent and communed with Abigail, to take her to him to wife.
So David finally realizes what has happened, and is thankful God prevented him from commi ng such an act out of
his anger. Had Abigail not gone to David, perhaps he would have ended up as Saul, absented from God. 1Sa 25:29 Yet
a man is risen to pursue thee, and to seek thy soul: but the soul of my lord shall be bound in the bundle of life with
the LORD thy God; and the souls of thine enemies, them shall he sling out, as out of the middle of a sling.
“bundle of life” is actually an ancient Hebrew expression meaning to “be bound into the bundle of life”.
The Hebrew expression is bisror hahayyim and it is indeed speaking of some kind of bundle and oflife.
The bundle, according to Torah teacher Tom Bradford, is referring not to a bag or to a package but rather
to a document. In the days of David a document for the Hebrews was usually a scroll; or even be er,
an animal skin with words wri en on and then rolled up and ed with a leather string to form a bundle.
Thus a be er and more apt transla on is Document of Life or Document of the Living. So the bundle of
life is some kind of heavenly document where those whom the Lord chooses have their names place into
it, and so their life essences, their souls, are tucked safely away forever. Sound familiar? Obviously this is
a very early way of the Old Testament speaking of the Heavenly (or God’s) Book of Life.
(Revela on 20:12) ”And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another
book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were wri en in the
books, according to their works.”
NOTE: Nabal died 10 days a er he received the message of God’s deliverance of his family, which was the
same number as the number of men who came to Nabal with David’s message. Ten is a number of fullness . Ten is a
number of perfect completeness; not a perfect end, but rather something that has been made all it was purposed to
be. Ten is a number of divine order as opposed to chaos. Thus also the proper measure of the giving of our wealth
back to the Lord is 1 tenth. Evidence is gathering in modern physics that there are ten dimensions of existence (Jewish
mys cism has for 500 years made the claim that the Bible describes ten dimensions of existence). So when we come
across the number 10 in the Bible, always pay special a en on just as we do when we see the number 7.
David’s wives. David married Abigail a er Nabal died. He also married Ahinoam of Jezreel. Michal,
75
David’s wife, had been given to another man by Saul. When Saul gave Michal to Phal , he forced her into the sin
of adultery. Likewise, Phal became an adulterer against David. This was one of those sins for which there is not
sacrifice. So in this one line: 1Sa 25:44 But Saul had given Michal his daughter, David’s wife, to Phal the son of Laish,
which was of Gallim. We see the final rebellion against God by Saul.
Saul pursues David again. We read that Saul had promised that he would leave David alone, but he could not resist the tempta on to try to kill the man who threatened his posi on as king. The Ziphites came to Saul in Gibeah and
told him that David was hiding in the hill of Hachilah. 1Sa 26:2 Then Saul arose, and went down to the wilderness of
Ziph, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph. So we see that
Saul again pursues David with an intent to kill him. (Hey, I have a beau ful cardinal watching me through the window
- just had to share :) ) David learns that Saul is near and so he devises a plan. 1Sa 26:7 So David and Abishai came to
the people by night: and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the trench, and his spear stuck in the ground at his bolster:
but Abner and the people lay round about him. Here was his opportunity. Did God bring him here because he had
spared Saul in the cave when God wanted him to slay Saul? Or is this another test for David. Obviously God’s hand is
on David and the circumstances that he encounters and once again we are to see that David spares Saul’s life, perhaps
expec ng God to ’smite him’ as he did Nabal.
David tells Avishai to “not destroy” Saul, it is a li le different than saying “don’t kill him”. The Hebrew is al tashitehu and it means to mu late, or to deface or corrupt. And the idea is that while killing the king would
bring on the sin of blood guilt, there is also another sin piled on if one would kill the king in a way that disgracefully
disfigures him . This statement mostly represents the customs of the mes when even an enemy king is seen as above
most mortals, so he must be accorded special privileges even in his death.
David again spares Saul. Once more David had an opportunity to kill Saul as Saul lay sleeping, Some of David’s men
wanted him to slay the king, but David was unwilling to li up his hand personally against God’s anointed, the ruler
of Israel. He did take his spear and cruse of water. He then awakened Saul and showed him that he could have killed
him when he stole into his camp and took his spear.
Saul again repents. Saul knew that he had done wrong in breaking his oath. He also knew that David was more
righteous than he himself. When he was confronted with this truth, he repented again. 1Sa 26:25 Then Saul said to
David, Blessed be thou, my son David: thou shalt both do great things, and also shalt s ll prevail. So David went on
his way, and Saul returned to his place. But we will see as we con nue whether or not Saul s cks to his pledge or
once again breaks his word. 1Sa 27:1 And David said in his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul: there
is nothing be er for me than that I should speedily escape into the land of the Philis nes; and Saul shall despair of
me, to seek me any more in any coast of Israel: so shall I escape out of his hand.
David is again in Gath. His return to Philis a has been called, by many commentators, a lapse of
faith. He had been told by the prophet Gad not to flee outside the borders of Israel. David must have given up hope
of living safely in Israel. He disobeyed God’s commandment and returned to Achish, the king of Gath. 1Sa 27:6 Then
Achish gave him Ziklag that day: wherefore Ziklag pertaineth unto the kings of Judah unto this day.
76
David’s pretended campaign against Judah. The king of Gath
gave the city of Ziklag to David
for his residence. David and his men dwelt there for a year and four months. On a number of occasions he invaded
the Geshurites and other foreigners to the south of Judah. He reported to Achish the king of Gath that he had been
making a acks against Judah itself. 1Sa 27:12 And Achish believed David, saying, He hath made his people Israel
u erly to abhor him; therefore he shall be my servant for ever. He was apparently, trying to curry favor with Achish
by pretending to a ack his own people.
From the Torah Teaching, a good explana on of what is going on with David, we read:
”David had a heart for God, for this there can no debate; but he also had a desire for life and to live as a
leader of men. We’ll find out later that he also had a desire for beau ful women, no ma er what their legal marital
status. He had a bit of a crusader mentality and so would put his own life on the line to right what he saw as moral
wrongs. He valued life on the one hand, but on the other hand he could take life without remorse if he felt it was
jus fiable in his own eyes. He was amazingly deep and introspec ve as demonstrated by his many Psalms; he was
also impulsive and rash as demonstrated by his determina on to kill Nabal for merely being insulted, and to keep his
own ac vi es private by killing countless men and women so that Achish couldn’t ques on them. And yet, God loved
him and used him migh ly and (outside of God’s own Son, Jesus) may be the most revered Bible hero by Chris ans
and Jews, and the most beloved of the divine Father.
This ought to give each of us who loves the Lord the greatest hope. Even when we fail, miserably, provided we
maintain unwavering loyalty to God, He will con nue to claim us. Even through those stages of our lives that we’re
too embarrassed to reveal to those closest to us, and a er some of our darkest moments, God can s ll use us for His
Kingdom if we will s ck to Him and not close off the possibility (on our own accord) due to our shame and guilt and
belief that there is no way that we are anything but sha ered and useless vessels. We, therefore, must put our trust
in God and Always choose God first!
WHAT CAN WE LEARN
1. Words fitly spoken are like apples of gold (Pro. 25:11). Abigail’s words to David were words of wisdom. When
we hear words of wisdom we should listen and head the advice.
2. Man should respect the things of God. David showed again and again that he respected Saul, God’s appointed
leader. Even though God had already absented Himself from Saul and chosen David to replace Him, Saul had
s ll been anointed king. The ming was in the hands of God, not in David’s.
3. Today we would do well to respect those appointed by God. Jesus told Peter (Ma . 18:21) that we are to forgive
our brethren and unlimited number of mes. David demonstrates this in accep ng Saul’s apology and promise
to stop his pursuit a number of mes...
4. Beware the weakness of the flesh. We look to David as a hero, but even our heroes are only human and thus,
they are flawed. He gave into the ways of the world when pressed, so we have our example. How do we guard
against such a fall? We must be firmly rooted in God’s word.
77
5. A lie is never jus fiable. David lied to Achish and because of this lie he was forced to slaughter everyone to keep
the truth secret. One sin led to another. God cannot lie (Heb 6:18) and He does not expect His servants to lie,
even to save their own lives.
78
Bible in a Year -10 Apr 2015 The Death of Saul (2015-04-10 06:00)
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
INTRODUCTION
The Philis nes prepare to a ack the Israelites, and Achish informs David that he shall accompany him to ba le,
• Saul, unable to obtain any answer from God, applies to a witch at En-dor to bring up Samuel that he may
converse with him on the issue of the war,
• Samuel appears, He reproaches Saul with his misconduct, and informs him of his approaching ruin, He is greatly
distressed; but at the solicita ons of the woman and his own servants, he takes some food, and departs the
same night,
The Philis nes gather their armies together against Israel, and encamp at Aphek; while the Israelites encamp at Jezreel,
• The lords of the Philis nes refuse to let David go to ba le with them, lest he should betray them,
• Achish expresses his confidence in David; but begs him to return,
• David and his men return,
While David is absent with the army of Achish, the Amalekites invade Ziklag, and burn it with fire, and carry away
cap ve David’s wives, and those of his men,
• David and his men return; and, finding the desolate state of their city,
79
• The men mu ny, and threaten to stone David,
• David inquires of the Lord, and is directed to pursue the Amalekites,
• He and his men begin the pursuit, but two hundred, through fa gue are obliged to stay behind at the brook
Besor,
• David finds the Amalekites secure, feas ng on the spoils they had taken; he a acks and destroys the whole
host, except four hundred, who escape on camels,
• The Israelites recover their wives, their families, and all their goods,
• They come to the two hundred who were so faint as not to be able to pursue the enemy, with whom they divide
the spoil; and this becomes a statute in Israel,
• David sends part of the spoil which he had taken to different Jewish ci es, which had suffered by the incursion
of the Amalekites; and where David and his men had been accustomed to resort,
A ba le in Mount Gilboa between Israel and the Philis nes; in which the former are defeated, and Saul’s three sons
slain,
• Saul, being mortally wounded, and afraid to fall alive into the hands of the Philis nes, desires his armor-bearer
to kill him; which he refuses, so Saul falls on his sword, and his armor-bearer does the same,
• The Israelites on the other side of the valley forsake their ci es, and the Philis nes come and dwell in them,
• The Philis nes, finding Saul and his three sons among the slain, strip them of their armor, which they put in the
house of Ashtaroth, cut of their heads, send the news to all the houses of their idols, and fasten the bodies of
Saul and his three sons to the walls of Beth-shan,
• Valiant men of Jabesh-gilead go by night, and take away the bodies; burn them at Jabesh; bury their bones
under a tree; and fast seven days,
Note: I will NOT be doing a summary for I Samuel as it was originally one book with II Samuel. I will provide a summary
at the end of our study of II Samuel.
I Samuel 28-31
David with Achish in ba le. The Philis nes began a campaign against Israel; and David was
forced to go along with his benefactor, the king of Gath. The poli cal situa on is that a major confronta on is brewing between Israel and the Philis nes. Achish says to David that it’s a foregone conclusion that David will fight on the
side of the Philis nes against his fellow Hebrews. Remember, Achish believes David has been figh ng the Hebrews
in the south all along. Now, David, because of his lies, finds himself in a quandary. he had chosen to par cipate in a
dangerous game and it was only a ma er of me before he would have to take a public stance: would he fight for his
own people or against them? Even more, who are his people, now? With whom is he iden fied?
80
Saul forsaken by God. Samuel was dead. Those that had familiar spirits had been put away out of the
land. Saul had no one to give him guidance. The Lord did not answer him because Saul had disobeyed the Lord. The
priests were not able to get an answer by Urim or Thummim. Since Saul had slain most of the priests there were none
of these to help him. The only other prophet of whom we have knowledge was Gad, and he was with David. Saul
was u erly abandoned. When Saul took a long look at the Philis ne army arrayed before him he went into a panic.
Already the u er darkness of despair had gathered around Saul. He was condemned; he knew it, he felt it, and his
tormented conscience convulsed in the knowledge of it. What was going to happen when the sun rose tomorrow and
the two armies raced at one another with deadly inten on?
His overwhelming fear can only be understood in that it was finally sinking in that he was on his own: the Lord
God had abandoned him completely and permanently (a er all, if not for this reason then what?) He had fought the
Philis nes on a number of occasions and usually came out with victory but this me he was filled with foreboding and
terror. It was understood in that era that the first thing that any army did before firing the first arrow in anger was
to consult their gods for direc on. No doubt the Philis nes had consulted with Dagan and were confident of victory.
But what of Saul? Samuel made it clear that God had withdrawn from Saul and no amount of groveling or insistence
would reverse the situa on. Saul had no gods of his own to consult.
Saul seeks the witch of En-dor. The law of Moses had commanded the people of Israel not to allow
a witch to live in their midst. Saul had put out of his country most of those necromancers, wizards, and witches. Some
of his soldiers knew of the home of the witch in En-dor, and he disguised himself and went to her. 1Sa 28:7 Then said
Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his
servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor.
Saul took his usual route; he tried to go around God’s laws and commands that he might obtain God’s wisdom in an
alterna ve way. Since you can’t force a dream upon yourself or anyone else, and since the High Priest apparently tried
in vein in Saul’s presence but the Urim and Thummim (lots) would produce no answer, the only remaining choice was
to get a Prophet to give Saul God’s wisdom. And since Samuel, his prophet, was dead the only way to accomplish that
was to have a necromancer call up Samuel from the grave.
As I was contempla ng this I thought to myself, isn’t that the way of humans in all ages and eras?
Even Chris ans at mes tend to think that we can ignore God’s laws and commands and instead ask the
Lord to bless our way. We get ourselves into a dire situa on as a result, and then we hope (expect?) that
the Lord will give us a different and be er answer to our problem using unconven onal (even un-Biblical)
means. Or because He’s merciful and He loves us, he’ll suspend His eternal laws and commands just this
once and give us a solu on that we prefer be er. Like Saul we try to find the loophole and go around the
Lord’s ways and principles and pa erns, sincerely believing that perhaps another way will lead us to Him.
It sounds so irra onal when said out loud, but so logical when you try it.–Tom Bradford says it well.
81
Ghost of Samuel. The Lord raised Samuel and allowed him to make a posthumous appearance to
Saul. This appearance frightened the witch and greatly distressed Saul. King Saul tells his closest advisers to go and
find him a female necromancer. The Hebrew term is Ba’alath Ob; it literally means, “Ghost wife”. A li le more than
5 miles northeast from Shunem, the Philis ne encampment, was a place called En Dor where a well known Ba’alath
Ob lived. She had apparently agreed to quit her prac ce instead of leaving the area. Let’s be clear: in general the
diviners and necromancers spoken of in the historical books of the Bible were Hebrews unless an alternate na onality
was given for them. Isn’t it bizarre that here was Saul consor ng in the act of Black Magic to consult dead spirits (a
capital offense in the Torah Law), but then swearing in the name of the God of Israel as proof of his sincerity to hold
the Ba’alath Ob harmless! Saul wanted the divine to come to him by means of the an -divine! How u erly modern
chris an!
1Sa 28:13 And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said
unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth. No ce that whatever it was that appeared seems to have been seen
only by the witch. Although virtually any pain ng or illustra on of this event depicts Samuel as visible to all present
that was not the case. It is obvious that the Ba’alath Ob was being swept along into something she had no control
over, by a power she did not understand. There is no indica on that she spoke special words, burned incense, or
performed an occult ritual. Saul spoke the words that he wanted Samuel and suddenly there he was! The witch, who
had conjured up dead spirits countless mes, was not expec ng what she was encountering (to say the least). No
doubt this was the Lord who was manipula ng this frightening event for His own purposes.
1Sa 28:14 And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and he is covered with
a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground, and bowed himself.
Saul has sought the help of a witch, a necromancer. When the ghost of Samuel appears he is fearful, but asks him
what is going to occur in the coming ba le. But Samuel reminds him of what he had told him earlier, that God has
departed from him and he is not on his own. And that God has appointed another to take the throne. 1Sa 28:17 And
the LORD hath done to him, as he spake by me: for the LORD hath rent the kingdom out of thine hand, and given it to
thy neighbour, even to David: All the verbs present in this passage are of the complete or perfect tense, meaning that
Samuel is saying that God has already done these things. Nothing can be undone; the outcome is sealed because it’s
happened in the past (from a Heavenly perspec ve). All that remains is for it to be fulfilled on earth.
Here we have an excellent example of what is so irra onally common among mankind; we know the truth, we know
the inevitable outcome of our disobedience, but we go blindly forward as though the day of judgment will never arrive.
If we put it out of our minds and con nue doing what we know is unwise or sinful, perhaps God will forget about it
and judgment will bypass us, but this is not what scripture tells us.
1Sa 28:19 Moreover the LORD will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philis nes: and to morrow shalt
thou and thy sons be with me: the LORD also shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philis nes. This is
referring to the concept of She’ol, the grave, the place that all humans (righteous or wicked) will suffer; then from
there men will judged. (Heb 9:27) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and a er this the judgment: But Saul
wanted a ba le plan, not his fate.
82
Saul was fas ng in a delusional a empt to approach the God that had already abandoned him. He was, in his own
way, repentant, but, it is too late. His fate is sealed. Saul’s a empt at a ’man-made’ way to force God to accept him
is laughable to us now, but how o en do we try to conform God into our own ideas?
(1Ch 10:13-14 Complete Jewish Bible) 13 So Sha’ul died for the transgression he commi ed against ADONAI, because
of the word of ADONAI that he did not keep and because he sought the counsel of a spirit 14 instead of consul ng
ADONAI. Therefore ADONAI put him to death and turned the rulership over to David the son of Yishai.
There is no reason to think that this incident was anything but of the Lord, and it was quite real.
In fact we have other Scripture that speaks directly to the issue that has caused many Church leaders
to simply label the story itself as false, or to give the Devil the credit for Samuel’s appearance and his
pronouncements. Would God speak His Word by means of an ungodly situa on whereby even a witch is
at the center of it? – Tom Bradford Torah Studies
Eze 14:1 -8Then came certain of the elders of Israel unto me, and sat before me. And the word of the LORD came unto
me, saying, Son of man, these men have set up their idols in their heart, and put the stumblingblock of their iniquity
before their face: should I be enquired of at all by them? Therefore speak unto them, and say unto them, Thus saith
the Lord GOD; Every man of the house of Israel that se eth up his idols in his heart, and pu eth the stumblingblock
of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the LORD will answer him that cometh according to the
mul tude of his idols; That I may take the house of Israel in their own heart, because they are all estranged from me
through their idols. Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Repent, and turn yourselves
from your idols; and turn away your faces from all your abomina ons. For every one of the house of Israel, or of the
stranger that sojourneth in Israel, which separateth himself from me, and se eth up his idols in his heart, and pu eth
the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to a prophet to enquire of him concerning me; I the
LORD will answer him by myself: And I will set my face against that man, and will make him a sign and a proverb, and
I will cut him off from the midst of my people; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
Here we have the Word of God exploring just such a situa on as we saw at En Dor. Idolatrous Hebrews
are seeking God through pagan idols. And what does Yehoveh says He will do when a Hebrew does such
a thing? He says that HE shall speak to them as they are consul ng these idols, and that He will tell them
to repent from their ungodliness or otherwise the Lord will turn away from them and cut them off from
the rest of His people. That is exactly what we saw in the story of Saul and the Witch of En Dor. No ce
in Ezekiel that in His response God is not answering their prayers; He is not offering a blessing by means
of pagan and manmade ways of worship and communica on that are unauthorized by the Torah. Rather
He is giving a warning of a curse for their ac ons. He is telling them to stop now! Repent! Otherwise
they will become no more than a warning sign and a very unpleasant example for the future genera ons.
–ibid
David challenged by the lords of the Philis nes. No ce the loca ons are different from those in
chapter 2. This is not a conflict, but rather a problem within the ’scholarly’ mindset of modern readers. Much like our
83
films, this long story is jumping around through the events, vigne es if you will. Necessary informa on is inserted to
allow us to understand more fully what is going on simultaneously in me. This allows us to view the circumstances of
different players. We also need to remember that because centuries ago some scholars decided to divide some of the
larger books of the Bible into 2 books ( Samuel and Kings for example), and then took the further step of dividing all
the books into chapters and then further into verses, so that today we get this false sense of beginnings and endings
when as o en as not one chapter simply runs directly into the next without interrup on.
The lords of the other ci es of the Philis nes doubted that David would fight against his own people when they
actually went into ba le. These men requested that Achish, the king of Gath, send David back and not allow him to
go into the conflict. Achish was not convinced that David would betray him in the heat of ba le, but he yielded to the
will of the other Philis ne leaders and sent David back from the ba lefield.
No ce the opposite natures of Saul and David. David was willing to admit his wrongs before the Lord, repent and
change; Saul only set his jaw all the firmer and became even more defiant
Hebrew for adversary is Satan
David departs from Achish. The Philis ne lords of such towns as Ekron, Lachish, Gaza and Gath had met at Aphek
along the Mediterranean coast as they prepared to go into ba le. They did not, by any means trust David to fight
with them, suspec ng instead that he would turn and fight on the side of the Hebrews. A er all, they were his own
people. So they demand Achish send him away. In spite of the ensuing discussion whereby Achish tries to convince
them, they stand fast. 1Sa 29:7 Wherefore now return, and go in peace, that thou displease not the lords of the
Philis nes. So David, in spite of confirming that he was loyal to the Philis nes, departed from this point and returned
toward Ziklag. There is no indica on up to this point that David had any inten on of turning on the Philis nes. It
appears, that once again, God saved David from himself. He, and his men, would not be allowed to spill the blood of
his fellow Hebrews and to fight against their own na on with their enemies. The Philis nes went on to ba le near
Jezreel.
The Hebrew word that is being translated as enemy or adversary is a familiar one: satan. That’s right; here the accusa on is that David would become a satan of Philis a. Despite the reality that we tend to use Satan as a formal
name for the devil, in fact it is but a common Hebrew term that means adversary. And here we see a good example
of what an adversary (a satan) does in the eyes of the ancients. First and foremost a satan is a traitor. Second is that a
satan will fight against his former ally and king. Third is that even though he might feign loyalty, the words are hollow
because a satan is a liar by nature. These are good things to remember about the a ributes of the Evil One whom we
call Satan.–Bradford
1Sa 29:11 So David and his men rose up early to depart in the morning, to return into the land of the Philis nes.
And the Philis nes went up to Jezreel.
84
David’s camp looted. David and his men marched for three days from Aphek and came to Ziklag. They arrived only
to find that their camp had been a acked, the city had been burned with fire, and the men’s wives and sons and
daughters had been taken cap ve. 1Sa 30:4 Then David and the people that were with him li ed up their voice and
wept, un l they had no more power to weep.
David was distressed, not only for the loss of his wives and property, but because the people blamed him, they even
wanted to stone him. But rather than react as Saul would have , David turns to consult God. 1Sa 30:8 And David
enquired at the LORD, saying, Shall I pursue a er this troop? shall I overtake them? And he answered him, Pursue:
for thou shalt surely overtake them, and without fail recover all. Asking God what to do, he is told to go a er these
plunderers, they would succeed.
David’s pursuit of his enemies. David made inquiry of Abiathar, the priest, to find out the Lord’s will. The Lord informed him that he should pursue those who had destroyed his camp. 1Sa 30:11 And they found an Egyp an in the
field, and brought him to David, and gave him bread, and he did eat; and they made him drink water; David found
a straggler from the enemy’s forces, and the straggler helped David to take the enemy’s camp by surprise, upon the
promise of protec on. 1Sa 30:18 And David recovered all that the Amalekites had carried away: and David rescued
his two wives.
I want to point out God’s perfec on here. IF the Hebrew people, way back at the me of Moses,
had totally (and not par ally) obeyed God’s commandment to destroy the Amalekites, totally and completely, then
much of this story would not have taken place. We need to understand that God is perfect in his foresight, but more
importantly we need to understand that God works outside of our realm of understanding, in me and space. We
CANNOT fully know or understand the works of God, we are only to obey, trus ng in His righteousness. God is just,
and regardless of what we might think as humans, ONLY God’s way is the right way. This spirit of Amalek is alive and
well in all those who oppose Israel and God’s people the Hebrews.
David’s good will towards Judah. David took considerable spoil from the Amalekites, who had
a acked the camp. He did not keep all of it himself. He ordered that all his men should share equally in the spoils,
and in spite of their disagreement, he then sent some of the spoils to the ci es of Judah. He especially made sure that
spoils were sent to Hebron and to all the places where he and his men had been protected when they fled from Saul.
We see David working in the spirit of love, in a Godly manner, towards his enemies. 1Sa 30:24 For who will hearken
unto you in this ma er? but as his part is that goeth down to the ba le, so shall his part be that tarrieth by the stuff:
they shall part alike. David in essence was making a restora on to all those he had plundered over the past year or
so. 1Sa 30:31 And to them which were in Hebron, and to all the places where David himself and his men were wont
to haunt.
Again Tom Bradford expands on this event: ”David rescued every last woman and child and all the goods and animals
that had been stolen from them. I can’t even imagine what a joyous evening of reunion and relief that must have
been. In addi on to recovering their own goods, David’s men also took all that the Amalekites had taken from other
loca ons. David claimed it as his own, although I’m not so sure that was proper. Back in chapter 15 the instruc on
to Saul was to a ack Amalek and destroy everything right down to the ca le. This was more a standing order to all
Israelite leaders than it was a one- me instruc on meant only for Saul. Considering that David had consulted Yehoveh
and was given the instruc on to go a er Amalek this smacks of Holy War and the spoils of Holy War belong to God.
No doubt much of what David’s men retrieved from the Amalekite camp was classified as recovery of property and
not spoils of war (the Lord would have had no issue with this). But what David took was indeed spoils of war.”
1Sa 30:25 And it was so from that day forward, that he made it a statute and an ordinance for Israel unto this day.
The Hebrew says the restora on of the spoil and the equal division became a choq and a mishpat: an ordinance and
85
a judgment. In other words (as the word mishpat implies) this ruling of David’s was seen as appropriate jus ce and
so it became part of the Israelite legal code that had to be followed or there was a penalty.
Saul’s death. Samuel had told Saul that he would die in ba le. This came to pass as the armies
of Israel and Philis a met in ba le on Mt. Gilboa. 1Sa 31:2 And the Philis nes followed hard upon Saul and upon his
sons; and the Philis nes slew Jonathan, and Abinadab, and Malchishua, Saul’s sons. Saul fell on his sword and killed
himself. 1Sa 31:5 And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead, he fell likewise upon his sword, and died with
him. So his armor-bearer, and his sons were killed with him in this fatal ba le. We find this same account, nearly word
for word, in the book of 1stChronicles 10 and with only the most minor varia on that is really only added informa on.
The Bible spends no me to give us a blow by blow account or the gory details of their deaths; rather we are only told
that the archers had zeroed in on King Saul. At least one arrow found its mark and Saul was mortally wounded and in
great pain. Some ancient Biblical manuscripts include that he was shot in the belly, the area of the intes nes. In 1st
Samuel 31 it says “all of his men”, but in 1st Chronicles 10 it says “all of his household”. So we now understand that
the phrase “all of his men” is meant as a saying, a figure a speech, with the idea being that “his men” are those men
closest to him by blood and by status. The English word “household” is bayith in Hebrew; it literally means “house” in
the sense of those living together or joined together. It can mean rela ves, but it can also include (as it does here) the
king’s court. 1Sa 31:9 And they cut off his head, and stripped off his armour, and sent into the land of the Philis nes
round about, to publish it in the house of their idols, and among the people. Saul’s burial. To take everything of value
from a corpse, from weapons to armor to jewelry, was not considered at all wrong nor a mistreatment of the dead. It
was the customary reward of the spoils of war to the victor, and to this day in all armies the prac ce is permi ed to
some level or another. But to add the final insult to Israel’s defeat the Philis nes hacked off the heads of Saul and his
sons. This typically was not done to a king. The Philis nes cut off Saul’s head and stripped off his armor. They put his
armor in the house of their gods the Ashtaroth. In the eyes of the Philis nes their Philis ne gods had defeated the
one Israelite god, YHWH. Ironically the Philis nes had no way of knowing that God had long ago abandoned King Saul
and was now with David, the nagid, the king in wai ng; They fastened his body to the wall of Bethshan.
Beth Shean was a well known and long established fortress of the Canaanites; it had been built centuries earlier and fought over countless mes due to its strategic loca on. Even the Egyp ans occupied it
for about a 200 year period beginning at a me not long before the Exodus. It was located at the junc on
of the important east-west highway that connected the Jezreel Valley with Gilead, and the main road
that connected the north to the south of Canaan. Caravans and armies used these routes since me immemorial and the importance of these highways never ceased being of the greatest value to merchants,
conquerors and kings. Apparently the Philis nes controlled the Beth Sh’an fortress at the me of Saul’s
demise and they wanted to send a powerful message to all who passed by that Israel’s me was over and
that the era of Philis ne hegemony in the region had begun. So they hung the headless bodies of Saul
and his sons onto the city walls and allowed nature’s scavengers to start to work on them. This could
only have indicated the immense hatred and disrespect that the Philis nes had for Saul and his northern
tribal coali on.– Torah Studies
86
The men of Jabesh-Gilead heard that Saul’s body was hanging on Bethshan. The brave men of JabeshGilead marched through the night to right this terrible wrong. Saul’s reign had not wrung all truth, gra tude and
courage out of Israel. They crossed over the Jordan, waited un l the residents of were asleep behind the safety of
their walls, and stealthily hoisted Saul and his sons’ bodies down. They carried the corpses all the way back to JabeshGilead for what to them must have been a proper and honorable burial. 1Sa 31:13 And they took their bones, and
buried them under a tree at Jabesh, and fasted seven days. So, as we close the book of I Samuel and turn the page to
II Samuel we can see how the division of this one book leaves the reader hanging. When will David be crowned King?
What is going on with the Philis nes? These and other ques ons will soon find answers as we con nue our study.
may God bless your gi . This is only a study guide and personal commentary which means that you are responsible
for your own interpreta on of the Bible. I have provided only a li le of my insight to these chapters, and they are not
necessarily always the best interpreta on for you. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the
Holy Spirit are priority in interpreta on. You must not relinquish this to a commentator. You must always seek the truth
in scripture, take no man’s (or my) word for anything. For history proves the fickle nature we all possess. The only true
interpreta on of scripture is that of the writer…and you can Believe… 2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspira on of
God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc on, for instruc on in righteousness: Resources: My Primary
resource is the King James Bible – Others include Print, online, and so ware commentaries and databases. Please see
the resources in the le sidebar and the drop down menu for many addi onal resources to assist you in your studies.
I heavily research what I present, but I am in no way infallible. PLEASE, do your own PRAYERFUL study. I present only
one interpreta on, mine, which is based in study, and research as well as considera on for many commentaries from
others. I pray God will con nue to guide me, and that nothing I share here will in any way hinder your walk with God,
but the ul mate responsibility FOR YOUR SALVATION lies with you! Got Jesus? In Jesus Christ’s name I pray. Amen
87
Bible in a Year - 11 Apr 2015 Long live the King (2015-04-11 06:00)
TODAY IS 21 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR It is a Sabbath Day unto the Lord
Today is the last day of Feast of Unleavened Bread 15 Abib – 21 and it concludes with the Day of First-fruits tomorrow
22 Abib.
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 2 Samuel chapters 1-2
INTRODUCTION
Originally the 1st and 2nd books of Samuel were one book, therefore I will be trea ng them as such. We con nue
with the rise of King David.
An Amalekite comes to David, and informs him that the Philis nes had routed the Israelites; and that Saul and his
sons were slain,
• And pretends that he himself had dispatched Saul, finding him ready to fall alive into the hands of the Philis nes,
and had brought his crown and bracelets to David,
• David and his men mourn for Saul and his sons,
• He orders the Amalekite, who professed that he had killed Saul, to be slain,
• David’s funeral song for Saul and Jonathan,
88
David, by the direc on of God, goes up to Hebron, and is there anointed king over the house of Judah,
• He congratulates the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead on their kindness in rescuing the bodies of Saul and his sons
from the Philis nes,
• Abner anoints Ish-bosheth, Saul’s son, king over Gilead, the Ashurites, Jezreel, Ephraim, Benjamin, and all Israel;
over whom he reigned two years,
• David reigns over Judah, in Hebron, seven years and six months,
• Account of a ba le between Abner, captain of the Israelites, and Joab, captain of the men of Judah; in which
the former are routed with the loss of three hundred and sixty men: but Asahel, the brother of Joab, is killed
by Abner,
Please listen to a li le History of this me period and a short summary by Torah Teacher Tom Bradford. It will help
place the events in your mind.
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/etcwk1-2-Samu el-a-li le-history.mp3”][/audio]
2 Samuel chapters 1-2
The Amalekite’s account of Saul’s death. David was in Ziklag when he heard of Saul’s death. An
Amalekite came to him saying that he had fled from the field of ba le. He told David that he had seen Saul lying
mortally wounded and that Saul had asked him to kill him. The Amakelite said that he had actually slain Saul. We read
in 1 Samuel 31 that Saul had been wounded by an arrow and 1Sa 31:4 Then said Saul unto his armourbearer, Draw thy
sword, and thrust me through therewith; lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through, and abuse me. But
his armourbearer would not; for he was sore afraid. Therefore Saul took a sword, and fell upon it. This ’confession’
therefore has been called into ques on. It seems as if this messenger had been lying, that he had simply seized an
opportunity to bring the news, and the crown, to David in the hope of some reward or preferen al treatment. He
was an Amalekite and perhaps did not know that David had been instructed by God to destroy ALL the Amalekites.
No ce David asks him why he was not afraid to take the life of one of God’s anointed, the meaning is how could this
fellow think that, in God’s perspec ve, he has the right to put asunder that which God has established? David never
wavered from his posi on that regardless of the King’s behavior God had established and anointed him as king and
so Saul was not to be harmed. 2Sa 1:16 And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath
tes fied against thee, saying, I have slain the LORD’S anointed. And so the messenger is killed.
David wasted no me in having the Amalekite ger (foreigner or what we might call a resident alien) executed, which
means David fully believed the man’s story. From David’s perspec ve, once an Amalekite always an Amalekite. David
tells the fellow that his blood is on his own head. This is a Hebraism that means the killing of Saul is a crime of blood
(a specific category of crimes) for which there is no atonement and no mercy. All crimes of this nature are capital
crimes. The Levi cal Law Lists several trespasses for which the blood of an innocent animal was not acceptable as a
subs tute for the blood (the life) of the violator. Therefore rather than an animal’s blood being, symbolically, on the
criminals head (as atonement for him) only his own blood can sa sfy God’s jus ce. This crime of unjus fiable killing
of a man is one of those crimes.–Torah Teachings
89
David’s punishment of the Amalekite. David was not willing himself to lay a hand on God’s
anointed. He had no respect for anyone else who would destroy God’s chosen servant. He ordered one of his men to
fall upon the Amalekite and kill him. One of the major give-a-ways as to the very dubious account of the Amalekite is
the men on of chariots. Saul and his sons had escaped up into the heights of Mt. Gilboa where they were killed. A
man on horseback probably could have made his way up there with difficulty; but certainly not chariots. Chariots are
the equivalent of modern day tanks: they don’t do well in mountainous areas or on steep grades. Chariots needed
room to operate and maneuver; they needed to be deployed on a plain or on lightly rolling terrain like the Jezreel
Valley (where the main ba le was fought). They don’t climb mountains, and they can’t operate among boulders or on
slopes, or wind their way through a forest of trees. Even cavalry loses much of its advantage in such a ba le se ng.
We will see shortly that David did not regard this sort of thing as the bringing of good news. 2Sa 4:10 When one told
me, saying, Behold, Saul is dead, thinking to have brought good dings, I took hold of him, and slew him in Ziklag,
who thought that I would have given him a reward for his dings: But we will cover that more when we get to it. The
Amalekite thought by stripping the King and being the one to bring David the “good news” that Saul was dead; and
then by claiming that it was he who had granted Saul a merciful death blow, he would obtain a reward and possibly
become part of David’s inner circle. A be er assump on is that this man was merely the first to stumble across Saul’s
body and was an opportunist.
The Song of the Bow. David mourned greatly over the deaths of Saul and Jonathan. He wrote a
lamenta on that came to be known as the Song of the Bow. He taught it to the people of Israel, and they used this
in their lamenta on over Saul. 2Sa 1:21 Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, neither let there be rain, upon
you, nor fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, as though he had
not been anointed with oil. What it says in the Hebrew is that no sadeh that produces terumah should grow there (as
the result of moisture depriva on). Sadeh is indeed a field, but terumah is actually a ritual offering of grain. What we
call a wave offering or a heave offering is what’s being referred to. So the idea isn’t that no plants or grain should ever
grow there on Mt. Gilboa; rather only not the BEST grain that is given the honor to be ritually waved at the Temple by
the priests. “the shield of Saul as if he had not been anointed by oil”; poor transla on. Tom Bradford explains: it was
indeed the shield. Shields in Saul’s day were o en made of leather. It would take a man of extraordinary strength
and size, along with an extremely thinly pounded metal sheet to form a useful shield. So leather (which was abundant) was the typical material for a shield (some socie es, like the Philis nes, had developed advanced metal working
technology and may have been employing metal shields, but not Israel). Anyone who has ever owned horses knows
that you need to keep a saddle cleaned and lubricated or it cracks and deteriorates. But Rashi also points out that
before warriors went out to ba le they would put extra oil on their leather shields so that as the enemy’s weapons
struck them, they tended to slide off in a glancing blow. That is the inten on of this passage about oil and Saul and
his shield.”
2Sa 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy
love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women. This ”love” between David and Jonathan has been previously
addressed. It is NOT a homosexual rela onship, as many, sadly, o en use this to indicate God’s approval of such
90
rela onship.. It is a situa on of Faithful alliance. When the rela onship was a poli cal rela onship, the word “love”
was most closely synonymous with the phrase “happily loyal”. ”Thus what we have in verse 26 is a contrast between
the great and unusually genuine degree of poli cal loyalty and faithfulness between David and his friend Jonathan
(who was the heir to the throne of Israel as Saul’s dynasty) as contrasted to the rather limited kind of love between a
man and woman that revolved around sexual in macy, producing children, and the labor a woman was expected to
produce for a man’s household.”
Download the Book of Jasher 2Sa 1:18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it
is wri en in the book of Jasher.) NOTE: –Tom Bradford explains The Book of Jashar has been lost to history. We only know
of its existence due to men ons of it in the Bible and in a handful of other ancient Hebrew documents. That said; an
anonymous person created a forgery in the mid-1700’s that was supposed to be this work. (downloadable file above)
Although academia has always discredited it a few teachers and pastors have been duped into thinking that this is the
actual sefer Yashar as spoken of here; it is not. In fact, this book is being reprinted and sold to this day. Don’t waste
your money, get it here if you are curious. Download the Book of Jasher
David, king in Hebron. David inquired of the Lord concerning his every move. He asked him
where he should go a er Saul had been killed. 2Sa 2:1 And it came to pass a er this, that David enquired of the LORD,
saying, Shall I go up into any of the ci es of Judah? And the LORD said unto him, Go up. And David said, Whither shall
I go up? And he said, Unto Hebron. The Lord told him to go up to Hebron. Once David asked a ques on of God and
felt he got his answer, he acted. God said yes to David’s inquiry of going to Judah, and then yes to Hebron as the place
in Judah he should go. The very next verse has David packing up his two wives, Achinoam and Avigayil, and leaving
for Hebron. His en re army (they were all s ll in Ziklag) also packed up their families and moved with David. Hebron
was one of the important ci es of Judah, David’s own tribe. David went up to this important city, and all the men of
Judah came there to make him king over them.
This brings up an important point. God accomplishes His
will with the coopera on of man! So o en we pray about something and then sit back ans wait for God to do something. But this is not how God works according to what we learn in scripture. In every instance where a prayer is
asking God what a person should do, the person follows through with an ac on, right or wrong as it may be. David
was by no means a perfect example for us to follow, however, we look to him as the man ”a er God’s own heart”.
Why? Because he sought God and DID what he believed God was instruc ng him to do. He was a man of ac on.
91
Inquiring of God is prayer, no ma er how one does it. By tradi on ( not biblical example) we fold our hands, bow
our heads, close our eyes, etc. Only in our day has prayer become exclusively a religious term. In the not too distant
past “prayer” was used to describe a person approaching a king or a nobleman, asking for something. Prayer is not
the end-game; it is but the necessary prepara on for our ac on. Yes, we con nue to pray for the poor and hungry,
but that will not miraculously put food on the table. Prayer without ac on is detrimental to God’s plans. It is the
equivalent of a child asking a parent, should I clean my room, and they answer yes. But the actual cleanup is never
done. Not very produc ve to say the least. God accomplishes His will with the coopera on of man! This means, we
ask God HIS WILL, and then we ACT on what we are told, led, or inspired to do, in Christ by the Holy Spirit. This Bible
in a year series is an example. My prayers, God, what shall I do to help spread your truth, led me here, and keep me
returning every day. If I had only prayed, but not followed through, neither you or I would have benefited from the
many hours of study this has led me to. God accomplishes His will with the coopera on of man!
The Jewish commentary called Bereishis Rabbah states that Abner did not deny that David was to be king, but only
thought that it was not yet the appointed me. This convic on had to do with a tradi on that had evolved that the
tribe of Benjamin was to supply at least two kings BEFORE David would become king. And this belief was due to a
statement made in the Torah in Genesis 35:11 that God blessed Jacob (as he was returning from Mesopotamia and
fleeing from Laban) by saying that “kings shall issue from your loins”. This was taken to mean that since up to now
there was no indica on that any king had come from the sons already born to Jacob, that these kings would be manifested in a not-yet-born son. Tradi on says that the only son not yet born to Jacob was Benjamin. Therefore it was
Benjamin that would produce these kings. And since the word is a plural that meant at least 2 Benjamite kings had
to rule before David would assume the throne. Therefore (reasons the Rabbis) Abner was merely being righteous
by insis ng that the 2nd Benjamite king be installed (Ishbosheth), and then only therea er would Abner help David
become king. Abner was determined to fulfill the prophe c words of Genesis 35:11.
BUT, there is be er more straigh orward answer present in the Scriptures; Abner was the now the real and undisputed power in the north and Ishbosheth was too young and incompetent to lead Israel on his own. Abner knew that
by installing the weak and easily manipulated Ishbosheth as his puppet that he would personally control Israel using
Saul’s sole surviving son as a mere proxy, and at the same me appear to be doing the right thing in the people’s eyes
by con nuing Saul’s dynasty with his surviving son.
Saul’s son, king in Gilead. Abner, the son of Ner and captain of Saul’s hosts, took Ishbosheth,
Saul’s son, and made him king in Gilead. Gilead was the land east of the Jordan river. There were thus two rival kings
in Israel. 2Sa 2:7 Therefore now let your hands be strengthened, and be ye valiant: for your master Saul is dead, and
also the house of Judah have anointed me king over them.
No ce that generally ever since the tribes of Israel crossed over the Jordan they were divided into
coali ons. As of the me of David there were 3: the house of Judah, the house of Israel, and Gilead (in
the Trans-Jordan). Before his death Saul held the loyalty of most of the house of Israel and of Gilead, but
not the house of Judah. It’s hard to overstate the importance of a modern Chris an and Jew understanding these designa ons and this territorial and poli cal reality because it will play a central role throughout
the remainder of the Bible. It also helps to untangle many prophecies (fulfilled and future), and it is also
relevant to current events in the modern State of Israel.–Tom Bradford
92
2Sa 2:10 Ishbosheth Saul’s son was forty years old when he began to reign over Israel, and reigned two years. But the
house of Judah followed David.
The mul ple use of the word “kindness” is in the original Hebrew language “chesed”. And chesed
indicates the commission of a righteous deed that is beyond everyday kindness. It is an act of mercy
and grace that mimics the kindness of God. But there is also present a very complicated Middle Eastern
thought pa ern and dialogue that is difficult for modern Westerners to spot. The underlying implica on
is that when we read of a person wishing chesed on another because of the other’s own chesed, it is
because the person who was on the receiving end of the righteous deed is unable to repay it himself. So
in this case the ci zens of Jabesh-Gilead showed chesed to Saul and his family, but since Saul is dead he
obviously can’t reciprocate with a righteous deed towards Jabesh. Such a thing is quite intolerable to
Middle Eastern sensibili es and must be remedied. (See Ruth 1:8-9)–Tom Bradford
David is offering a bond of faith with them in place of the bond they had with Saul. This idea of repaying good deed
for good deed is very Middle Eastern. So since the deceased Saul and the people of Jabesh can no longer show loyalty
and chesed to one another, David suggests that (in addi on to God giving chesed to Jabesh) he will be the one who
repays the people of Jabesh for their act of righteousness towards Saul–ibid
Ishbosheth is not so much a name as an epithet. It is unthinkable that a man would name his son
“man of shame”. So there is some disagreement on what his real given name actually was. Later in the
Book of Kings we see men on of this same fellow but he is given the name of Eshba’al, and there is good
reason to think that this may indeed have been his original given name. This name issue may seem trivial
on the surface, but there is good reason to spend a li le me with this because it helps us to understand
the ancient Hebrew mindset at this point in Israel’s cultural development. Understanding these sorts of
nuances is the key that unlocks many mysteries and difficul es of the Bible. Eshba’al means, “Fire of
ba’al”. By the me of David the Hebrews had borrowed the word ba’al and added it to their vocabulary,
and they used it to mean “lord” in the sense of a person with authority. it did reflect a very casual and
un-pious a tude toward the Law of Moses and the Hebrew religion in general. But that’s what happens
to language; a word that means one thing is incorporated into a new language and it comes to mean
something similar but not quite the same. And a er a genera on or two since the word was adopted,
the use of it is done without thinking; no one bothers to challenge its real meaning or whether it is even
proper to use it. But the editors of some of Old Testament books determined that it was inappropriate for
that word to appear in the holy texts and therefore they would not write or say the word “ba’al” because it
was offensive to them. Thus when they copied the most ancient Biblical scrolls they subs tuted the word
bosheth (which means shame) when they ran across the word “ba’al”. Thus Eshba’al became Ishbosheth.–
ibid
The contest at Gibeon. Abner was the captain of the Ish-bosheth’s army, and Joab was the captain
of David’s army. 2Sa 2:13 And Joab the son of Zeruiah, and the servants of David, went out, and met together by the
pool of Gibeon: and they sat down, the one on the one side of the pool, and the other on the other side of the pool.
The two armies met in a ba le near Gibeon. 2Sa 2:16 And they caught every one his fellow by the head, and thrust
his sword in his fellow’s side; so they fell down together: wherefore that place was called Helkathhazzurim, which is
in Gibeon. A contest was suggested, and twelve men from each side went out to engage in the ba le. All these men
93
fell mortally wounded, and nothing was decided by the contest. The two main armies then joined in ba le. The Pool
of Gibeon has been located. It turns out to have been man-made; it was a large cistern carved out of the rock. About
40 feet in diameter and 80 feet deep, it caught the runoff from the surrounding area and stored the water. There is
even a stairway carved into the walls of this cistern so that as the water level dropped the precious liquid could s ll be
accessed.
Asahel slain. 2Sa 2:23 Howbeit he refused to turn aside: wherefore Abner with the
hinder end of the spear smote him under the fi h rib, that the spear came out behind him; and he fell down there,
and died in the same place: and it came to pass, that as many as came to the place where Asahel fell down and died
stood s ll. Asahel was the younger brother of Joab. He decided to pursue Abner from the field of ba le. Abner did
not wish to engage in hand-to-hand combat with Asahel. Asahel was a young man, and Abner was an experienced
man of war. When Asahel con nued to pursue Abner, Abner put out the back part of his spear. Asahel was running
at full speed and ran against the sharpened end of Abner’s spear. Asahel thus fell mortally wounded. 2Sa 2:32 And
they took up Asahel, and buried him in the sepulchre of his father, which was in Bethlehem. And Joab and his men
went all night, and they came to Hebron at break of day. But as Asahel’s brothers carried his body to the family burial
plot in Bethlehem, Yoav burned with desire for revenge. The truce arranged at Ammah Hill between he and Abner
applied only to kingdom business; but the ma er over Asahel’s death was personal and between he and Abner alone.
This was, a er all, the Middle East where all blood feuds end badly
of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc on, for instruc on in righteousness: Resources: My
Primary resource is the King James Bible – Others include Print, online, and so ware commentaries and databases.
Please see the resources in the le sidebar and the drop down menu for many addi onal resources to assist you in
your studies. You may no ce that I have been using the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford as a main resource for many
of these studies. This is mainly because I have done much research and find these teachings to be aligned to scripture
and quite informa ve.
94
Bible in a Year -12 Apr 2015 King over Israel (2015-04-12 06:00)
TODAY IS 22 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR Today is the Day of First-fruits
God’s Appointed mes are SCHEDULED APPOINTMENTS to meet with His people... Would you stand up God?
– March Schedule
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 2 Samuel 3-5
INTRODUCTION
Account of the children born to David in Hebron,
• Abner being accused by Ish-bosheth of familiari es with Rizpah, Saul’s concubine, he is enraged; offers his
services to David; goes to Hebron, and makes a league with him,
• Joab, through enmity to Abner, pretends to David that he came as a spy, and should not be permi ed to return,
• He follows Abner, and treacherously slays him,
• David hearing of it is greatly incensed against Joab, and pronounces a curse upon him and upon his family,
• He commands a general mourning for Abner, and himself follows the bier weeping, 2Sa _3:30-32. David’s
lamenta on over Abner,
95
• The people solicit David to take meat; but he fasts the whole day, and complains to them of the insolence and
intrigues of Joab and his brothers: the people are pleased with his conduct,
Some account of Rechab and Baanah, two of Ish-bosheth’s captains, and of Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan,
• Rechab and Baanah murder Ish-bosheth, and escape; and bring his head to David,
• David is greatly irritated, and commands them to be slain,
The elders of all the tribes of Israel come and anoint David king over all Israel,
• He goes against the Jebusites, and takes the strong hold of Zion, and a erwards the city itself; which is called
the city of David,
• David’s prosperity, and friendship with Hiram, king of Tyre,
• He takes more concubines, and begets several sons and daughters,
• The Philis nes gather together against him in the valley of Rephaim; he defeats them; they abandon their idols,
and David and his men burn them,
• They assemble once more in the valley of Rephaim, and David smites them from Geba to Gazer,
2 Samuel 3-5
David’s family. As David reaches a turning point in his career, the reader of the Bible is introduced to his family. Several sons were born to him during the seven years when he ruled in Hebron. At the same
me the reader is introduced to other wives whom David had married and who became the mothers of some of his
children. But much occurs before we see David crowned and his kingdom rise. 2Sa 3:1 Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: but David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed
weaker and weaker.
Abner rebels against lsh-bosheth. Ish-bosheth accused Abner of improper ac ons with Saul’s concubine, Rizpah.
Abner went into Ishbosheth’s harem (that he inherited from his father, Saul) and had sexual rela ons with Rizpah,
perhaps the most prominent woman in the harem. In this era such a thing was done to show total disrespect for the
current leadership and to indicate that a new leader had arisen to usurp the old. In other words there is no doubt
that Abner created an excuse to have a confronta on with Ishbosheth (by means of cavor ng with Rizpah) so that he
could do just what he did: transfer Saul’s old kingdom from Ishbosheth to David. Abner neither admi ed the charge
nor denied it. He did refuse to suffer the embarrassment of being accused and announced that he was transferring
his allegiance from the son of his former king to David.
96
There were several mo va ons for Abner to do such a thing even though the one he spoke about actually seemed
to be righteous in nature. Abner says that the reason he is going to hand the kingdom over to David is because God
had made it publicly known that David was to be the king over all Israel, and therefore Abner was merely ac ng in
obedience to the divine decree. But behind this supposed pious purpose were a personal agenda and some poli cal
reali es. For one, we read in verse 17 that many of the elders of the northern tribes had groused for some me
that they preferred David over Ishbosheth. Ishbosheth was a weak king, somewhat of an embarrassment, and the
people liked what they saw in David. Thus as is typical in tribal socie es the ongoing game was to posi on yourself
(your clan or your tribe) to be in the good graces of the current leader, while remaining on the lookout for a new and
stronger leader to ally yourself with for your tribe’s benefit.--Bradford
Abner contacts David. If the
kingdom fell to David then Abner was out of a job. On the other hand if it was Abner who approached David with a
gracious offer to bloodlessly deliver the scepter of power to him, perhaps Abner could nego ate a posi on as 2ndin
power in David’s administra on and thus outmaneuver Joab. Abner was a faithful soldier, and he acted honorably in
making his open contact with David. 2Sa 3:21 And Abner said unto David, I will arise and go, and will gather all Israel
unto my lord the king, that they may make a league with thee, and that thou mayest reign over all that thine heart
desireth. And David sent Abner away; and he went in peace. David showed himself to be a man of honor inasmuch as
he sent word back to lsh-bosheth so that the king in Gilead would be informed of what was transpiring. All that was
le was for a general assembly of all the northern coali on leaders to convene to formally confirm David; so David
bid his new ally Abner farewell and guaranteed his safe journey back to his home territory. But revenge is a terrible
Joab murders Abner. Joab returns to discover that David has
monster and it rears it’s head.
not only met with Abner, but sent him away. 2Sa 3:24 Then Joab came to the king, and said, What hast thou done?
behold, Abner came unto thee; why is it that thou hast sent him away, and he is quite gone? Men o en insult one
another by saying that they are behaving as females or are serving as a female in a sex act. As unsavory as this is it is
hardly a modern phenomenon; it likely goes back to the 2nd or 3rd genera on of humans. Verses 24 and 25 have Yo’av
complaining to David that “Abner came to you”, and that “he came only to deceive you”. Actually what it says more
literally is that Abner “went into you” because “he came only to seduce you”. The words used are nearly iden cal,
and are meant to be taken in the same sense, as when Ishbosheth accused Abner of seducing and going into Rizpah,
Saul’s concubine–ibid . Joab also, probably immediately, suspected that Abner was there to nego ate his way into his
posi on and since David had deceived him by sending him away to allow Abner to come safely, he naturally thought
that his worst suspicions had come about. Under the pretense of avenging his brother’s death, Joab took Abner aside
and killed him in cold blood. Warriors who killed in ba le did nothing wrong and needed no protec on but Joab,
assisted by his other brother, Abishai did not seem to agree. 2Sa 3:27 And when Abner was returned to Hebron, Joab
took him aside in the gate to speak with him quietly, and smote him there under the fi h rib, that he died, for the
blood of Asahel his brother. This occurs at the city gate, the place tradi onally designated for jus ce to be carried
out. But, the law forbids murder, and this was indeed murder, not jus ce. 2Sa 3:30 So Joab and Abishai his brother
slew Abner, because he had slain their brother Asahel at Gibeon in the ba le. The law given by God excludes killing
in war from the crime of murder. What happened here was not only illegal, it was the result of a blood feud, a man,
Joab, taking revenge for a death. He should have been killed for this crime, rather than only cursed. 2Sa 3:29 Let it
rest on the head of Joab, and on all his father’s house; and let there not fail from the house of Joab one that hath an
issue, or that is a leper, or that leaneth on a staff, or that falleth on the sword, or that lacketh bread.
We certainly don’t see ourselves as unfaithful worshipers remaking God’s laws in our image anymore than Joab. Cultural customs and cherished symbols are powerful things, as are doctrines and tradi ons and peer pressure. But as
97
the Lord’s followers we are to resist these man-made things when they do not agree with God’s Word; not make ex-
David mourns for Abner. David made it plain that
cuses and embrace them. Easier said than done.
he did not have anything to do with the murder of the good soldier Abner. In fact he made personal lamenta on of his
death and ordered his people to mourn for this good man. David doing damage control; he’s making quite a show of
sorrow and repugnance in order to distance himself from the dirty deed. No doubt he was being as sincere as he was
being pragma c. He was doing all the things that Middle Eastern and Hebrew culture would instantly understand that
only a sincere man would do. He mourned and ordered that others mourn. He spoke a proper and respec ul eulogy
over Abner. He threw an elegant and all-encompassing curse over Abner’s killers (even though they were his own
sister’s sons), and he even walked behind Abner’s body in a funeral procession (the highest honor that a king could
Mephibosheth
confer upon the deceased and reserved usually for a member of the royal family).
introduced. David had made a covenant with Jonathan that he would not destroy his descendants. In this passage
of scripture we are introduced to one heir of Jonathan. He has some mes been called the “li le lame prince.” 2Sa
4:4 And Jonathan, Saul’s son, had a son that was lame of his feet. He was five years old when the dings came of
Saul and Jonathan out of Jezreel, and his nurse took him up, and fled: and it came to pass, as she made haste to flee,
that he fell, and became lame. And his name was Mephibosheth. This is important to understand that because Saul’s
last remaining blood descendant is now lame, there is no chance he could be made king. There may also be a factor
here, although we are not told, that he cannot sire any children in the future. So essen ally, the line of Saul will die
Ish-bosheth slain. Two wicked servants of Ish-bosheth’s thought
out with the death of Mephilbosheth.
they would do David a favor by killing Ish-bosheth. 2Sa 4:6 And they came thither into the midst of the house, as
though they would have fetched wheat; and they smote him under the fi h rib: and Rechab and Baanah his brother
escaped. They beheaded him and brought his head to David in Hebron. David reminded them of the punishment he
had meted out to the man who said he had slain Saul. 2Sa 4:8 And they brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David
to Hebron, and said to the king, Behold the head of Ishbosheth the son of Saul thine enemy, which sought thy life;
and the LORD hath avenged my lord the king this day of Saul, and of his seed. He could treat them in no be er way.
2Sa 4:11 How much more, when wicked men have slain a righteous person in his own house upon his bed? shall I not
therefore now require his blood of your hand, and take you away from the earth? Their hands and feet were cut off
and they were hanged up over the pool at Hebron as an object lesson to any others who might commit such crimes.
NOTE: The penalty for murder is death under the law, HOWEVER it is against the law to mu late a corpse, so while on
the one hand David administered jus ce by execu ng the two men, he also commi ed a sin in cu ng off their hands
and feet. 2Sa 5:1 Then came all the tribes of Israel to David unto Hebron, and spake, saying, Behold, we are thy bone
and thy flesh.
To understand the reference to the ’tribes of Israel’ used here, we need to understand the me period.
Originally, the term Israel applied only to the individual, Jacob. Only a er the children of Jacob began to
98
mul ply, was the term used for the people, Israel. However, some of the groups of these now twelve
divisions of the people of Israel, decided not to enter into the promised land. The group that did cross
the river and enter the Promised Land divided into two main groups or coali ons: the northern and the
southern. Since the northern coali on held itself up as the majority and said that they represented 10
of the 12 Israelite tribes (an exaggera on) they claimed the right to consider themselves as “Israel”. The
southern coali on that consisted of the tribes of Judah and Simeon (but always dominated by the tribe
of Judah) was considered a break-away group; they were seen as a separate en ty from Israel and even
went by the name “Judah”–Bradford
So when David first became a king he was only the king over a modest sized en ty called Judah.
He was NOT the king of Israel in the eyes of all of the 12 tribes. When Saul was king he tried to be king over all the tribes,
but only those of the northern coali on accepted him as such. Judah condescended to King Saul’s administra on to
some degree but only so far as to gain whatever benefit they could from the rela onship and to prevent a direct
confronta on with the north. But the tension between Israel and Judah was palpable and o en spilled over into
armed conflict. The people of Judah (and Simeon) certainly acknowledged that they shared a common ancestor with
the northern tribes (Jacob), but at that me the reality of a common heritage took a back seat to the man made
poli cal reali es.–Bradford It can quickly get confusing as to when the term “Israel” means the northern tribes ONLY,
versus when it means all the tribes of Israel as a newly unified group under David. And then there is the issue that in
one context Israel is the people of the 12 tribes, and in another context Israel is the land of the 12 tribes.
David king over all Israel. A er David had reigned for seven years in Hebron all the tribes of Israel came to him and
asked him to be king over them. They needed to unite under one king.
• They already saw David as a king so there would be no shame in accep ng him
• They were his blood rela ves and thereby should be re-united under him
• They had always seen David as their military leader under Saul anyway
• They acknowledged that God had decreed that David should be king (There is no record of any public proclamaon of this from prophets or anyone, and as there must have been some pronouncement based on this verse,
it must be simply lost to history)
No ce something else about David becoming king: it was a long process that took place on a winding and unlikely
road. I think we should see this process as a pa ern that was fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Jesus was designated by the
Father as the king (the prince really, the nagid, the king in wai ng, long before it ever becomes a reality. Just as God
ordained David as king over His people long before the actual earthly event caught up to this spiritual reality. So many
things had to be accomplished along the way, and so much had to align in order for David to gain the throne of Israel.
The same thing is happening for Messiah. In fact the earthly reality of Jesus’ kingship is s ll in our future, even though
it was predicted in the Prophets more than 2500 years ago and it happened to largely a spiritual extent 2000 years
ago. Christ becoming king over God’s Kingdom is a long process, with much that has to happen along the way, far
more than it is a singular event. – Torah Teachings
99
Modern archeology along with the discovery and transla on of some ancient clay tablets has helped
to piece together the astounding history of this place. If we were to pin a date on a calendar for David’s a ack on
Jerusalem it would probably be around 990 B.C. (give or take a couple of years). But this city was known and its
existence recorded long before that. Jerusalem is one of the most ancient ci es in the world. It is men oned by name
in the famous Ebla archives. These Ebla archives consist of some 15,000 clay tablets that were uncovered star ng
in the late 1960’s in northern Syria. Wri en in the ancient Akkadian language these tablets tell of the reign of King
Ibbit-Ilim, the ruler of a place called Ebla that lay only 150 miles from Haran, the place where Abraham lived for a me.
The tablets have been dated to 2500 B.C. And in them is found the record of the Canaanite city of Yerushalayim along
with a descrip on of where it was located. There is no doubt that it is the same place that we call Jerusalem today.
How much before 2500 B.C. Yerushalayim existed is debatable. The point is that it existed at
least 500 years before the me of Abraham and 1500 years before David set about conquering it. There has always
been debate about the precise meaning of the term Yerushalayim, but the reality turns out that it is an Akkadian word
and NOT a Hebrew word. Now that this fact has been recognized it is clear that the meaning is something like, “the
founda on of Shalem”. It is also clear that “Shalem” was the name (or be er chief a ribute) of a god so perhaps a
be er way to say it is, “the founda on of the god Shalem”.Shalem I’m sure sounds familiar as it should because the
word shalom is taken from it. So the idea is that the god of this city of 2500 BC was a god with the a ribute of shalom.
I wonder who that can be? –ibid See Genesis 14:14-20 and Judges 19:10. ”Jerusalem has taken many names over
David in Jerusalem. David needed a capital city. Hebron was too far south to be
the centuries
reached easily by all the people of Israel. The Jebusites s ll held the stronghold of Jerusalem. 2Sa 5:7 Nevertheless
David took the strong hold of Zion: the same is the city of David. The Jebusites, however taunted David. First, we
need to understand that David, like Jesus, hated the CONDITION
of being lame or blind, not
the people who suffered from the condi on. Some commentaries suggest that these ’lame and blind’ were the idols
placed on the city walls , or statues of Jacob and Isaac meant as a curse against David. 2Sa 5:8 And David said on
that day, Whosoever ge eth up to the gu er, and smiteth the Jebusites, and the lame and the blind, that are hated
of David’s soul, he shall be chief and captain. Wherefore they said, The blind and the lame shall not come into the
house. It seems that David used a water tunnel to more or less sneak his men into the city. This tunnel, or really more
a “sha ”, was first rediscovered in the modern age by Sir Charles Warren in 1867 and has been aptly named Warren’s
Sha ; it neatly verifies the Biblical account of David’s conquest of Zion.David took this and made it his capital city. 2Sa
5:9 So David dwelt in the fort, and called it the city of David. And David built round about from Millo and inward.
100
Jerusalem was right on the border between Israel and Judah. It was claimed by neither en ty. It wasn’t
even inhabited by Hebrews. Over and over in the Bible, just as we’ll see the two terms Judah and Israel ed together,
we’ll o en see the two terms Jerusalem and Judah ed together. As you now know the reason Judah and Israel are
ed together is NOT because they were 2 different names for the same place, but rather because indeed they were 2
separate en es. Only when ed together do they form all of Israel; separately they each represent only part of Israel.
The City of David belonged strictly to David as his private property and it was NOT considered as na onal territory. It
was a privately held sec on of Jerusalem that was walled off and owned by the king and treated very differently than
Jerusalem that lay outside the walls. 2Sa 5:10 And David went on, and grew great,
the rest of
and the LORD God of hosts was with him. And so David is se ling into his new home and building his family, as well as
his palace. David knew that his own hard work and courage were definitely needed to become king and to rule God’s
Kingdom as king but the results were dependent on the Lord. And that’s the same a tude that a worshiper of the God
of Israel needs to approach life. Thus we see God as a center of this narra ve. David’s success was God’s doing, he was
merely a willing par cipant. So David is building his palace and his city. Hiram king of Tyre sends David cedar trees.
The Cedars of Lebanon are proverbial because cedar was such an admired and valuable wood. Cedar was as beau ful
as it was durable. It was strong enough to be used for load-bearing and lovely enough to be used for exquisite interior
paneling. As early as 3000 B.C. cedar was being exported from Phoenicia to Egypt . Cedar wood was in such demand
that by the me of David the cedar forests were nearly depleted and thus it became a precious commodity that was
reserved for only the wealthiest aristocrats and kings. We read that he took many more wives and concubines and
had several children with them. 2Sa 5:13 And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, a er he
was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David. A concubine was not a sex slave or
marriage
a play thing for the man. Rather she was a like a wife but usually she didn’t receive a
document so she was sort of a 2nd class wife. A concubine, especially in the case of kings, was o en the handmaiden
of an aristocra c woman that the king would marry to create a needed or wanted poli cal alliance with another king
or potentate. The list of names of David’s sons represents only the firstborn sons from each of the mothers. Many
daughters and other sons were born as well to these women. David was crea ng quite a dynasty of loyal leaders
for his administra on. Those that were born to David, by his wives and concubines, while he was in Jerusalem were;
Shammua, and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon, Ibhar , Elishua, and Nepheg, and Japhia, Elishama, and Eliada, and
Eliphalet. David seemed to be quite se led and happy, but as a servant of God, this condi on would not last without
obedience, and in that obedience came conflicts. . David now realized what Samuel had told him so long ago, that
he was chosen by God to be the King over Israel. But David was to have li le rest. When the Philis nes heard of
his being anointed as King over Israel, they came to challenge him. But no ce, that unlike his predecessor, Saul, he
FIRST asked God how to proceed. David against the Philis nes. When the Philis nes heard that David was anointed
king over Israel, they saw his rise to power as a threat to their safety. They may also have perceived this as a betrayal
(remember David had lived with and fought for them for some me). They could not take a chance that David might
be able to succeed where Saul had failed. The united Israel would not have been as easy to manipulate than a loose
collec on of fractured tribes. The Philis nes a acked, but God had other plans and delivered the Philis nes into the
101
hands of David. 2Sa 5:19 And David enquired of the LORD, saying, Shall I go up to the Philis nes? wilt thou deliver
them into mine hand? And the LORD said unto David, Go up: for I will doubtless deliver the Philis nes into thine hand.
A er David inquires of God through the Urim and Thummim stones about how he should proceed, the Philis nes set
up camp in the Refa’im Valley (southwest of Jerusalem) a
nd David takes his army and goes to a
place called Ba’al P’ratzim (which means “the lord of breaking through”) and defeats them there. By David’s day the
word ba’al (li le “b” ba’al) apparently had been adopted into Hebrew and it simply meant “lord” as in “master” and
was NOT meant to indicate a pagan deity. So the name Ba’al P’ratzim was not at all about honoring the Canaanite
god Ba’al. 2Sa 5:22 And the Philis nes came up yet again, and spread themselves in the valley of Rephaim. But this
me God tells David to wait un l he gets a signal, the sound of a going in the tops of the trees, a rustling of leaves it
would seem. Then he is to go against the Philis nes. Now, in this passage we see several mes that David is talking
to God and obeying, yet in the earlier verses we see murder, revenge, and so on, occurring within the area David now
apparently controls. What this is giving are examples, it show us something about the condi on of Israel at this me.
It was just another subtle step in the perversion in the true Hebrew religion as defined by God. Like many other things,
baal had evolved from something God commanded against, to something that was just a common u erance. Have
you no ced that we hardly see the terms “Torah” or “Moses” or “Law” any more? The paganism of the surrounding
Peoples had by this me become such a part of the culture that, like today, the Word of God had become corrupted
and almost forgo en. In fact it would be several hundred more years a er David before a long abandoned Torah Scroll
was discovered in a pile a rubble, it was brought to the king and read to him, and this king realized what had happened
to Israel since that wonderful moment at Mt. Sinai. 2Sa 5:25 And David did so, as the LORD had commanded him;
and smote the Philis nes from Geba un l thou come to Gazer. The rule of the Philis nes over Israel was broken a er
centuries of aggression and subjuga on.
It is me for Jesus’ Church living today, to once again dig out the Torah, to rediscover the instruc ons of God and to
repent of our corrup on, turning back to the truth of God’s word. WE need to be falling on our faces in grief and
mourning and repentance over our failure to heed God’s instruc ons for all these years. Let those who have an ear
to listen, hear. LESSONS FOR LEARNING 1. “Children are like arrows” (Psa _127:4). As David composed the psalm
under the direc on of the Holy Spirit, he said that children were like arrows and that the man was happy who had his
quiver full of them. God certainly blessed David’s home with a fine group of sons and daughters. 2. “A prince and a
great man is fallen this day in Israel” (2Sa _3:38). This is a classic text of lamenta on over a great soldier of God that
has fallen in the line of duty. It is applicable to Chris an workers today as they lay down their armor. O en today’s
Chris ans are misled by their own understandings and they may fail God in the eyes of others. But we cannot see the
heart, and we must remember that those chosen by God, ARE his chosen, even if, in our eyes, they fall. 3. Men are
of more value than many sparrows (Mat _10:31). Mephibosheth does not seem very important to us. He did have
some later connec on with David. We are impressed with the fact that he was important enough for his name to be
men oned in the sacred scriptures. He was a descendant of an honorable man and his associa ons with David are
worthy of note. All of us count in the sight of God regardless of whether we seem important to men or not. 4. The
principle is more important than the policy. David was a man of principle. He slew the man who said he had killed
Saul, and he killed the men who said they had beheaded Ish-bosheth. God’s people should always be fair in their
judgment and act on principle and not on shi y policy. 5. Goodness unites God’s people. David was a good ruler. He
had ruled well for seven years in the South over the one tribe of Judah. The rest of Israel saw that God was with him.
They needed a leader and they naturally turned to David. This is always true among God’s people. They unite gladly
behind a leader who is worthy of their allegiance. 6. Blessings are heaped on blessings. God has said that if we will
give Him that which is righ ully His, He will open the windows of heaven (Mal _3:10). He has done that in the lives of
many of His followers. He did this for David. David moved from being king over one tribe to being king over twelve
tribes. He moved from the city of Hebron to the well-for fied city of Jerusalem. More sons and daughters were born
102
to him. God heaped blessings upon blessings, and He will do that for His followers today. But do not for one second
assume that God will hold back his judgment. And recognize, that the blessings we receive are not always those we
perceive as earthly riches.
of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc on, for instruc on in righteousness: Resources: My
Primary resource is the King James Bible – Others include Print, online, and so ware commentaries and databases.
Please see the resources in the le sidebar and the drop down menu for many addi onal resources to assist you in
your studies. You may no ce that I have been using the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford as a main resource for many
of these studies. This is mainly because I have done much research and find these teachings to be aligned to scripture
and quite informa ve, addi ally they access many of the same reliable resources for the culture and history as I have
collected.
Bible in a Year - 13 Apr 2015 Retrieving the Ark of the Covenant (2015-04-13 06:00)
This site is Dedicated to the Glory of GodIsa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth:
it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I
sent it.
103
TODAY IS 23 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR
• Download the Bible in a Year Schedule and Catch up on what you missed –
• January Schedule | Bible in a Year January e-book
• February Schedule | February Bible in a Year e-book
• March Schedule | March Bible in a Year e-book
• April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 2 Samuel Chapters 6-9
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/mgS5I2UrW74
INTRODUCTION
The obscurity of the ark, during the reign of Saul, had been as great a grievance to Israel as
the insults of the Philis nes. David, having humbled the Philis nes and mor fied them in gra tude for that favor, and
in pursuit of his designs for the public welfare, is here bringing up the ark to his own city, that it might be near him,
and be an ornament and strength to his new founda on. We read:
• An a empt to do it, which failed and miscarried.
• The great joy and sa sfac on with which it was at last done
– 1. The good understanding between David and his people
– 2. The uneasiness between David and his wife upon that occasion
S ll the ark is David’s care as well as his joy. In this chapter we have,
• His consulta on with Nathan about building a house for it; he signifies his purpose to do it and Nathan approves
his purpose
• His communion with God about it.
• A gracious message God sent him about it, accep ng his purpose, counter-mining the performance, and promising him an entail of blessings upon his family
• A very humble prayer which David offered up to God in return to that gracious message, thankfully accep ng
God’s promises to him, and earnestly praying they be done as God willed
104
David having sought first the kingdom of God and the righteousness thereof, se ling the ark as soon as he was himself
well se led, we are here told how all other things were added to him. Here is an account,
• Of his conquests. He triumphed,
– Over the Philis nes
– Over the Moabites
– Over the king of Zobah
– Over the Syrians
– Over the Edomites
• Of the presents that were brought him and the wealth he got from the na ons he subdued, which he dedicated
to God
• Of his court, the administra on of his government and his chief officers .
Since Mephibosheth was only five years old at the me of his father’s death and now had a young son , the incident
here recorded cannot have occurred ll David had been reigning at Jerusalem for some seven years at least, when
Mephibosheth would be about 20 years old. The narra ve finds a natural place here as an appendix to the general
summary of the public history of David’s reign, and before the account of his great sin with its fatal consequences. It
is omi ed in Chronicles as being a ma er of private interest.
2 Samuel Chapters 6-9
You Should listen to this teaching by Tom Bradford. It has some very interes ng points and good insights.
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/etcwk11.mp3” ][/audio]
Uzzah smi en. David wanted to bring the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem. It was in capvity in Philis a for a number of years, but had been returned by the Philis nes and was kept by the men of
Kiriath-Jerim. 2Sa 6:3 And they set the ark of God upon a new cart, and brought it out of the house of Abinadab that
was in Gibeah: and Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, drave the new cart.
The venture was ill-fated. Uzzah stuck out his hand to steady the ark, and the Lord smote him. 2Sa 6:7 And the anger
of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.
But, why was God angry? We would think God would be happy that David was bringing the Ark and se ng up a
new temple. But, we have to once again step back and look at what is really happening here. David had no working
knowledge of the Torah and here is yet another proof. If David knew the Law he would instantly have known why
Uzzah died by touching the Ark. And if the Levites had known the Law they could have explained to David why Uzzah
died and that this need not recur. But since ignorance was running rampant at the moment, an abundance of cau on
was the wisest course of ac on.
Uzzah’s offence seems very small. He and his brother Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, in whose house the ark
had long been lodged, having been used to a end it, to show their willingness to prefer the public benefit to their
own private honor and advantage, undertook to drive the cart in which the ark was carried, this being perhaps the
105
last service they were likely to do it; for others would be employed about it when it came to the city of David. Ahio
went before, to clear
the way, and, if need were, to lead the oxen. Uzzah followed close to the side
of the cart. Uzzah was a Levite, but priests only might touch the ark. Uzzah’s long familiarity with the ark, and the
constant a endance he had given to it, might occasion his presump on, but would not excuse it.
The law was express concerning the Kohathites, that, though they were to carry the ark by the staves, yet
they must not touch any holy thing, lest they die, (Numbers 4:15) ”And when Aaron and his sons have made an end
of covering the sanctuary, and all the vessels of the sanctuary, as the camp is to set forward; a er that, the sons of
Kohath shall come to bear it: but they shall not touch any holy thing, lest they die. These things are the burden of
the sons of Kohath in the tabernacle of the congrega on.” Uzzah died for an error they were all guilty of, which was
carrying the ark in an ox- cart. Because it was not carried on the Levites’ shoulders, the Lord made that breach upon
us, (1 Chronicles 15:13) ”For because ye did it not at the first, the LORD our God made a breach upon us, for that we
sought him not a er the due order.”
But Uzzah was singled out to be made an example. Perhaps the ark was not covered, as it should have been,
with the covering of badgers’ skins (Numbers 4:6) ”And shall put thereon the covering of badgers’ skins, and shall
spread over it a cloth wholly of blue, and shall put in the staves thereof.”, and that was a further provoca on. God
teaches us that a good inten on will not jus fy a bad ac on; it will not be good enough to say about all that we do
in the name of God, however well meant, if it is not done in obedience to God’s commandments and laws. (Psalms
50:16) ”But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take
my covenant in thy mouth?” Friend, how camest thou in hither? If the ark was so sacred, and not to be touched
irreverently, what is the blood of the covenant? (Hebrews 10:29) ”Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall
he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant,
wherewith he was sanc fied, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?”
The ark brought to Jerusalem. David was upset by the death of Uzzah. It is not for us to be
displeased at any thing that God does, how unpleasing soever it is to us. But David was more than just upset. He was
angry, puzzled, frustrated. What had he done wrong? 2Sa 6:9 And David was afraid of the LORD that day, and said,
How shall the ark of the LORD come to me? It appears that David believed he was to bring the Ark to Jerusalem, what
we aren’t told is if this is his own idea or God’s instruc on. In my mind, it is his idea for surely God would have given
him the details he needed to prevent this calamity. Or perhaps, we are seeing an example of today’s ’well meaning’
believers, rushing to do what they believe is God’s will, outside of God’s inten on for us. I ask this o en, do you?
God, is this the road you are leading me on or have I fallen into a trap. (Jeremiah 25:5-7) ”They said, Turn ye again
now every one from his evil way, and from the evil of your doings, and dwell in the land that the LORD hath given
unto you and to your fathers for ever and ever: (6) And go not a er other gods to serve them, and to worship them,
and provoke me not to anger with the works of your hands; and I will do you no hurt. (7) Yet ye have not hearkened
unto me, saith the LORD; that ye might provoke me to anger with the works of your hands to your own hurt.” David
le the ark in the house of Obed-Edom. Later he learned that God had blessed the house of Obed-Edom. He also
106
learned that he had been careless in trying to move the ark on an ox cart. God had ordained that the ark should be
carried by the Levites.
But, the manner in which David and the people acted in the presence
of the ark was also at issue. 2Sa 6:5 And David and all the house of Israel played before the LORD on all manner of
instruments made of fir wood, even on harps, and on psalteries, and on mbrels, and on cornets, and on cymbals.
The mood of the people was more like that of people celebra ng at Marty Gras in New Orleans. It’s Party Time!!!
They should have been joyous and reverent, not celebra ng as they would a returning war hero, but with a more
subdued and respec ul joy that came from inside.
So, David followed God’s direc ve and moved the ark without further mishap. 2Sa 6:14 And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod. (see video clip above) In other words,
when we picture the procession with the musical instruments, the singing, and the dancing the a tude was
appropriately pious. Even if we modern Chris ans might have some personal inhibi ons and feelings about various
kinds of outward displays of
worship and praise, it is the intent and a tude of the worshiper
that ma ers to the Lord; the rest is only about our personal hang-ups.
He put it in the special tent which he had erected for it in Jerusalem. This was not a ”tabernacle” or a stone
temple.
Michal cursed. David had insisted that Michal be sent back to him from Gilead when he was nego a ng with
She was ashamed of David as he took
Abner and Ishbosheth. Michal’s pride overcame her.
part in the public ceremonies a ending the return of the ark. When she upbraided David, she was evidently smi en
of the Lord. At least she had no child unto the day of her death.
David is now king, that the Promised Land is united and secure, Jerusalem is the capital of God’s earthly kingdom, and
the Ark is back among God’s people.
David’s desire to build a temple thwarted. David wanted to build a temple as a place of worship
for God’s people. Nathan the prophet was in favor of this at first but God told him that this was not to be David’s
privilege. Deuteronomy 12: 10 - 11 may be the reason David thought it was me to build a temple to God. 10 But
when you cross the Jorden and live in the land ADONAI your God is having you inherit, and he gives you rest from all
your surrounding enemies, so that you are living in safety; 11 then you will bring all that I am ordering you to the place
ADONAI your God chooses to have his name live- your burnt offerings, sacrifices, tenths, the offering from your hand,
and all your best possessions that you dedicate to ADONAI; (CJB)
107
Building a temple for God would have been a natural thing to do in these mes and cultures.
All kings built temples to their Gods, shouldn’t Israel as well? David had a beau ful palace made out of a rare and
expensive material, cedar wood, and he was only God’s servant. Shouldn’t God have a grander and more glorious
dwelling place than his lowly anointed human king? 2Sa 7:3 And Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine
heart; for the LORD is with thee.
Nathan the prophet agreed this would be a good thing to do, but is quickly becomes apparent that he did so on his
own accord and without consul ng God. How o en do we Chris ans rush ahead because something feels right, only
to discover through the walls we run up against, that it is not necessarily what God might want for us. I know I have
many, many, mes, and I am pre y confident that I will again. All we can do is trust God and put aside our own plans
and desires. Some mes this is easier said than done, but, we try, just as David tried. And although he was far from
perfect he was a man a er God’s own heart because, He trusted, was faithful, repentant, and obedient.
There have been many scholarly arguments about the nature of this tent and whether
it should be considered as the first Temple since there is no indica on that it was built to be portable. The
reason for the concern over this is because we’re told that the Millennial Temple will be the 3rd Temple,
so if the tent in David’s City was the 1st Temple, then Solomon’s was the 2nd and Herod’s the 3rd and
therefore there IS no actual future Temple to come. Rather the future Temple is purely spiritual in nature
and the men on of it is somewhat allegorical. I’ll not get into the lengthy subject of the 3rd Temple but
I can state confidently that there will be another Temple and it will be quite literal and real.– In Exodus
33:7-11 no ce the loca on of Moses’ tent; it was apart from the people. David’s tent was located inside
of his own personal walled complex, the City of David, and so it too was apart from the people. Therefore
let’s put to rest any theological no on that David’s tent was actually intended, or thought of, as the 1st
Temple. Therefore Solomon’s Temple would be the first, Herod’s the 2nd, and the 3rd Temple is yet to
come. David’s tent was similar in nature to Moses’ tent.–Bradford
God’s covenant with David. Nathan the prophet had told David that building a temple would be a good thing, but
own ideas, now
he had NOT consulted God. He thought it would be a good thing based on his
he comes to David with the announcement that it was not to be his privilege to build the temple. 2Sa 7:5 Go and
tell my servant David, Thus saith the LORD, Shalt thou build me an house for me to dwell in? I can almost hear God
chuckling at the ideas of men. I counted fourteen ”I”s in just the ten verses spoken to Nathan to be given David. God
reminded David, through his command to Nathan, that it was HE who brought about all the things that the people
had experienced, both the good and the bad. It was HE who orchestrated everything, and HE had never needed a
”house” anywhere in order to do so. God is always with the people, no ma er where they are. Jer 17:7-10 Blessed is
the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is. For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and
that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall
not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit. The heart is decei ul above all things, and
108
desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according
to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
In the Hebrew, and certainly most ancient cultures, the belief was that the heart was where all thought came from.
It was the heart that was the seat of thought and emo on. So when Nathan told David to do what he thought best,
in his heart, this was the mindset. Today we believe that the heart is the seat of our feelings. We believe that if we
’feel’ something is right then it must be. But it would do us good to remember, Genesis 6:5 ¶ And GOD saw that
the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagina on of the thoughts of his heart was only evil
con nually.
I am reminded of the following concerning Nathan, was he speaking in the name of God when he told David to go
ahead with his plans, and should David now be wary of Nathan? We shall have to wait and see.
(Deuteronomy 18:20-22) ”But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. (21) And if thou say
in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? (22) When a prophet speaketh in the
name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but
the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”
Nathan also told relayed to David what God had told him; that God would bless his house for genera ons to come. 2Sa
7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for
ever. The condi ons that are being described are occurring at that moment in David’s kingdom are to some degree,
the same condi ons that will occur again at a more complete level in the future when one of David’s descendants is
reigning.
God has given us the examples, it is up to us to see them, to learn from them.
But, alas, rarely
do the children learn the lesson the parents are trying to teach, and more o en the experience must be repeated
me and again before they (we) finally get it. How long will God wait for us to figure it out? How much longer will
God be pa ent with us, withhold His jus fiable wrath. How much longer? The season of the end days is truly upon
us. Events are unfolding at a phenomenal rate and prophecies of the bible are occurring almost daily. The signs of
His soon return are playing out in our physical world. Can’t you See? Or are your eyes clouded with worldly cares and
lusts?
David responds to the Lord’s will. David went in and sat before the Lord when he heard of His will for
his life. 2Sa 7:18 Then went king David in, and sat before the LORD, and he said, Who am I, O Lord GOD? and what is
my house, that thou hast brought me hitherto? David realizes he is just a li le thing, hardly worth no ce in the eyes
of the Great Adonai. He is so far from perfect. He has been a warrior and has blood on his hands, yet, Adonai, this
loving God has chosen him. He doesn’t understand why, certainly he is only a worthless example of a man. Be er
than some, perhaps, and worse than others, yet only a man.
109
Source: Torah Studies
But Adonai has chosen him, and has now promised that his line will endure forever. While he may not have understood or even agreed with God’s instruc ons and purpose, he accepted God’s will, with gra tude and humility. His
disappointment over not being able to build a temple did not keep him from accep ng God’s will for his life. See Luke
1:30-33 to read of the fulfillment of this promise by God.
Lesson for today: How our “heart” feels about it all is Biblically irrelevant and we are warned that our “hearts” are
terribly decei ul; and yet the modern teaching is mostly to follow our hearts and leave the Bible to Bible scholars and
religious authori es.
Chapter 7 is a type of pause in the story to impart the REASON that God was doing what He was doing,
especially as it concerned making David great in the eyes of his people and feared and admired by the surrounding
na ons. But Chapter 7 is also future oriented; it is prophe c. God determined that this was the moment that He
would li a corner of the veil (ever so slightly) that lay over His plan of redemp on, and reveal it to David since the
cornerstone of that plan would involve an unnamed and unknown descendant of the king. Neither David nor his
subjects could have known what we know with a certainty: that mysterious descendant was Jesus of Nazareth, God’s
Messiah.
David’s victories. Chapter eight is out of order. The opening phrase in verse 1, “some me a erward”, probably
ought to be considered as referring to a me not too long a er chapter 6 that tells of the arrival of the Ark of the
Covenant to the City of David. 2Sa 8:1 And a er this it came to pass, that David smote the Philis nes, and subdued
them: and David took Methegammah out of the hand of the Philis nes. As a king David was just as effec ve as he had
been when he was a soldier in Saul’s army. He met every challenge that was thrown before him and was victorious
over all the enemies which surrounded Israel. This verse connects to 1Ch
18:1 Now a er this it
came to pass, that David smote the Philis nes, and subdued them, and took Gath and her towns out of the hand of
the Philis nes. Meteg-Amah can be literally translated as “the bridle of the mother”. This is a figure of speech that in
some ways is s ll common in the Middle East today. Who can forget Saddam Hussein promising America the “mother
of all wars” if our armed forces were to a ack? In Middle Eastern thought the “mother” is o en seen as the chief
110
or the originator of something. Thus in Philis a the city of Gath was seen as the chief city (the mother city) and the
other 4 ci es that formed the Pentapolis of the Philis nes as the daughter ci es. The bridle controls the beast and
so in whomever’s hand the bridle rests has power over beast. Gath was the most powerful of the 5 Philis ne ci es,
a sort of capital city (even though the 5 ci es were generally independent of one another), and so the Lord or King
of Gath held sway over the other 4. What is being explained here (in such typical oriental fashion) is that Gath and
its king (who, interes ngly, was s ll Achish who had harbored David from the murderous King Saul) was captured by
David. By capturing Gath (the mother city of the Pentapolis) the Philis nes were greatly weakened and their influence
over the region was effec vely neutered.–Bradford
2Sa 8:2 And he smote Moab, and measured them with
a line, cas ng them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line
to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David’s servants, and brought gi s. Moab had been a friend of sorts to
David and his family in years past. The King of Moab agreed to let David’s parents and family live there, protected,
while David was on the run from King Saul. Even more, David’s famous ancestor Ruth was from Moab so there was
an ancient family connec on. Although it is not recorded it must have been that Moab seriously offended David and
the repercussions were very severe; or David concluded that unless Moab was greatly weakened they would not be
controllable and the most expedient way to weaken a na on has always been to diminish their military. Twice in this
David’s governchapter we are told ”And the LORD preserved David whithersoever he went.”
ment. David manifested a great deal of wisdom in organizing his kingdom. 2Sa 8:15 And David reigned over all Israel;
and David executed judgment and jus ce unto all his people. David ruled over all the tribes of Israel that are now
formed into a single sovereign na on. We are told he reigned with jus ce. The original Hebrew is mishpat tzedekah
and it ought to be translated as jus ce and righteousness or probably most literally as righteous judgment. Here is
the appearance of a pa ern that was called for in the Torah; and we’ll encounter several places in David’s story where
the narrator will point out an ac on of David that is actually a Torah command or pa ern.– ibid. This had not been
so since the days of Joshua. Sadly although David’s son Solomon would inherit this arrangement and even improve
upon it, within a ma er of 3 or 4 years a er Solomon’s death Israel would fall into civil war and dissolve back into
its age-old tribal coali ons that primarily consisted of the 10 to the north (Ephraim) and the 2 to the south (Judah).
David placed officers over various responsibili es and func ons of the government. Many of these men were very
faithful to him and were s ll serving him at the close of his reign. 2Sa 8:18 And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was
Now that things were
over both the Cherethites and the Pelethites; and David’s sons were chief rulers.
rela vely stable and ba ling for survival was no longer his everyday task, David turned his a en on to less urgent
ma ers. David seeks Saul’s heirs. Chapter 9 is the story of David remembering his promise to his dear friend Jonathan
and ostensibly of showing compassion upon the house of Saul. It was customary for a king to seek out the heirs of his
predecessor. Generally the mo ve was to exterminate them. David had a different reason for looking for the heirs of
Saul. He had made a covenant with Jonathan that he would deal kindly with any descendants of the royal family. 2Sa
9:1 And David said, Is there yet any that is le of the house of Saul, that I may shew him kindness for Jonathan’s sake?
We will read more about this and the slaughter of Saul’s family in 2 Samuel 21. So the context of David’s inquiry is that
the known remaining members of Saul’s family had been executed with David’s consent, and now David is concerned
about that vow he made before the Lord especially as concerned Jonathan’s descendants.
111
Some versions will have different terms in verses 1 and 3, All 3 of these English words (kindness, grace, and mercy)
that each has a somewhat different meaning for us, is actually the SAME Hebrew word, chesed. We take these regular
detours in Torah Class to carefully examine even a single word in a passage understand that it is necessary because
there is no way that our Bibles, as translated to English, can fully convey these Hebrew thoughts or cultural nuances
to us as we have received them. So very o en we have all heard that the Bible (especially the Old Testament) makes
li le sense and is filled with contradic ons. But the reality is that most of those supposed contradic ons are due to
necessarily limited or quite poor or agenda driven transla on efforts, and because a book of only a few hundred pages
(the Bible) spans an enormously long period from the Crea on of the world to the coming of Christ. It is impossible to
explain to the reader cultural norms. Therefore it is incumbent upon us to learn about the ancient culture and history
of the era and of the Middle Eastern region of the world, and to delve into the original languages as much as possible,
so as to resolve most of these difficul es.–ibid Torah Class
Mephibosheth brought to David. David’s
cour ers knew one heir of Saul’s. He was a lame prince, the son of Jonathan. 2Sa 9:6 Now when Mephibosheth,
the son of Jonathan, the son of Saul, was come unto David, he fell on his face, and did reverence. And David said,
Mephibosheth. And he answered, Behold thy servant! We need to understand some culture in rela on to this. In
ancient mes cripples were seen as near worthless. They were a burden and, barring some unusual circumstance,
they usually wound up as street beggars in order to survive. A cripple could never hold a posi on of prominence
or authority because he would be seen as unable to carry out the du es or to defend his posi on from people who
would take it from him. The disabled weren’t merely seen as having li le use they were actually despised and looked
down upon as undesirables bordering on ritually unclean. Mephibosheth was introduced to the narra ve in Chapter
four (2Sa _9:4), and the nature of his lameness was explained. 2Sa 9:7 And David said unto him, Fear not: for I will
surely shew thee kindness for Jonathan thy father’s sake, and will restore thee all the land of Saul thy father; and thou
shalt eat bread at my table con nually. David gave Mephibosheth a place in his court. He was treated as one of the
king’s own family.
The Lord was using this social outcast’s unfortunate condi on to demonstrate divine glory and
mercy, as is seen in John 9:1-17. The public a tude was that God didn’t love the disabled otherwise He wouldn’t
have caused their disability in the first place. This was what the people thought deep inside; and it was a principle
that they took for granted without further examina on because it was how things had been for thousands of years.
Only in private circles and in hushed tones would they ever actually say that thought out loud because it would sound
so pi less and harsh if they did otherwise. Humankind’s a tude regarding physical disability and personal calamity
hasn’t changed all that much in several thousand years, even if we act outwardly different towards it in Western society
by providing wheelchair ramps, restrooms equipped for the disabled, signs in brail and so on. Certainly some physical
distress or calamity is caused by God, but we cannot ever know when. So, we probably ought to be considerably more
humble in our personal es ma ons about it.
Tziva (KJV renders the name Ziba) 2Sa 9:11 Then said Ziba unto the king, According to all that my lord the king hath
commanded his servant, so shall thy servant do. As for Mephibosheth, said the king, he shall eat at my table, as one
of the king’s sons. Ziba really tries to deter David’s decision, but in the so doing further exposes his haughty a tude.
He tells the king that he will certainly obey every aspect of David’s decree; however he had been doing a good job of
caring for Mephibosheth and that Mephibosheth had been ea ng “at my table”. First of all, no ce again that “ea ng
at my table” does NOT mean literally dining together. Rather it means “providing for”. Most o en it is referring to
food, but depending on the context it could indicate providing for all a person’s needs. But to hear Ziba saying that
it was “my table” is rather arrogant. Ziba owned nothing. Ziba was a gen le servant. Ziba sat at the table that had
been owned by King Saul, and then (essen ally) by King David. Ziba, the gen le outsider, was given the privilege of
joining in the bounty of an Israelite’s harvest, in Israelite land, that was an Israelite inheritance from the God of Israel.
112
That privilege was given to him by the king of God’s kingdom. But it was ONLY because of the king’s kindness (his
chesed) that the gen le Ziba could partake of Israel’s bounty; and such a privilege could be easily removed if Ziba
thought too much of himself or didn’t want to obey the condi ons for this beneficial rela onship as given to him by
the king.
Rom 11:13 -22 For I speak to you Gen les, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gen les,
I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emula on them which are my flesh, and might save some of
them. For if the cas ng away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life
from the dead? For if the firs ruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. And if
some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them
partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest
not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well;
because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared
not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God:
on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou con nue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt
be cut off. Mephibosheth, a cripple, useless, who has earned nothing, looked down upon with disdain all of his life
and perhaps only with pity even among the clan that had been hiding him, is dumbfounded. 2Sa 9:8 And he bowed
himself, and said, What is thy servant, that thou shouldest look upon such a dead dog as I am? How do we come into
the presence of our Lord Jesus? Whole and perfect or lame and des tute? Perfect or flawed? Lost in a world gone
mad or with a sincere heart seeking truth? God loves us just as we are. God WANTS to care for us, to love us. He asks
only that we love Him in return. Like any parent, God wants His children to love Him and obey Him, because He loves
them. Do you know, do you understand? GOD LOVES YOU so much that He sent JESUS, his only bego en son to pay
the penalty for your sins. JESUS is that son and He IS risen and He has conquered death, FOR YOU! And no ma er
what your condi on or circumstances, you can come to Him and He will wrap His arms around you and call you HIS.
May God Bless and keep you.
Images in this post from Tom Bradford Torah Studies
113
Bible in a Year - 14 Apr 2015 David’s Great Sin (2015-04-14 06:00)
sent it.
– January Schedule | Bible in a Year January e-book
– February Schedule | February Bible in a Year e-book
– March Schedule | March Bible in a Year e-book
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 2 Samuel chapters 10 and 11-12
INTRODUCTION
The king of Ammon being dead, David sends ambassadors to comfort his son Hanun,
• Hanun, misled by his cour ers, treats the messengers of David with great indignity,
• The Ammonites, justly dreading David’s resentment, send, and hire the Syrians to make war upon him,
• Joab and Abishai meet them at the city of Medeba, and defeat them,
• The Syrians collect another army, but are defeated by David with great slaughter, and make with him a separate
peace,
114
David sends Joab against the Ammonites, who besieges the city of Rabbah,
• He sees Bath-sheba, the wife of Uriah, bathing; is enamoured of her; sends for and takes her to his bed,
• She conceives, and informs David,
• David sends to Joab, and orders him to send to him Uriah, He arrives; and David having inquired the state of
the army, dismisses him, desiring him to go to his own house,
• Uriah sleeps at the door of the king’s house,
• The next day the king urges him to go to his house; but he refuses to go, and gives the most pious and loyal
reasons for his refusal,
• David a er two days sends him back to the army, with a le er to Joab, desiring him to place Uriah in the front
of the ba le, that he may be slain,
• He does so; and Uriah falls,
• Joab communicates this news in an ar ul message to David,
• David sends for Bath-sheba and takes her to wife, and she bears him a son,
The Lord sends Nathan the prophet to reprove David; which he does by means of a curious parable,
• David is led, unknowingly, to pronounce his on condemna on,
• Nathan charges the guilt home on his conscience; and predicts a long train of calami es which should fall on
him and his family,
• David confesses his sin; and Nathan gives him hope of God’s mercy, and foretells the death of the child born in
adultery,
• The child is taken ill; David fasts and prays for its restora on,
• On the seventh day the child dies, and David is comforted,
• Solomon is born of Bath-sheba,
• Joab besieges Rabbah of the Ammonites, takes the city of waters, and sends for David to take Rabbah,
• He comes, takes it, gets much spoil, and puts the inhabitants to hard labor,
2 Samuel chapters 10 and 11-12
You may wish to view this video 2 Samuel 10-11 lesson by Dr. Bob Utley, re red professor of hermeneu cs (Bible
interpreta on). Recorded at the Bible Lessons Interna onal studio.
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/DBCOD3BbDDA
115
David’s Ambassadors shamed. The king of Ammon died and David sent ambassadors to express his sympathy. David really didn’t seem to want this war with Hamun. Perhaps he was sincerely wan ng to put aside the
long held feud, or perhaps he just didn’t want to have to divide his armies and fight on yet another front. Using the
occasion of the death of Hachash, David reaches out a hand of friendship only to be slapped in the face.
2Sa 10:2 Then said David, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto
me. And David sent to comfort him by the hand of his servants for his father. And David’s servants came into the land
of the children of Ammon. This verse has David saying that he will show kindness (some transla ons say ’grace’) towards
Hanun; in Hebrew it says he wanted to show chesed to Hanun. Thus David sent a message of “comfort” to the new
king by means of some Israeli diplomats. The Hebrew word usually translated as comfort is nacham and it is the
same word that is also translated as repentance. It also carries with it the sense of regret; so “kindness” is probably
a bit tame and a li le off the mark. 2Sa 10:3 And the princes of the children of Ammon said unto Hanun their lord,
Thinkest thou that David doth honour thy father, that he hath sent comforters unto thee? hath not David rather sent
his servants unto thee, to search the city, and to spy it out, and to overthrow it? The old animosity and distrust was
too deep to overcome and so Hanun’s royal court , the princes of the country, persuaded the new king that David
was really seeking opportunity to spy out their land. They treated his ambassadors shamefully and this was taken
as a cause for war. Considering the brutality David showed towards the Moabites, perhaps this distrust is naturally
warranted and why the king of Ammon was so quickly convinced. The Dead Sea Scroll of Samuel adds this bit of data:
4QSam: “Now Nachash, king of the Ammonites, had been grievously oppressing the Gadites and the Reubenites. He
would gouge out the right eye of each of them and would not grant Israel a deliverer. No one was le of the Israelites
across the Jordan whose right eye Nachash, King of the Ammonites, had not gouged out. But there were seven thou-
had escaped from the Ammonites and had entered Jabesh-Gilead”. All one has
sand men who
to do to get a good mental picture of the situa on is to turn on our televisions and watch the seemingly unending
situa on between Israel and the Pales nians. There has been such a long history of violence, deceit, slaughter, and
failed agreements that to trust one another at any level seems the height of folly rising to the suicidal. What the king
did to David’s messengers was the height of insult. When David told them to remain in Jericho it was a ’nice’ gesture,
but perhaps there is more here. Was David simply trying to preserve his image among the people? Torah studies tells
us that David did not wish to look upon the shame of his messengers or to be reminded daily of the situa on. In the
culture of the mes, too look upon the shame of someone else was seen as shame upon the person who’s eyes saw
it, especially if the person was a priest or king. 2Sa 10:6 And when the children of Ammon saw that they stank before
David, the children of Ammon sent and hired the Syrians of Bethrehob, and the Syrians of Zoba, twenty thousand
And the
footmen, and of king Maacah a thousand men, and of Ishtob twelve thousand men.
war begins. ”stank” used here is H887: bâ’ash baw-ash’ A primi ve root; to smell bad; figura vely to be offensive
morally: - (make to) be abhorred (had in abomina on, loathsome, odious), (cause a, make to) s nk (-ing savour), X
u erly. So Ammon realizes he has declared war on King David and so he sends for reinforcements. Many commentaries say these are mercenaries, however, that is a term that denotes someone who will do anything for personal
116
monetary (usually) gain. This is not the case here. These HIRED soldiers were not paid, their kings were. Just as our
own soldiers today go to war, some mes to fight the ba les of others, at the command of their generals or president.
This was an opportunity for surrounding Kings to build up their Treasury. The reality here is that the kings of these
various kingdoms sublet a por on of their na onal militaries to Hanun in return for a handsome payment. We are
given the details of the amount spent in Chronicles 19, and at
today’s prices that would amount
to at least $175 million. 1Ch 19:6 And when the children of Ammon saw that they had made themselves odious to
David, Hanun and the children of Ammon sent a thousand talents of silver to hire them chariots and horsemen out
of Mesopotamia, and out of Syriamaachah, and out of Zobah.
This group of Aramean Kingdoms is collec vely called Aram in most Bibles, but it seems be er to our understanding to call it Syria because it helps us to understand the area these troops came from using modern place names.
David’s army was divided into two companies. One was under the direc on of Joab, and the
other was led by Abishai. We next get an account of the number and kinds of troops that Hanun received. If we look
at 1 Chronicles 19 we get a li le bit different accoun ng, more about the kind of troops than the amount. In the end
what we find is that these foreign forces consisted of large numbers of cavalry, chariots, as well as foot soldiers. And
we also find that the rallying point for the various armies of the Syrians was a place called Medeba,(Madaba) about 2
hours southeast of Heshbon, in the territory of Reuben, and across the Jordan from Jerusalem. The armies of Israel
were victorious, and the Syrians from Damascus came to aid the Ammonites. David then gathered his en re host
together and crossed over the Jordan himself to direct the campaign. The Israelites were victorious and the Syrians
But no ce here: It is that for the first me David SENT his army to confront an enemy and
withdrew.
did not go with it. The is behaving more like typical sedentary monarch of his era, who stays safely and comfortably
behind in his palace while he sends his top general into harm’s way. While this is the method of poli cal leaders in
most cultures from me immemorial, it is NOT the method of leadership prescribed for God’s people. The king of
God’s Kingdom is not to “send” or “to be served”; rather he is to “lead” and is “to serve”. The King is to go with his
army. This is symbolized in how God “travels” with Israel’s army by means of the Ark of the Covenant (God is not
inside that golden box, rather it is but an illustra on of God’s presence with His people). Israel’s kings are to follow
this example and for many years a younger David did so; but not this me. Regardless, apparently God was with the
armies and Israel prevailed against Ammon and the hired forces. 2Sa 10:19 And when all the kings that were servants
to Hadarezer saw that they were smi en before Israel, they made peace with Israel, and served them. So the Syrians
feared to help the children of Ammon any more.
We have all heard the ”wonderful love story”
of David and Bathsheba. It has been told in Sunday school classes for decades and almost always making David out to
117
be a hero. all sort of allegory is used to twist what scripture tells us about this event.
David’s sin with Bathsheba. David was in Jerusalem while his army was besieging Rabbah in Ammon. 2Sa 11:2 And it
came to pass in an evening de, that David arose from off his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king’s house: and
from the roof he saw a woman washing herself; and the woman was very beau ful to look upon. He was a racted to
Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, one of his soldiers. No ce she was ”beau ful to look upon” and the similarity to Gen
3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be
desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and
he did eat.
How o en do our ”eyes” get us into trouble. We desire the things, or people, we
see that we have no business messing with. Don’t you dare say this has not happened to you in some way. We WANT
what we WANT. Our society (western especially) is geared to tapping into our wants. Having worked in adver sing
and marke ng has (Thank you God) given me, perhaps, a li le more understanding of why and how adver sing works.
I will tell you it is insidious, and I am so grateful God got me out of the whole mess! And today, adver sing is much
more ’in your face’ than it was years ago when I began to see the underlying evil it posed to our lives. Ok, I am trying
not to go on a rant here, but well I could. Deu 5:21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour’s wife, neither shalt thou
covet thy neighbour’s house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is
thy neighbour’s. We have been condi oned by our modern society to COVET everything and anything. We take me
from our families to make the money to buy all those things we really don’t need but are told by adver sers that we
must have. Who in their right mind spends hundreds of dollars on a phone only to toss it and buy another in just over
a year or so? What could that money be used for? Feeding a homeless person for months? Paying down a mortgage?
Saving for re rement? Are we selling our souls for a hunk of technology and a comfortable bed? Where will our sin
lead us? David saw and wanted another man’s wife so, he sent messengers and had her brought to his court and com-
mi ed adultery with her,
Berleburg Bible, early 1700’s. An anonymous contributor to this German publica on says this:
“We may see from this how deep a soul may fall when it turns away from God, and from the guidance of His grace.
This David, who in the days of his persecu on would not even resort to means that were really plausible to defend
himself, was now not ashamed to resort to the greatest crimes in order to cover his sin. O God! How great is our
strength when we lay hold of Thee. And how weak we become as soon as we turn away from Thee. The greatest saints
would be ready for the worst of deeds if Thou shouldst leave them but for a single moment without Thy protec on.
Whoever reflects upon this will give up all thought of self-security and spiritual pride”. Here is a clip that you may find
interes ng from 1951 with Gregory Peck
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/XRd8qJFt8Hk
The story of David and Bathsheba demonstrates to all who worship the God of Israel that it doesn’t ma er that we
have accepted Christ if we freely choose to decide that once saved, we now have the tools to go it alone. That
once saved, we think we have the inner capacity to resist tempta on by our own will, to know the truth by our own
conscience, and to follow God by our own goodness. That once saved we believe that God sets aside His jus ce and
none of it applies to us any longer. There is no greater Bible hero (aside from Jesus) than David. And yet, despite every
advantage of nearness and access to God, of an abundance of divine mercy and grace available to him, of a life me
of miraculous victories that no man would have a right to expect, his evil inclina on took hold and we see a man that
seems to currently be more Saul than David. Nowhere is the Devil blamed for this. –Bradford
118
Uriah, Loyal Soldier
It is interes ng to me that King David made no a empts to hide his li le ’affair’ un l Bathsheba turned up pregnant.
Surely all the servants (messengers) knew what had happened while her husband was away figh ng. The men on of
the Mitzvah (2Sa 11:4 ...for she was purified from her uncleanness: ...) tells us a couple of things. First, this was a
purifica on Mitzvah or bath David spied on. that she had purified from her tumah. Tumah means uncleanness, and
in this instance it is referring to nidda, the state of ritual uncleanness that occurs during a woman’s period. Once a
woman starts her period she becomes ritually unclean. During the en re me of her flow she is not to have intercourse
with her husband or he becomes ritually unclean as well. A er the flow ends, she remains unclean for 7 more days;
then on the 8th day she is to sacrifice 2 kosher birds at the Temple (the least expensive of all sacrifices), immerse
herself in a Mikvah (a ritual bath), and now she is once again ritually clean. So a woman is ritually unclean due to
her cycle for anywhere from 10 to 14 days total, or thereabouts. And so abs nence all during that me is called for,
otherwise the man becomes ritually impure and has to go through the prescribed Levi cal protocol to become clean
again. And, whereas it is NOT sin for a woman to be unclean due to her period, a er all it is not in her control nor
is it through any fault, it IS sin for a man to have sexual rela ons with her because it is a choice to disobey God’s
command not to. – adapted from Torah studies We see then that it is the day of her Mikvah, the 8th day a er her period
has ended, and she is carrying out the last of the steps necessary to become ritually pure again. David would be fully
aware of this and so verse 4 makes it clear that when David took her to bed she had indeed completed the process
of returning to ritual purity. David was able to ra onalize in his mind to commit adultery, but at the same me to
wait un l his adultery partner was ritually clean so that he didn’t commit that par cular sin. As o en happens, one
sin leads to another. 2Sa 11:5 And the woman conceived, and sent and told David, and said, I am with child. When
David learns of Bathsheba pregnancy, he knew there would be no way to a ribute it to her husband as he was off at
war, apparently for some me. It would soon become obvious that she had ’cheated’, commi ed adultery. Adultery
was a sin punishable by death, and while the King apparently could not be killed this way, he would have faced such
shame and loss of reputa on as to have been virtually impotent as the country’s leader. (sorry, can’t resist a play on
David’s a empt to cover his sin. In an effort to hide the fact
words some mes). So David devises a plan.
that Bathsheba was to bear a child which David had fathered, he called Uriah to Jerusalem from the field of ba le.
2Sa 11:13 And when David had called him, he did eat and drink before him; and he made him drunk: and at even
he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but went not down to his house. So we see in Uriah a
man of loyalty and conscience. What Uriah couldn’t bring himself to do was something ,even though his comrades
at the ba le scene would likely never have found out about it, that is the very thing that David was doing for himself.
Uriah felt he could not go enjoy the comforts of home and wife while his men were in the ba lefield away from their
homes. So, while David a empted to get him to go to his own house while he was in Jerusalem, in order to have him
’lie with’ his wife and thereby give her pregnancy a modicum of legi macy, His plan was thwarted.
By God
perhaps? We are not told this, but, as I am beginning to understand how God works, I would bet His hand is in this
episode. Uriah refused and thwarted David’s a empt to make it appear that the child was Uriah’s. So David chooses
another course of ac on. 2Sa 11:15 And he wrote in the le er, saying, Set ye Uriah in the forefront of the ho est
ba le, and re re ye from him, that he may be smi en, and die.
119
So we see a progression of sin. David COVETED his neighbor’s (Uriah’s) wife. He commi ed ADULTERY. He contrived
to hide his sin in a LIE. Now, he is planning MURDER.
This is hardly the ’sweet love story and lesson in repentance’ I learned as a child.
2Sa 11:24 And the
shooters shot from off the wall upon thy servants; and some of the king’s servants be dead, and thy servant Uriah
the Hi te is dead also. Uriah killed in ba le. The faithfulness of Uriah is exposing the unfaithfulness of David. And
David is becoming ridden with anxiety and is, by now, furious. King David makes a last desperate effort to save his
reputa on and Bathsheba. Remember, the penalty for adultery is stoning and she would have faced the possibility
of this sentence if Uriah did not accept the pregnancy on his return. Surely, the town, neighbors, not only knew he
was gone, and for how long, but as servants will talk, they also probably knew of the ’night she spent with the king’.
Uriah carried instruc ons back to Joab which resulted in his own death. Uriah was sent to the front of the ba le near
the city walls, and then Joab ordered the other troops to withdraw.
Uriah fought valiantly on
and was killed. Bathsheba mourns for her husband. The typical mourning period was seven days, a er which me
she was free to re-marry. Remember, in the mes of David women had few, if any, op ons to support themselves
and they were dependent, and in fact under the control of , a father, brother or husband. While we will learn later
that Bathsheba was a strong and determined woman, we might assume from this part of the story that David was
ac ng our of more than a self interest in protec ng himself and his future son. This is the spin o en taught and in
fact one I learned as a child, but I do not really see this in the scriptures here. Torah Studies teacher, Tom Bradford,
sums it up nicely: ”The contents of the le er are chilling. David knows that his seduc on of Bathsheba will become
public, and that he has no chance of pinning Bathsheba’s pregnancy on her husband because the en re royal court
witnessed Uriyah doggedly refusing to leave the palace. So now David compounds his adultery with conspiracy to
commit murder. By the Law of Moses both adultery and murder require capital punishment. Of course, David is the
king and there is absolutely no way that he will suffer such consequences at the hand of men. So David is by no means
a emp ng to save his own life by his ac ons; rather this all about poli cs and sexual lust (something that has gone
hand-in-hand since me immemorial because the common denominator for both is the desire for power).” Du fully
following orders, no ma er how illegi mate or immoral they might be, is wrong when it goes against God’s law. And
then when confronted with the consequences we end up offering the defense that we were just “doing our job” and
thus ought to be held immune by God and men. The reality is that all situa ons, in God’s view we are nothing less
than co-conspirators to inten onal wrong-doing against Him. I have on at least a few occasions been forced to put a
job on the line in favor of doing the ’right thing’. This is not to say that I am ’perfect’ in any way, or that I always chose
the right thing, far from it. It is always a difficult decision to make. Do I chose to follow God and ’put up my treasures
in heaven’ or do I insure I have a pay check to feed my children? But, I have learned that when making the right
decision, God has always been there to catch me . I can’t count the mes God ’saved me’ from the consequences of
my deciding to do the right thing. It is a hard learned lesson. But now I know, there in no thing or person in this world
that I would trade My salva on in Jesus for. I may s ll slip and fall, but, my choice will always be the one that, to the
Bathsheba becomes David’s wife. As
best of my understanding, will be in line with God’s commandments.
a widow, Bathsheba was free to marry David. A er the period of mourning for Uriah was ended, Bathsheba became
David’s wife. Bradford rightly points out: It is interes ng that we find David’s descendant, Miriam, mother of Yeshua,
pregnant before formal marriage and her betrothed, Joseph, marrying her partly to save Miriam the embarrassment
of being obviously pregnant out of wedlock. The circumstances aren’t exact, nor the mo ves pure in David’s and
Bathsheba’s case, but the parallel and pa ern cannot be ignored. 2Sa 11:27 And when the mourning was past, David
sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done
120
displeased the LORD. (note: several versions render this as: evil in the eyes of the Lord)
Most bible students
understand that there is a ght connec on between King David and the book of Psalms. While I have not yet posted
the Book of Psalms to this site, I hope you will open your bibles and read these specific ones as part of your study
today. Some Psalms specific to today’s study are:
• Psa 44:1 To the chief Musician for the sons of Korah, Maschil. We have heard with our ears, O God, our fathers
have told us, what work thou didst in their days, in the mes of old.
• Psa 60:1 To the chief Musician upon Shushaneduth, Michtam of David, to teach; when he strove with Aramnaharaim and with Aramzobah, when Joab returned, and smote of Edom in the valley of salt twelve thousand. O
God, thou hast cast us off, thou hast sca ered us, thou hast been displeased; O turn thyself to us again.
• Psa 32:1 A Psalm of David, Maschil. Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
• Psa 51:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came unto him, a er he had gone
in to Bathsheba. Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the mul tude
of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.
Nathan’s parable. Nathan came into David’s presence to tell him a story that brought out a great truth. The
story so intrigued David that he was caught in his own judgments. Here is a good place to open our bibles to Psalm
32 (read all) . Psa 32:9 Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding: whose mouth must be
held in with bit and bridle, lest they come near unto thee. Many sorrows shall be to the wicked: but he that trusteth
in the LORD, mercy shall compass him about. It didn’t take Nathan delivering God’s oracle for David to recognize that
he was being eaten alive from the inside-out; rather it took Nathan’s message for him to take the required ac on to
reverse the process. The burden of his sin was terrible, and because David refused to face it his heart was like a piece
of raw meat dropped into a glass of coke. It was shriveling up, turning rancid, and about to become unusable.
Rabbi Scherman says this: “From its very beginning, the process through which the Davidic dynasty and the eventual
King Messiah were to come into being has been mysterious and hidden. The na on of Moab (the na on that Ruth, the
ancestress of David came from) came into being when Lot lived incestuously with his daughter. Peretz, the ancestor
of David, was born from the strange rela onship of Judah and Tamar. David descended from the marriage of Ruth
and Boaz, a rela onship that some cri cized as being a viola on of halachah. David’s dynasty descended from his
Sin begets other sin;
marriage with Bathsheba, which was so shrouded in obvious impropriety.”
that’s how it works. Li le ones lead to more sins and bigger ones. And big ones lead to horrific ones. David did not
spot Bathsheba and then instantly have murderous inten ons towards her husband. But out of his adultery came
something he hadn’t counted on: her pregnancy. So next David tried to deal with the fallout of his sin that resulted
in her pregnancy by quickly calling her husband home from war, again, with no inten ons to harm Uriah, so that
Uriah would have rela ons with her, having no idea his wife was already a few weeks pregnant, and then Uriah and
everyone else would assume the child to be his. I wonder if Bathsheba would have had the conscience to tell Uriah?
Perhaps, but probably not. In essence Uriah’s failure to go home spared Bathsheba from direct par cipa on in his
pending death, although we cannot overlook whatever part she played in ’allowing’ herself to succumb to David. It
took Nathan to bring David to the full realiza on of what he had done. 2Sa 12:7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art
the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of
Saul;
121
Grace surrounds those who trust in God
Confession is the way we begin to return to God. In Psalm 32 David admits that the silence concerning his sin was
causing his physical distress and he had to take responsibility for his ac ons. Psa 32:3 When I kept silence, my bones
waxed old through my roaring all the day long. When we acknowledge our sins to God, not to other people, or
priests, or in a confessional, but to God and from a place of sincere regret, God, through Jesus, forgives. Psa 32:5 I
acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the
LORD; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah. God’s judgment. Nathan delivered to David the judgment of
God upon David’s sin. David was not able to hide his sin from God. The child born to David and Bathsheba out of
The Birth of Solomon. David repented of his
their adulterous union was smi en. Eventually it died.
sin and God blessed his marriage with Bathsheba. Solomon’s other name, Jedidiah, which means “Beloved of the
Lord.” This shows a forgiveness of David, however we will see that his ’fourfold’ penalty will be paid with the loss
of four sons, Bathsheba’s baby at God’s hand, and Amnon, Absalom, and Adoniyah in violent deaths that the Lord
essen ally arranged through the hands of men. Asking yourself or asking another person if they “believe in God” is a
hollow, meaningless ques on. Mere belief in God or disbelief in God brings the same results (eternal death) because
trust and not belief is the redemp ve issue. Even Satan believes in God. This is not a ma er of seman cs. Saul of
course believed in the God of Israel. David also believed in the God of Israel. Saul and David both commi ed the
worst of sins. The only thing that separated the two was David’s trust in the God of Israel, which opened the door for
God’s grace upon him. Grace is ONLY available to those who trust. The only difference between a saved Believer and
an unsaved person is trust; because we are very likely to have similar behavior. You may wish to listen to this Torah
Lesson on this subject. [audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/etcwk19.mp3” ][/audio]
The final siege of Rabbah. The armies of Israel were finally victorious over the Ammonites. This had been a long
war and encompasses the episode with David and Bathsheba. Finally, the ci zens of Rabbah, their leading city, were
besieged and put under the strictest kind of servitude. We can well imagine that David may have wished he had never
heard of the country of Ammon. 2Sa 12:31 And he brought forth the people that were therein, and put them under
saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and made them pass through the brickkiln: and thus did
he unto all the ci es of the children of Ammon. So David and all the people returned unto Jerusalem. There is some
dissension over this verse, but the best reading, in my understanding, is that David brought the people into servitude
and set them as laborers. WHAT CAN WE LEARN 1. “Ambassadors for Christ” 2Co 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors
for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. The treatment
of a country’s ambassadors is tantamount to the same treatment of the country. When the people of Ammon cut off
the beard of David’s ambassadors and sheared their robes just slightly below the waist, they caused the men to be
so ashamed that they were not willing to be seen in public. David took this treatment to be the same as shameful
treatment of himself and of his en re na on. He therefore went to war. We are some mes surprised to read that
Jesus said to Saul, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest” (Act _9:5). As far as we know Saul never saw Jesus; but when
he persecuted the followers of Jesus, it was as if he were persecu ng Jesus. We need to realize that our treatment
of God’s workers is equal to the same treatment of God himself. 2. Playing the man. When the armies of Israel saw
that the Syrians had joined with the Ammonites, they knew that the odds were overwhelmingly against them. Joab
122
said, “Be of good courage and let us play the men for our people and for the ci es of our God” (2Sa _10:12). When
Chris ans are overwhelmed by the forces of evil, they need to begin ’playing the men’, or to become God’s warriors,
for the sake of their brethren and for their God whom they serve, 3. In idle brain is the Devil’s workshop, Or Idle
hands are the devil’s plaything. The armies of Israel were in the field, but their leader was at home in Jerusalem. In
this period of idleness, David was lured into a trap which meant the ul mate downfall of his period of prosperity. No
doubt he may have wished many mes that he had been in the field of ba le rather than free to walk on the walls of
his palace in Jerusalem. We need to be busy for the Lord, lest in our periods of laxity we are led into sin. 4. Sin bears
compound interest. A er adultery came the en cing of a man to become drunk and ul mately the commi ng of
murder. One sin led to another. As it was with David, so it is o en in the everyday life of a Chris an. The wages of sin,
of course, is death (Rom _6:23 ). 5. “So they wrap it up” Mic 7:3 That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the
prince asketh, and the judge asketh for a reward; and the great man, he u ereth his mischievous desire: so they wrap
it up. The devious ways of a sinner are so intertwined and so interwoven that it is difficult to discern his path. David’s
sinful ways were so camouflaged that the man on the street did not know what was happening. Only the pure white
light of God renders accurate judgment on such devious ways. 6. A beam in the eye (Mat _7:1-5). David wanted to
punish a man who had killed another man’s lamb. He did not realize that Nathan was talking about him, but he was
one who was guilty of a far greater sin. 7. “Thou are the man” (2Sa _12:7). The apostle Paul urged the preachers of
the gospel to be sure that they did not condemn themselves when they condemned others (Rom _2:21-24). 3. The
iniqui es of the fathers (Exo _20:5). God does not visit the ul mate condemna on of a father’s sin upon the children,
but many fathers cause much suffering for the children. David and Bathsheba in their sin brought on the death of
their first child.
123
Bible in a Year - 15 Apr 2015 Birth of Solomon (2015-04-15 06:40)
This site is Dedicated to the Glory of GodIsa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall
not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
TODAY IS 25 Abib on GOD’S CALENDAR P
• January Schedule | Bible in a Year January e-book
• February Schedule | February Bible in a Year e-book
• March Schedule | March Bible in a Year e-book
• April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 2 SAMUEL CHAPTERS 13-14
You May wish to listen to this sermon by Pastor David Moore ”Bad Forgiveness” from Sermonaudio
[audio
mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2014.07.20.ABad-Forgiveness-Pastor-David-Moore-7201474483.mp3”][/audio]
INTRODUCTION
We begin to read how the doom pronounced on David’s house began to receive its fulfillment
• by Amnon’s shameful outrage on Tamar,
• by Absalom’s murder of Amnon in revenge for that outrage.
The events here related probably occurred soon a er David’s marriage with Bathsheba.
Dean Stanley points out how “the story, revol ng as it is, has the interest of revealing to us the interior of the royal
household beyond that of any other incident of those mes.
124
• The establishments of the princes.
• The simplicity of the royal employments.
• The dress of the princesses.
• The rela on of the king to the princesses and to the law.” Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, iii. 1433.
A woman of Tekoah, by the advice of Joab, comes to the king; and by a fic
ous story persuades him to recall Absalom.
• Joab is permi ed to go to Geshur, and bring Absalom from there,
• Absalom comes to Jerusalem to his own house, but is forbidden to see the king’s face,
• An account of Absalom’s beauty, and the extraordinary weight of his hair, His children,
• He strives to regain the king’s favor, and employs Joab as an intercessor,
• David is reconciled to him,
2 SAMUEL CHAPTERS 13-14
One of the wonderful and perplexing things about studying scripture is that God is truth. Often, as we will see in this story, God opens the hearts of men to our eyes. We begin to see at least some of what
God sees in humanity. The problem is not with the truths given that show the humanity of God’s chosen people,
but in our determina on to revise the stories to suit our modern way of thinking. The story of Tamar and Amnon is
one such story. David is seen by Judaism as virtually sinless (very nearly the same way Chris ans view Christ) and
almost as the first appearance of the Messiah. Thus no ma er what Scripture may say, David is defended and meanings are violently twisted to make things turn out in his favor. It has been twisted by Jewish teachers in such a way
as to remove any and all guilt from King David, making him perfect in his ways much as Jesus was perfect. A er
all, he is the prototype, right? In many ways Chris ans, similarly, hold King David up as the best human example.
The perverted behavior and immorality depicted in this chapter has been somewhat watered down especially in the
English transla ons of the original Hebrew manuscripts and as we get into it, it will become obvious why that is. –
adapted from Torah Studies by Tom Bradford This is a story that is not a children’s story. It is a story of incest and rape. That
said, I will do my best to avoid the ’gory details’, at least as much as can be and s ll find the meaning of this passage.
THE PLAYERS:
• Tamar was the daughter of Maacah, a princess of Geshur, and David’s marriage with her, while s ll at Hebron.
2Sa 13:1 And it came to pass a er this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair sister, whose name was Tamar;
and Amnon the son of David loved her. The name Tamar means ”palm tree,” and both she and Absalom were
remarkable for their personal beauty.
• Absalom was apparently older than Tamar, if she were now fi een or sixteen years of age. David would have
been king of all Israel at least thirteen or fourteen years, and would have reached the summit of his glory.
125
• Jonadab The cousin of Amnon. He is described as shrewd. The Hebrew word might be translated ’cra y’. He
is always looking for ways to integrate himself by finding ways for others, his ”friends” to do what they want
to do., whether it is right or not. Jonadab is an example of a false friend. True friends will rebuke you when
they see you bent on a wrong path. He is called Shammah in 1Sa _16:9, and is there described as Jesse’s third
son. A brother of Jonadab, named Jonathan, is men oned in 2Sa _21:21 as a valiant soldier who slew one of
the Philis ne giants. 2Sa 13:3 But Amnon had a friend, whose name was Jonadab, the son of Shimeah David’s
brother: and Jonadab was a very sub l man Sub l is not used in a bad sense, but means clever, ready in devising
means.
• Amnon was David’s firstborn, the son of Ahinoam of Jezreel; and probably he would never have commi ed his
shameless crime had not David’s own sin loosed the bonds of parental authority.
• King David Tamar’s parentage is men oned as a proof of his growing power, and consequently some me must
have elapsed a er his appointment as king before this alliance took place. David would have been king of all
Israel at least thirteen or fourteen years, and would have reached the summit of his glory. His wars would be
over, Rabbah captured, and his empire firmly established. For twenty more years he must sit upon his throne,
but as a culprit, and bear the many sorrows resul ng from his sin.
Amnon was in ’lust’ with his sister, Tamar. Even though the end of verse 1 states that Amnon fell in love
with Tamar, 2Sa 13:2 And Amnon was so vexed, that he fell sick for his sister Tamar; for she was a virgin; and Amnon
thought it hard for him to do any thing to her. immediately defines the type of love this amounted to; it was sexual
obsession. Amnon was struck with an ero c lust for Tamar. The last thing on his mind was to make Tamar his wife
in order to start a family. So, his friend, Jonadab, wan ng to know what is wrong with Amnon, discovers he is sick
because he realizes he can never have Tamar. This is the result of Amnon ’pining away’ for Tamar. In other words,
he was totally fixated on Tamar, much in the way, I imagine, as we see a stalker in our modern world as portrayed in
may crime stories. His obsession is more than just finding her a rac ve and desiring to have her, it is obsessive to the
point of making him ill. There are several taboos at work here.
• Tamar is closely related, in fact she is Amnon’s sister, a rela onship would be incest which is against the Torah
Laws of God. The Law did not permit incest nor did it permit their marriage and thus he could not have sex with
her
• Tamar is a virgin. Being a Virgin in Hebrew society it means never having had intercourse, plus a number of
other things.
– First, it means that the person is a female (males were never called virgins).
– Second it means that this girl was young.
– Third it means the girl was s ll living in her father’s household, under his authority, and she had never
been married. While that means that she was available for marriage, the end of verse 2 says clearly that
Amnon knew he could not have any kind of rela onship with her beyond a sister and brother rela onship.
There is also the base fact of Amnon’s lus ul obsession that would lead to the viola ng of Ta
mar.
So, Jonadab, in his supposed concern for Amnon’s health, devises a plan whereby he can ”bed” Tamar. Now, for those
of you who have children, you know how a ’friend’ can encourage a child to do good or to misbehave (and I put that
126
lightly). Peer pressure is a very powerful thing. Even more-so when it is someone you consider your friend, and it does
not end in childhood. So, Jonadab is not only encouraging Amnon to seek out Tamar to sa sfy his lust, but he gives
him a detailed plan to accomplish his desires. 2Sa 13:5 And Jonadab said unto him, Lay thee down on thy bed, and
make thyself sick: and when thy father cometh to see thee, say unto him, I pray thee, let my sister Tamar come, and
give me meat, and dress the meat in my sight, that I may see it, and eat it at her hand. So, Amnon does as Jonadab
suggests and it works! David, his father (and King) is worried about his son. Now recall that God had forgiven David
earlier concerning the Bathsheba incident (David took another man’s wife and then had him killed to cover his crime
and her pregnancy), but David would s ll have to suffer the consequences of his sin; God pronounced His judgment
upon David that the sword would never leave his household. This means that divinely caused treachery, violence and
death would play out for genera ons to come among David’s closest descendants..
Sin is, and will be responded to, on two levels: spiritually and earthly. And thus because all sin is first and worst a
trespass against the Lord, a spiritual payment is due. And that spiritual payment HAS been made for those who trust
in the one who made it: Yeshua HaMashiach, Jesus the Christ. But an earthly penalty is also due, depending on the
nature of the sin. Some mes the payment is through the jus ce system of human governments (which God created
and ordained as an authorized means to carry out jus ce). Other mes it is a payment directly caused by God (and
we’ll see especially that happen in David’s life since, as king, he was generally beyond the reach of human government).
We should more accurately define God’s ac on against us for our sinning as “discipline”. We must therefore assign
that same term to the horrors that we will see visited upon David’s family as well. For what is be falling David is of the
same nature and intent as what befalls us when we choose to defy our God and His commandments and trespass upon
The consensus of most bible
His holy nature. Let this be an example that we can learn from.
scholars and fi ng with the cultural customs of the mes, it is said that what we see happening, with Amnon, Tamar,
and Absalom, revolved around compe on for succession to David’s throne. In addi on, David had become selfindulgent and therefore also indulgent of his children. He had given them a bad example in many areas of life. Most
weren’t around in his glory days of such admirable faith and trust in the Lord that led to his assump on of the throne.
Thus it was the less desirable characteris cs of their father that they mostly witnessed, and of course they picked up
on it as but the rights of privileged royalty (of which they were part). David evidently was an affec onate father, who
even went to the abodes of his sons in a loving and unceremonious way, to see how they fared. But Jonadab abused
the king’s affec on, and made it the very means of removing the obstacles in the way of his daughter’s disgrace.
And like the whole tribe of fla erers and me servers, he employed his cleverness to gra fy his patron’s momentary
passion, indifferent to the miserable consequences which must inevitably follow. For the least punishment which
Amnon would have to bear would be exclusion from the succession to the crown, besides disgrace and his father’s
anger. Absalom, who was three or four years younger than another son Ashen, he despised, and counted for nothing.
Amnon succumbed to the same character flaw and crime as his father, David. We see here a similar theme
in that David developed an uncontrollable lust for Bathsheba based on her rare beauty and David’s son, Amnon,
succumbs to the same. Only this me Amnon’s improper desires are worse than his father’s. Why this is interes ng
is because we see the Lord supernaturally handing down propor onal jus ce upon David just as He said He would.
It is the classic eye-for-an-eye principle whereby because David lusted a er a woman who was legally taboo for him,
so now his firstborn son lusts a er a woman who is legally taboo for him. And the result of both cases would be
domes c violence and death. Much as when David had cruelly used an unwi ng messenger to go and fetch an
unsuspec ng Bathsheba to his palace so that he might have immoral sex with her. Now David himself is made the
unwi ng messenger that is used by Amnon to fetch the unsuspec ng Tamar to the man who would force himself
on her, have immoral sex with her, and end her virginity. David sends Tamar to Amnon. 2Sa 13:8 So Tamar went to
her brother Amnon’s house; and he was laid down. And she took flour, and kneaded it, and made cakes in his sight,
and did bake the cakes. The cakes were a dumpling-like food. But in this context there was a subtle double meaning
buried in the Hebrew words chosen, which a Hebrew from that era would have immediately understood. It is that the
FIRST use of the phrase “made cakes” was levav, and the 2nd use (just a few words later) was levivah. The root word
127
these are taken from is lev, which means “heart”. Thus the name for this par cular kind of cake is “heart cakes” or
“heart dumplings”. It is NOT that they were heart shaped like valen nes. Rather it is that “heart cakes” were a quickly
prepared food that would (in old English style) “strengthen the heart”. In other words they tasted good and they
provided a quick boost of energy; perhaps we might term them a “comfort food” (a food that brightens our mental
outlook more than simply filling our bellies). But of course we now see the double meaning that the girl who was the
cause of Amnon’s heart-ache was fixing him heart-cakes.–Bradford
So Amnon has his opportunity and takes
hold of Tamar. 2Sa 13:12 And she answered him, Nay, my brother, do not force me; for no such thing ought to be done
in Israel: do not thou this folly. By telling Amnon NO! all of the sin of what was occurring fell upon Amnon. Amnon
was about to become a rapist. But inevitably, it was the woman, Tamar, the vic m who would suffer the most. Tamar
was weaker and had li le hope, other than her wits, to stop what is about to happen. She pleads with Amnon not to
do this terrible thing. Certainly she was concerned for herself, knowing what the loss of her virginity would mean, but
she is also concerned with her brother. 2Sa 13:14 Howbeit he would not hearken unto her voice: but, being stronger
than she, forced her, and lay with her.
The penalty for a man in this situa on is primarily financial. But for the woman, the loss of her virginity is a life-long
calamity. In fact under certain circumstances it can lead to her execu on. No man wanted to marry a girl who wasn’t
a virgin unless she was a widow, or perhaps a divorcee. Literally a typical Hebrew girl’s financial worth to her family
Now that Amnon has achieved his goal and
became near zero if she were unmarried but not a virgin.
go en what he wanted, his lust disappears. The ”Love” he claimed he felt for Tamar turns to abject hate. He has her
tossed out of his rooms as if she were a common pros tute. Even a basic brotherly love toward a sister is glaringly
absent. Not only was Amnon a vic m of his own sexual lust, but now he is concerned over his posi on in the kingdom
as the heir once his father discovers what has happened.
The minute Amnon was finished with her a revulsion for her welled up inside of him. Tamar had resisted in every way.
Her refusal and disgust have essen ally ruined the experience that he had fantasized over for so long. His animal lust
for her had instantly turned into a hatred that was even greater than his so-called love. Only now that his hormones
are sa sfied does Amnon begin to contemplate the earthly consequences of his fiendish foolishness. What this means
for Tamar is nowhere in his thoughts. He blames her.–Bradford 2Sa 13:18 And she had a garment of divers colours upon
her: for with such robes were the king’s daughters that were virgins apparelled. Then his servant brought her out,
and bolted the door a er her. This is reminiscent of another coat of many colors. The word used to describe her
virgin’s robe is ketoneth. It is a word rarely used in the Bible, but it is the same word used for Joseph’s coat . A er his
brothers sold him to Arab slave traders they needed a believable story to explain his disappearance to his father Jacob.
So they rubbed goat blood on the coat, handed it to Jacob, and told him Joseph was killed by a wild animal. There is
no doubt that the choice of this word ketoneth is intended by the author to draw a graphic parallel between the final
2Sa 13:19 And Tamar put ashes on her head, and rent her garment
state of Joseph’s tunic and Tamar’s.
of divers colours that was on her, and laid her hand on her head, and went on crying. The blood of her spoiled virginity
is certainly apparent, an allusion to the ”wedding cloth” that was tradi onally given to the parents of the bride a er
the wedding night, to prove her virginity and seal the marriage. In fact the marriage cloth was carefully stored away
to be used as legal evidence in case the husband ever wished to divorce his wife (and get his bride-price back from
her father) using the excuse that she wasn’t a virgin when he married her and so had been defrauded. The blood on
Tamar’s virgin’s ketoneth was public proof that she was no longer pure. There was no hiding it. What should have
128
been a prized marriage cloth was now permanent evidence of her life-long shame. WE see Tamar fleeing, not back to
her quarters with the other virgins, but to her other brother, Absolom. 2Sa 13:20 And Absalom her brother said unto
her, Hath Amnon thy brother been with thee? but hold now thy peace, my sister: he is thy brother; regard not this
thing. So Tamar remained desolate in her brother Absalom’s house. Absalom was a clever and coldly calcula ng man.
Amnon’s assault upon Tamar (while ruinous for her) provided an opportunity for Absalom to use to his benefit what
was otherwise a family disaster and setback. As has been the mo o of ruthless poli cal leaders and poli cal hopefuls
since me immemorial, ‘you don’t ever let a good crisis go to waste’. All it would take is some determina on and
pa ence on Avishalom’s part and his fondest aspira ons just might become a ainable.
Meanwhile, David
learns of the incident. There is no hint that one word was spoken between David and Amnon. We are only told 2Sa
13:21 But when king David heard of all these things, he was very wroth. Certainly there is no record than any ac on
whatsoever was taken by David; no rebuke, no punishment, no nothing. Here a serious flaw is exposed in David. David
full well knew that by the Laws of Moses, Amnon had a price to pay and jus ce applied. We must not suppose that
Absalom did not comfort his sister, and make her conscious of his love. He was, in fact, so indignant at her treatment
as to have purposed the sternest vengeance. But this he concealed from her, and counseled
pa ence, net
merely because she would have dissuaded him from a course so full of danger to himself, but because it was the duty
of both to wait and see what course David would take. Where polygamy is permi ed, it is the duty especially of the
brothers to defend their sisters’ honor. But David was both her father and the chief magistrate; and, moreover, he had
been made an instrument in his daughter’s wrong. They must be pa ent, and only if David failed in his duty would
Absalom’s turn come. Meanwhile, Tamar dwelt in his house desolate, as one whose honor and happiness had been
laid waste. But, David did nothing. David was a man whose conduct was generally governed by his feelings. He was
a creature of warm and o en generous impulse, but his character lacked the steadiness of though ul and consistent
Another pa ern is given here. Recall that the son of the King of Shechem raped Jacob’s
purpose.
daughter Dinah and Jacob did essen ally nothing about it except to become angry. In fact, it was the King of Shechem
who came to Jacob, hat in hand, to ask Jacob if this could be made right by his son marrying Dinah (which, in fact,
was the remedy of Deuteronomy 22, even though it would be centuries later before the Law was even given). Jacob
agreed to this, but his sons were incensed that their father would respond by essen ally giving in to a foreign king,
and so they took a violent and wrong ac on by killing the en re male popula on of the city (who were innocent and
had no part in this). Jacob’s response to this was simply to move.
God-principle: Wrong doing, even and especially by our children, must be dealt with, harshly if the situa on is serious
enough. We can call it discipline if we like, but God calls it jus ce.
129
Unfortunately humanism has
taken hold of society in this age, so even a mild slap on the bo om is considered abuse that is punishable by jail me or in some cases the State taking the child from the home. Equally so it has become
customary in American society that the mother is the disciplinarian and the father just looks-on helplessly
or is disinterested and prefers to be a buddy more than a parent. While maternal discipline is be er than
none, it o en casts a woman into a role that she isn’t supposed to have to bear. Men, it is our job to
discipline and exact jus ce upon our children when necessary (especially as they get a li le older), both
to benefit them in the long run and to sa sfy God’s commandments in the short run. I can remember
the several mes my mother said to me, “Wait un l your father gets home and I tell him what you did”.
Those are words that no young boy wanted to hear. It was effec ve, and my father did what was needed.
Apparently David’s children had no such threat hanging over their heads, and the result (as this and the
next few chapters show) wasn’t less violent and more responsible children (today we’re told that if we
spank our children we’ll turn them into bullies and abusers), but rather it was a stable of reprobate young
princes who thought they were above the law and that there would not be consequences for their behavior. Ironically it was the lack of puni ve ac on upon them that led to catastrophic and deadly results
later in their lives.–Tom Bradford
So Absalom devises his own plan for vengeance. And a er two years of wai ng for David to
take ac on, Absalom’s me had come. 2Sa 13:27 But Absalom pressed him, that he let Amnon and all the king’s
sons go with him. Though Tamar’s wrong was the mainspring of Absalom’s conduct, yet neither he nor his men
would forget that Amnon stood between him and the crown; and Amnon, en rely off his guard, never very wise
at his best, and with his senses made dull by wine, seems to have fallen an easy prey. And as soon as the murder
was commi ed, the rest of the king’s sons, though all had a endants with them, fled in dismay, not knowing what
might be the extent of Absalom’s purpose. 2Sa 13:29 And the servants of Absalom did unto Amnon as Absalom
had commanded. Then all the king’s sons arose, and every man gat him up upon his mule, and fled. This being
130
the first place in which this animal, the mule, is men oned, as the word so translated in Gen _36:24 really means
”hot springs,” and is so translated in the Revised Version. The breeding of hybrids was forbidden in Gen _19:19, and
probably they were procured, as were horses, by trade. Up to this me the ass had been used for riding; but now
David had a favorite mule (1Ki _1:33), and Solomon received mules as tribute (1Ki _10:25). Horses seem to have been
Again a pa ern emerges. The servants were responsible before God
used chiefly for chariots.
for their murder. They incurred blood-guilt. Once again we see David’s past coming back to haunt him. A few years
earlier David had instructed Joab to kill Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband, to clear the path so that David could add her
to his harem. Other than wan ng to be sure that the plan would work, and that the Israelite soldiers who would
be nearby wouldn’t suspect that this was really a murder plot; Joab seemed to be en rely unconcerned about the
immorality and wickedness of David’s order. Thus in propor onal jus ce, David’s firstborn son is about to be murdered
by disinterested 3rd par es who are merely following orders from someone who wants him out of the way. With
Amnon gone, Absalom would be next in line as king, and David had proved me and again that he was incapable
of confron ng his children’s sins. David would never exact jus ce upon Absalom for murder and everyone knew it.
In all the commo on word reached David that ALL his sons were dead. He throws himself on the floor
in mourning, but soon word comes to the contrary. 2Sa 13:32 And Jonadab, the son of Shimeah David’s brother,
answered and said, Let not my lord suppose that they have slain all the young men the king’s sons; for Amnon only is
dead: for by the appointment of Absalom this hath been determined from the day that he forced his sister Tamar. We
have here this same man we saw in Amnon’s residence, devising the plot to get Tamar to come to Amnon so that he
could have her. Now, in the true form of the ambi ous, we see him as being near to David and having the king’s ear.
This was a person who was maneuvering to get himself in proper posi on to become a man of greater influence in
the next administra on (regardless of who might wear the crown). He was Amnon’s ally un l Amnon was killed, and
so now it was me to play it safe to see how things worked out. Absalom flees. He knows that murder of a kingdom
heir is much worse than rape, however right his ac ons may have been by custom. He essen ally banishes himself
from his father’s sight. 2Sa 13:38 So Absalom fled, and went to Geshur, and was there three years.
Now, David was not only mourning the death of one son, but the absence of the other. David well understood the
ways of blood revenge; but he also well understood that Absalom was ambi ous, ruthless, and impa ent. As is o en
the case, while we may secretly hold our children’s faults to our hearts while denying them to others. But eventually a
me comes when we must admit to ourselves that our children are not the person we might have hoped they would
be, at least this is true when we fail to teach and discipline them as we should. 2Sa 14:1 Now Joab the son of Zeruiah
131
perceived that the king’s heart was toward Absalom.
The preposi on
does not usually mean ”toward,” but ”against,” and is so rendered in 2Sa _14:13. The whole phrase occurs again only
in Dan _11:28 Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant;
and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land., and certainly there implies enmity. The whole a tude of David
towards Absalom is one of persistent hos lity, and, even when Joab had obtained his recall, for two full years he would
not admit him into his presence. What has led most commentators to force the meaning here and in 2Sa _13:39 is
the passionate burst of grief when news was brought of Absalom’s death following upon the anxious orders given
to the generals to be careful of the young man’s life. But David was a man of very warm affec ons, and while this
would make him feel intense sorrow for the death of a son by his brother’s hand, and stern indigna on towards the
murderer, there would s ll lie deep in the father’s heart true love towards his sinning child, and Absalom’s fall was
sad enough to cause a strong revulsion of feeling. David’s grief would be not merely for the death of his son, but that
he should have died so miserably, and in an a empt so shameful. Was not, too, the natural grief of a father made the
more deep by the feeling that this was the third stage of the penalty denounced on his own sin, and that the son’s
death was the result of the father’s crime. The first of the foretold disgraces that fell on David’s family followed the
same pa ern as David’s own sin: sexual immorality followed by murder, with the murderer carefully plo ng how to
David would not listen to anyone concerning Absalom. Joab finally devises a plan to
get rid of his vic m.
reach the king. He finds a ”wise” woman. This is only meant to say she was intelligent and quick wi ed and would be
able to counter ques ons and objec ons as they arose from the King. Joab apparently wanted to see some stability
restored to the royal household, with one man firmly recognized as heir to the throne. That man, in Joab’s opinion,
was Absalom. David made no a empt to bring Absalom back from exile, because this would require him to sentence
him to death for murder. Joab therefore laid a plan that would enable the king to bring Absalom back safely . He used
a woman to win from the king a judgment that in certain circumstances it was not wrong to show mercy to a murderer
. The woman then used this principle to show that David should allow Absalom to return .
Although David
realized that he had been tricked by Joab into making this judgment , he stuck to his decision and allowed Absalom
to return. However, he did not allow Absalom to enter the royal court. In this way he showed firstly that he had not
forgiven his son, and secondly that he did not consider Absalom a suitable person to succeed him as king .Whatever
David’s opinion of Absalom might have been, the people in general were impressed by his handsome appearance . He
was also ambi ous and was becoming impa ent for power. He had spent three years in exile and another two years
132
back in Jerusalem, yet he had s ll not been accepted by the king (28). He decided he would wait no longer. When
Joab showed an unwillingness to give him further help, he persuaded Joab to take no ce of him by burning Joab’s
fields. Without delay Joab arranged for him to meet the king, with the result that he received the king’s pardon. His
fierce ambi on had at last brought him back into the royal court . 2Sa 14:33 So Joab came to the king, and told him:
and when he had called for Absalom, he came to the king, and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the
king: and the king kissed Absalom.
BIble in a Year- 16 Apr 2015 David’s Flight and the False Servant (2015-04-16 06:00)
it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
133
What is Bible in a Year? Learn more.>>> Download the Bible in a Year Schedule
– April Schedule
INTRODUCTION
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/QcTzvM5d _fo
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/Pt759shGkyc
Absalom conspires against his father, and uses various methods to seduce the people from their allegiance to their
king, Under pretense of paying a vow at Hebron, he obtains leave from David to go there; and, by emissaries sent
through the land, prepares the people for revolt,
• He gains over Ahithophel, David’s counselor,
• David is informed of the general defec on of the people; on which he, and his life-guards and friends, leave the
city, and go towards the wilderness,
• The steadfast friendship of I ai, the Gi te,
• David’s affec ng departure from the city,
• He sends Zadok and Abiathar with the ark back to Jerusalem,
• He goes up Mount Olivet; prays that the council of Ahithophel may be turned into foolishness,
• He desires Hushai to return to Jerusalem, and to send him word of all that occurs,
Ziba, servant of Mephibosheth, meets David with provisions, and by false insinua ons obtains the grant of his masters
property,
• Shimei abuses and curses David, who restrains Abishai from slaying him,
• Hushai makes a feigned tender of his services to Absalom,
• Absalom calls a council and Ahithophel advises him to go in to his father’s concubines,
• Character of Ahithophel as a counselor,
134
By cunning and deceit over the next few years, Absalom strengthened his posi on and gathered himself a following, mainly among the people of Judah’s country regions. 2Sa 15:1 And it came to pass a er this, that Absalom
prepared him chariots and horses, and fi y men to run before him. The men on of horses is no doubt to show Absalom’s disharmony with the Torah commandment of Deuteronomy 17:16 that Jewish kings are NOT to have very
many horses because that is what pagan kings do, and invariably they wind up being used against their own people.
He encouraged a feeling of dissa sfac on with David’s administra on and promised a be er deal for the common
people if he were in a posi on of authority .
Sound Familiar?
This can be compared to today. It is a me of a very poli cally divided America and so we tend
to align ourselves less on where we’re from than according to our poli cal leanings: le , right, center, independent,
libertarian, etc. In mes past, simply being an American was sufficient to explain our poli cal and social founda on,
our allegiance and our vision of the future, and this was because there used to be more unity and common cause; but
no longer. Similarly, the ci zenry was being dragged from a tribal society into a na onal one. Thus when Absalom
asked the people what city they were from (a ques on asked from the point of view of na onalism), they responded
by telling him what tribe they belonged to (a ques on answered from the point of view of tribalism).
Clearly, Absalom was plo ng to seize the throne. It appears that he relied for the success of his rebellion
upon the personal support he had built up among the country people. 2Sa 15:6 And on this manner did Absalom
to all Israel that came to the king for judgment: so Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel. Understand that
this does NOT mean that he stole their affec ons. Again we see the use of the word lev (heart), but in those days it
did not mean emo on or affec on, it meant “mind”. That is, Absalom stole their minds; he deceived the people by
presen ng himself as man of the people, when in fact he was but a man seeking personal power and only needed
them to achieve it.
Again I ask, Does THIS sound Familiar?
2Sa 15:7 And it came to pass a er forty years, that Absalom said unto the king, I pray thee, let me go and pay my
vow, which I have vowed unto the LORD, in Hebron. The number 40 is an obvious copyist error since there is no way
that Absalom went to the city gates for 40 years. Some scholars have tried to a ribute the number “40” to the amount
of me David had reigned, or to Absalom’s age at this moment, and to several other possibili es but none really fit.
Other ancient versions of the Tanach (such as the Aramaic and Syriac texts) give the number as “4” and not 40, and
that is probably correct. Most of the ancient Sages say that it had been 4 years since Absalom had returned from
Geshur, and that is most likely the case. If it is true that he had been home from Geshur for 4 years, then it would
have been 7 years from the me of Amnon’s murder and Absalom’s flight to Geshur that Absalom decided to name
himself King of Israel in Hebron. That would make the most sense, especially since the number 7 indicates divine
completeness. That is, the 7-year me-frame shows that it was God’s direct hand in the affairs of men that led to this
astounding event of David being usurped by his own son, and this in divine retribu on for David’s sins.–Bradford
135
2Sa 15:12 And Absalom sent for Ahithophel the Gilonite, David’s counsellor, from his city, even from
Giloh, while he offered sacrifices. And the conspiracy was strong; for the people increased con nually with Absalom. This was one reason why he chose Hebron as the place to declare himself king . We see here that the concept
that a god was everywhere simultaneously was not fully developed, yet, even among the Israelites. And thus YHWH
was only where He had sanctuaries and priests to serve Him (one of which was in Hebron). The leading ci zens of
Jerusalem were unaware of the plot, except for the man who was possibly the mastermind behind it, David’s chief
adviser, Ahithophel . 2Sa 15:10 But Absalom sent spies throughout all the tribes of Israel, saying, As soon as ye hear
the sound of the trumpet, then ye shall say, Absalom reigneth in Hebron. The sound of the shofar means a ba le cry,
because the shofar was a device used to send signals during war. Listen...
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/shofar.mp3”] [/audio]
The rebellion took David by surprise, because, as far as he knew, the people of Jerusalem s ll supported him. The
rebellion spread like wildfire. Now he could not be sure who was for him and who was against him. Knowing that
Absalom would head for Jerusalem to claim the throne, David did not want to be trapped in the city. Nor did he
want to cause the ci zens unnecessary bloodshed. He therefore gathered his household and loyal troops, and fled .
Foreigners who had defected to Israel remained loyal to David, and people from the villages near Jerusalem lamented
his departure. What we see happening in this chapter with those who are faithful to the Lord’s chosen king running
for their lives as a wicked challenger reveals himself, is a shadow and a pa ern for the Ma hew 24 event that is future
to us. Mat 24:26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the
secret chambers; believe it not.
David’s Judas - Ahithophel
Bradford tells us a li le about Ahithophel: Achitophel was a powerful member of David’s inner court, renowned for
his wisdom and sage advice. As such he was one of David’s most trusted councilors. Some say that his betrayal of
David is wrapped in mystery; I don’t think so. Achitophel was Bathsheba’s grandfather and would have had in mate
knowledge of all that had transpired. One can only imagine how distraught and deceived that he felt when David
seduced his granddaughter, and then had her husband eliminated. That David kept her as a wife was a dual edged
sword; on the one hand it was probably the best thing that could be done to protect this pregnant young woman
and keep her disgrace to a minimum. On the other hand, David had many wives and concubines and she was only
his trophy wife. Further a person such as Achitophel could argue that if David was sincerely sorry for his abominable
behavior towards his granddaughter, he would have made public apology, offered res tu on to her family, and cared
for her needs instead of making her appear to be an adulteress with equal culpability as David. No doubt for Achitophel his support of Absalom was all about honor and revenge.- Torah Studies
David knew that (at the least) what was happening was God’s will and part of the just punishment due him, so he
determined that he would not fight it.
2Sa 15:15 And the king’s servants said unto the king,
Behold, thy servants are ready to do whatsoever my lord the king shall appoint. This is the Great Divide. Mat 7:15
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Read the
136
words of Tom Bradford: ”I grieve over the long preached no on in some of the
most popular Evangelical
circles that there is absolutely no way that a REAL Believer would voluntarily leave the divine sheepfold and a ach
him or her self to another. Therefore anyone who would succumb to this opportunity to rebel was only a pretender
and not ever a Believer. Well that simply doesn’t match what the Scriptures, Old and New Testament, warn us against.
Such a no on even defies common sense. Why if falling away isn’t even possible would we be warned against it over
and over again? And the pa ern in 2nd Samuel 15 that those who were at one me loyal-to-the-death for David could
be fooled by another leader who is masquerading as a good and righteous king is well established in Holy Scripture.
David had tarried for a long me; he went out of the view of the people and didn’t seem to be there, visibly, for them
as he was for awhile. So a highly visible and a rac ve false shepherd that promised to address all the people’s needs,
and to be a champion for the people NOW, was able to win over a huge por on of the congrega on by convincing
them that he was God’s choice represen ng God’s will.” But don’t take our word for it, do the research for yourself.
Psalm 41 and then to 55. These were wri en before the rebellion of Absalom actually broke
out into the open and just before David thus fled to survive.
Psa 41:9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath li ed up his heel against
me.
Psa 55:3 Because of the voice of the enemy, because of the oppression of the wicked: for they cast iniquity upon
me, and in wrath they hate me.
When the priests Abiathar and Zadok set off to escape with David, taking the ark with them, David sent
them and the ark back to Jerusalem. In so doing he expressed his hope that he was not leaving Jerusalem permanently. He also intended that Abiathar and Zadok, by staying in Jerusalem with the ark, could join with David’s loyal
adviser Hushai to form a spy ring in the midst of Absalom’s court. The priests’ sons were to act as messengers to carry
the way, Shimei went along on the
news to David . 2Sa 16:13 And as David and his men went by
hill’s side over against him, and cursed as he went, and threw stones at him, and cast dust.
David, as passive and self indulgent as he had become; so back-slidden and prone to rash ac ons as was now his
way, seems to have been jarred into ac on by the sudden rebellion of the Kingdom of Israel led by his son Absalom.
That same jarring also seems to have re-awakened a sense of humility and repentance within him that reflected a
much earlier self that operated in a more righteous manner. So despite being the great warrior that he s ll was at
heart, and probably quite capable of mustering a substan al force of loyal supporters to resist the rebels, David chose
a different course. He chose to put his people ahead of himself.
2Sa 15:19 Then said the king to I ai the Gi te, Wherefore goest thou also with us? return to thy place, and
abide with the king: for thou art a stranger, and also an exile. David took I ai aside and offered him the opportunity
to go back and not become embroiled in an uncertain future, a ached to a deposed king. In verses 19 and 20 David
tells I ai that he has no obliga on to s ck to David (since he is not a Hebrew) and that he is essen ally free to dissolve
137
the covenant of loyalty with David and instead serve the coming an -king, Absalom. David also reminds I ai that he
is only a rela vely recent newcomer to Israel.
As David le Jerusalem, Ziba (whom David had appointed to manage the property of Saul’s grandson Mephibosheth;
took the opportunity to win David’s favor by bringing him food and animals to assist his escape. 2Sa 16:2 And the king
said unto Ziba, What meanest thou by these? And Ziba said, The asses be for the king’s household to ride on; and the
bread and summer fruit for the young men to eat; and the wine, that such as be faint in the wilderness may drink.
Ziba then told David that Mephibosheth was a traitor who was planning to seize the throne for himself. As a result
David took away Mephibosheth’s property and gave it to Ziba, though later events showed there was some doubt
whether Mephibosheth really was a traitor. Shimei, another of Saul’s rela ves, was pleased to see David’s humilia ng
removed from his throne, and cursed him bi erly .
Ambi on drives Absalom to covet David’s Crown
David showed much pa ence in accep ng the humilia on, believing it might have been part of God’s judgment upon
him . Meanwhile Absalom seized power in Jerusalem, though David’s cause was helped when Hushai gained entrance
into Absalom’s circle of advisers . 2Sa 16:21 And Ahithophel said unto Absalom, Go in unto thy father’s concubines,
which he hath le to keep the house; and all Israel shall hear that thou art abhorred of thy father: then shall the
hands of all that are with thee be strong. Absalom then took over his father’s harem, to demonstrate to all that he
was now king. By his shameful treatment of the harem women he showed his u er contempt for his father . This
was all carefully planned by Ahithophel. He saw that if Absalom’s revolt was to succeed, there had to be no possible
chance of a reconcilia on between Absalom and David .
2Sa 16:23 And the counsel of Ahithophel, which he counselled in those days, was as if a man had enquired at the
oracle of God: so was all the counsel of Ahithophel both with David and with Absalom.
LESSONS FOR LEARNING
1. The fickleness of mul tudes. Men and women who had been soundly in support of the government of David
suddenly turned to support the cause of his rebellious son. Some of them went along with the revolt without
really knowing what was happening. Absalom was a demagogue, and many of the people were deceived into
following him. Those who want to please God must be careful lest they follow along with the crowd.
2. “Let him do to me as seemeth good” (2Sa _15:26). David was willing to let God discipline him as it seemed good
to Him, He was res ng his case in the hands of the righteous judge. He knew that he had sinned against God,
and he was willing to pay whatever penalty should be exacted. This surrender of life is commendable.
3. “The Lord will look on mine afflic on” (2Sa _16:12). This was David’s belief. He trusted that it would be so
that the Lord would see what was happening to him and would requite him good for the cursing which he was
receiving at the hands of some of his people. It is enough for the Chris an to trust God to heal his hurts.
4. There is a true oracle of God. Absalom’s people followed Ahithophel as if he were God’s true spokesman. His
counsel was good over all, but it was not the counsel of God. Hushai was thwar ng a man who was usurping
138
the throne.
5. False prophets arise in every age and mul tudes follow them as if they were the oracle of God. Only one could
say, Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by
me.
139
BIble in a Year - 17 Apr 2015 Ba le of Mount Ephriam (2015-04-17 06:00)
Today we are reading about a rebellion against King David
– April Schedule
You may wish to listen to the following: Absalom and Achitophel
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/4HAwr5y77lM
INTRODUCTION
Ahithophel counsels Absalom to pursue his father with twelve thousand men,
• Hushai gives a different counsel, and is followed,
• Hushai informs Zadok and Abiathar; and they send word to David,
• David and his men go beyond Jordan,
• Ahithophel, finding his counsel slighted, goes home, sets his house in order, and hangs himself,
• David moves to Mahanaim; and Absalom follows him over Jordan,
140
• Several friends meet David at Mahanaim with refreshments and provisions,
David reviews and arranges the people, and gives the command to Joab, Abishai, and I ai,
• On his expressing a desire to accompany them to the ba le, they will not permit him,
• He reviews them as they go out of the city,
Absalom,
and gives commandment to the captains to save
• They join ba le with Absalom and his army, who are discomfited with the loss of twenty thousand men,
• Absalom, fleeing away, is caught by his head in an oak; Joab finds him, and stabs him with three darts,
• The servants of David are recalled, and Absalom, having killed himself, is buried,
• Ahimaaz and Cushi bring the sad news to David, who is greatly distressed at hearing of the death of Absalom,
and makes bi er lamenta on for him,
2Sa 16:23 And the counsel of Ahithophel, which he counselled in those days, was as if a man had enquired at the
oracle of God: so was all the counsel of Ahithophel both with David and with Absalom.
At the end of chapter 16 Ahithophel’s advice was for Absalom was to have sex with all ten concubines from David’s
harem that had been le behind to tend to the royal palace. For Absalom to do so, literally on the roo op of the
palace, would be the most public of insults and disgrace his father King David in the eyes of the people. His purpose
in this rather barbaric act was for Absalom to so publicly insult his father that people knew there was not the slightest
prospect of reconcilia on between David and his rebellious son. By this act the people would know they wouldn’t
have to worry that Absalom might get cold feet about his rebellion, seek forgiveness, and stand aside for King David to
return to power because in that event it would mean their execu on. No King could forgive such a blatant act, even
by his own son.
Now, Bathsheba’s grandfather, Ahithophel, con nues to be a close adviser to Absalom and convinced him that he
needed to do only one thing to make his throne secure, and this was to kill David. 2Sa 17:2 And I will come upon him
while he is weary and weak handed, and will make him afraid: and all the people that are with him shall flee; and I
will smite the king only: If he did this swi ly, without war or unnecessary bloodshed, the people would soon be fully
behind him.
141
Ahithophel in a consummate poli cian. He is seen here, again, aligning himself with the team that he believes will win
the crown. Ahithophel was trying to posi on himself for a promo on and Absalom knew it. Because of a measure of
distrust in
Ahithophel, and certainly with the hand of God at work in the spiritual, Absalom sought a
second opinion, from a man known to be loyal to the King, his father. The man he was seeking to kill.
Hushai, wishing to gain me for David to escape and organize his troops, advised against such a risky opera on, for
David was a very experienced soldier.2Sa 17:7 And Hushai said unto Absalom, The counsel that Ahithophel hath
given is not good at this me. He recommended that the whole Israelite army be assembled and Absalom himself
lead them into ba le. Being as vain as he was ambi ous, Absalom liked this idea and accepted Hushai’s advice. 2Sa
17:14 And Absalom and all the men of Israel said, The counsel of Hushai the Archite is be er than the counsel of
Ahithophel. For the LORD had appointed to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, to the intent that the LORD might
bring evil upon Absalom.
2Sa 17:19 And the woman took and spread a covering over the well’s mouth, and spread ground corn thereon; and
the thing was not known.
At the risk of their lives, David’s spies took him news of Absalom’s plan , 2Sa 17:16 Now therefore send quickly, and tell
David, saying, Lodge not this night in the plains of the wilderness, but speedily pass over; lest the king be swallowed
up, and all the people that are with him. with the result that David and his men quickly escaped across Jordan.
Lesser of two sins. The Torah explicitly teaches that there are lesser and greater sins. The woman lied about the
men hiding in her well. We know we are not to lie. So, her lie is a sin. But, God values human life. The principle of Kal
V’homer or the principle of the lesser sin, tells us that when we encounter a situa on where we must choose between
sins, God understands the need to do what is necessary to preserve life. Just as those who lied to protect the lives
of the Jews in hiding from the Nazi’s , the sin was commi ed to preserve the life of another. Just as with the woman
in Bachurim, who hid the High Priests’ sons who were in process of warning David in order to save God’s anointed
one from death at the hands of his evil son Absalom. She told a lie and defied her government authori es. But in the
so-doing she also preserved innocent life and chose to stand with God’s anointed above a humanly contrived government. She only had two choices before her: tell the soldiers the truth or lie to them. She did the right thing for the
right reason, even though in doing so she knowingly commi ed the lesser sin to avoid the greater. However, the lie
is s ll a sin. When we find ourselves in such a posi on, we are honor bound to seek God’s forgiveness and repent for
our sin.
142
2Sa 17:22 Then David arose, and all the people that were with him, and they passed over Jordan:
by the morning light there lacked not one of them that was not gone over Jordan.
Ahithophel commi ed suicide.Failed revolu ons do not end well for those who lead them. Ahithophel decided that he
would not give David the sa sfac on of determining the me and means of his end, so he took control. He went back
to his hometown, delivered his last will and testament, and then commi ed suicide 2Sa 17:23 And when Ahithophel
saw that his counsel was not followed, he saddled his ass, and arose, and gat him home to his house, to his city, and
put his household in order, and hanged himself, and died, and was buried in the sepulchre of his father. His plo ng
had brought Absalom to the throne, and he knew that all would be lost if Absalom followed Hushai’s advice. David
had now gained valuable me to rest his weary men, obtain provisions and plan his war strategy. 2Sa 17:29 And
honey, and bu er, and sheep, and cheese of kine, for David, and for the people that were with him, to eat: for they
said, The people is hungry, and weary, and thirsty, in the wilderness.
The military leaders whom David appointed over his men suggested he not go with his troops
to the ba le, lest he be killed. David agreed, but warned them not to kill Absalom. In those days there were essenally the equivalent of standing armies and reserve corps. There were the professional soldiers employed by the King,
and there were mili a that consisted of all able bodied men that cold be called upon in mes of need. The la er
would take me to assemble.
David’s experienced army leaders knew be er than the inexperienced Absalom how to direct the figh ng in the dif-
forest. Absalom’s forces suffered a crushing defeat (6-8). Though
ficult condi ons of the thick
Joab acted against David’s command in killing Absalom, he knew that this was the only way to bring the revolt to an
end . 2Sa 18:9 And Absalom met the servants of David. And Absalom rode upon a mule, and the mule went under
the thick boughs of a great oak, and his head caught hold of the oak, and he was taken up between the heaven and
the earth; and the mule that was under him went away.
2Sa 18:10 And a certain man saw it, and told Joab, and said, Behold, I saw Absalom hanged in an oak.
143
Ahithophel killed himself because he understood that there were only two op ons. His op on would have been a
purely poli cal opera on between two and could have aligned the people to Absalom’s side when he took the throne.
Rather, taking the advice of Hushai, the country divided itself into two fac ons, one side backing one king and the
other side backing another and they were willing to fight to see their man and their fac on win because for them
this was more of a cause than it was about self-serving poli cal ambi ons. those who followed David were loyal and
would fight to keep their king on the throne.
Which side are we on today? Are we willing to fight to keep our King, Jesus, on the throne, or are we happy to
just let things occur and risk having a pride-filled and self-serving evil king running the world?
It has long been a Chris an saying that God comes first and family second. In prac ce the order is almost always
reversed, and in fact, those Chris an leaders who do NOT reverse it are o en cri cized by the Church in general for
being so callous and uncaring towards their families, and therefore behaving in an ungodly manner. Our Savior has
always warned that following Him will extract a cost, and it needs to be counted before making that commitment.
And that cost doesn’t come only upon the one who chooses, but o en it spills over upon his en re family.
While David insisted that his son, Absalom, not be harmed, God would exact the required punishment for his earlier
sins, as promised. Absalom had laid his own path,apart from God. Was this predes na on? Perhaps, or perhaps it
was God’s hand in the ac ons and decisions of men. Luk 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and
mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
GOD PRINCIPLES: We must NEVER allow trouble to cause us to doubt God. God works through the decisions of men.
2Sa 18:18 Now Absalom in his life me had taken and reared up for himself a pillar, which is in the king’s dale: for he
said, I have no son to keep my name in remembrance: and he called the pillar a er his own name: and it is called
unto this day, Absalom’s place.
Once Absalom was dead, further figh ng was not necessary. 2Sa 18:14 Then said Joab, I may not tarry thus with thee.
And he took three darts in his hand, and thrust them through the heart of Absalom, while he was yet alive in the midst
of the oak.
Absalom had hoped for himself an honorable memorial, but instead he was buried in disgrace 2Sa 18:17 And they
took Absalom, and cast him into a great pit in the wood, and laid a very great heap of stones upon him: and all Israel
fled every one to his tent.
Not knowing how best to break the news of Absalom’s death to David, Joab sent a slave runner, perhaps in case the
king reacted violently and killed the bearer of such bad news. 2Sa 18:21 Then said Joab to Cushi, Go tell the king what
thou hast seen. And Cushi bowed himself unto Joab, and ran. But Ahimaaz, knowing that David would be overcome
with grief, persuaded Joab to send him as well. Ahimaaz arrived first and tried to break the news to David so ly ,
but when the slave arrived he told David
144
bluntly that Absalom was dead . 2Sa 18:33 And the
king was much moved, and went up to the chamber over the gate, and wept: and as he went, thus he said, O my son
Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!
David is s ll King, but he has paid a s ff price for his disobedience to god. He has been lax in the discipline of his sons
and now they are lost to him. Consequences of his earlier disobedience and the judgment of God upon him. Again,
it is important for Chris ans to understand, While Jesus took the ul mate penalty for our sins, IN THE SPIRITUAL, we
are s ll in the flesh and blood world and our sins have consequences that must be paid. It is vital that we understand
that DISCIPLINE is not punishment for a sin, but a way in which God teaches us. While we certainly do not like it, god,
our Father knows what is best for us, just as we know what is best for our own children. When we fail to discipline our
children as youngsters, we will most certainly find ourselves suffering grief over their ac ons as adults. It is a truism
that the world seems to have forgo en.
• Many of the images from Torah Studies by Tom Bradford
145
Bible in a Year- 18 Apr 2015 David returs to Jerusalem (2015-04-18 06:00)
TODAY IS 28 Abib on GOD’S Today is a Sabbath Day unto the Lord. It is the 4th Sabbath of the month
of Abib.
– April Schedule
INTRODUCTION
Joab rebukes David for his con nued grief over the loss of Absalom. David, he says, must remember the risks taken
by those who supported him, and show his apprecia on to them. Meanwhile the rebels have a change of heart. The
remember, in hindsight, how David has protected his people from their enemies for so long. There is talk about asking
him to come back. David arranges for the elders of Judah to come with him and starts out for Jerusalem. He is met
146
by Shimei who begs for mercy, and by Mephibosheth, who explains why he had not come with David earlier. David
rewards an early supporter Barzillai.
Now, the northern tribes become upset that an honor guard from Judah has returned David to Jerusalem and this
JEALOUSY leads to yet another conflict. In open rebellion of the northern tribesmen Joab murders Amasa, whom
David has appointed the new commander of his forces, and taking personal command again, pursues the leaders of
the newest revolt. He puts this rebellion down, and is restored to command of all David’s forces. David reorganizes
the government and His throne is saved.
GOD PRINCIPLE: Jealously creates strife
There is so much in this chapter that we can learn it is difficult at best to lay it out in this format. I am
here using many of the study resources at hand and providing commentaries from various sources for the obvious,
in addi on to providing some other, less discussed insights. You may no ce there are fewer images today than usual
because I hope to focus on the message more and searching for appropriate imagery is very me consuming.
AS ALWAYS YOU MUST SEEK THIS OUR FOR YOURSELF, I am only trying to help point you to where you need to look.
The Lord had told David that despite the heavenly and eternal forgiveness (given to him by grace) for David’s heinous
sins, the remainder of his days he would suffer as one who is cursed-on-earth, with violence and death being the epitaph of his household now and on into the indefinite future. In other words, While God forgave David, he would also
allow for the earthly consequences of his ac ons. Now David finally seems to understand how his ac ons affected
others.
The king’s grief relieved. Many of the people were ge ng the impression that David was sorry that Absalom’s revolt had been stopped. They even felt that if all of them had been killed and Absalom had been spared, David
would have been happy. Joab rebuked David for this a tude and the king arose and sat in the gate and greeted his
people.
The isola on of David from his people during this absorp on in what appeared to be a domes c sorrow caused pain
to his staunchest friends, was very near imperiling his influence as sovereign, and gave some ostensible ground for
the ungracious remonstrance of Joab. But the fact is, David was true to himself as a man of deepest piety, and the
people were unable to enter into the actual struggle through which he was passing. Like One greater, he ”trod the
wine press alone.” It was not mere natural affec on for a son, it was not pain that a son had been ungrateful, that
crushed him and rendered him for the me forge ul of the claims of his people and the du es of his office. The key
to the whole is to be sought in the predic on of Nathan (2Sa _12:9-12), the fulfillment of this in its severest form
in the tragedy of the life just ended, and the keen percep on of this in rela on to his own dreadful sin. His dis nct
recogni on of the chas sing hand of God (2Sa _15:24-30) when, with bare feet and broken heart, he passed in silence
and tears over Mount Olivet, was now repeated with, of course, the fuller and more overwhelming anguish a endant
on the ruin of a life, yea, of a soul, as he felt, through his own great sin. Joab and the people never, perhaps, knew of
Nathan’s declara on. It was always a latent element in David’s restored life of piety; but now it was the crushing force
before which he could not hold up. He saw, as he believed, how his spiritual degeneracy, during those dark months
147
of horrible sin and guilt, had acted perniciously on the spirit of his son; and he could not but feel that, in the temporal
and spiritual destruc on of his son, he was now reaping just what he had sown. Yet all this he had to bear alone! No
one could share the dreadful secret; and in propor on as he saw what was involved in a ruined soul, so would be the
bi erness of his anguish. No wonder if in his solitary experience he forgot all earthly things, and gave himself up to
the bi erness of his grief.–Pulpit commentary
Never before did he see a
an event. Now, in his clarity, his grief is debilita ng.
connec on between his own past conduct and so awful
David was so absorbed in the spiritual anguish springing from a religious view of the ruin of Absalom in connec on
with his own great sin, as prac cally to forget that he was a king, and that a na on needed his guidance. The narra ve
is true to the spiritual facts that may be traced by a comparison of this event with the king’s previous conduct. The
intensity of his nature, as revealed in the strong and passionate u erances of the psalms, whether in joy or sorrow,
would add to the tendency to yield himself u erly to this greatest of all the calami es consequent on his sin. The
passion with which he once pleaded for Bathsheba’s child (2Sa _12:16-20) was an instance of the same kind, only less
than this, because here the trouble was the more serious in so far as the moral and bodily ruin of a son was a greater
consequence of his sin. All who have entered into the solitariness of the great crises in the soul’s career know how
at such mes all earthly things seem to vanish into insignificance; and it is with extreme difficulty that ordinary and
necessary du es can be a ended to. Men have been known to forget to take food, and to isolate themselves from
their friends. And no wonder, when the soul sees its sins in the awful light of God’s judgments, or is made to feel the
consequences to others of its past deeds. Peter did not associate freely with friends that night on which he ”went out
and wept bi erly.”--ibid
The great judgment on David’s sin was now passed. Nathan’s words had been fearfully fulfilled, but in what followed
we see also some of the remoter consequences of his sins.
I am going to be talking a lot about the parallels between David and Jesus, and a li le about significant differences
between the two. In reading the Torah Studies for this chapter Tom Bradford puts forth my intended focus:
However if anything set David apart from other men it was his zeal and his great passion to do whatever he did to its
fullest. He always loved God and remained dedicated to Him, even though he failed over and over again because at
mes (especially in the last several years of his life) he spit the bit out of his mouth and refused to be guided by His
Master (something Jesus never did).
It is a reality of our fallen humanity that even the best of God’s worshipers and leaders here on earth experience
enormous failures (some publicly visible, some hidden). In fact I would say that significant failures are probably part
and parcel of those who are the MOST zealous for the Lord. We see that nega ve side of the most zealous even
among the Apostles as Peter denies knowing the Lord on 3 occasions. And yet, since our earthly day-to-day behavior
is thankfully NOT the measure of what saves us, we get this truly head-scratching statement from Jesus in the Book
of Revela on:
(Rev 3:14-17 CJB) 14 ”To the angel of the Messianic Community in Laodicea, write: ’Here is the message
148
from the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the Ruler of God’s crea on: 15 ”I know what you are doing: you are
neither cold nor hot. How I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, neither cold nor
hot, I will vomit you out of my mouth! 17 For you keep saying, ’I am rich, I have go en rich, I don’t need a thing!’ You
don’t know that you are the one who is wretched, pi able, poor, blind and naked!
God expects more than just a passive ”I believe in God” from us. In all real love there is great passion. Would you
fight for your parents, your children, your spouse when they are being wronged? Of course you would. You would
shout, curse, perhaps even stoop to violence to protect what you love. But, do you have the courage, in the face
of opposi on, to stand and fight for God? For his people? Or are you happy to tell yourself and others , Oh, I am a
believer. I support Israel. I will fight for God, when all the while, you are more interested in the football game or the
next blockbuster movie. We are to push ourselves and turn away from our sin, not seek God’s glory in more and more
grace because we are commi ng more sin.
(Rev 3:19 CJB) 19 As for me, I rebuke and discipline everyone I love; so exert yourselves, and turn from your sins!
Here then is the Scriptural defini on of the term “exert”: for a Believer to exert oneself is to love God with all our
heart, being, and resources. Everything, all the me, in fullest measure. This exer on is called passion and zeal in the
Bible. It is an a tude and an ac on. So don’t ever think that taking the nice safe viewpoint that if I do nothing, I’ll
do nothing wrong; that although I’m not really ac vely serving God, I’m also not ac vely commi ng bad behavior or
direct trespasses. Christ says that when it comes to living out our lives for Him, doing nothing is far worse than doing
something wrong. God WILL rebuke and punish those zealots who do wrong, but it will be because He con nues to
love you, not because He rejects you. On the other hand, for the u erly passive non-passionate Believers, it is YOU
who are in the danger zone. Become passive and indifferent enough and He will reject you. Where that line is I do
not know; but it is there and I recommend we all stay far from it.–ibid
The return to the Jordan. 2Sa 19:14 And he bowed the heart of all the men of Judah, even as the heart
of one man; so that they sent this word unto the king, Return thou, and all thy servants. Since the campaign was
successfully concluded, David and his men returned to the Jordan river in prepara on for crossing back over into the
main part of Israel. He had sent messages ahead to find out if the people wanted him to be king. He was a monarch,
but he also wanted the people to approve his kingship.
The turn of the de had come for David, and with it men good and bad, great and small, throughout the land
began to consider how they had be er comport themselves under the new circumstances. Israel hastened to
indicate readiness. 2Sa 19:11 And king David sent to Zadok and to Abiathar the priests, saying, Speak unto the elders
of Judah, saying, Why are ye the last to bring the king back to his house? seeing the speech of all Israel is come to
the king, even to his house. Judah was wai ng for some encouragement to yield , and receiving it, hasted to be first
at Jordan
And such representa ve men as Shimei and Ziba show eagerness to find favor with the victorious
monarch. Probably only an ac ve sec on of the less though ul people had really rejected David; the great mass
were won over to the winning side because it was the winning side, and, now that David was returning to power,
they, as well as the real leaders of the rebellion, move on with the de.
Success has a great charm for some minds. The day of prosperity draws out many friends. In na onal and religious affairs mul tudes are influenced, not by a calm and independent considera on of the merits of the ques on
149
or system, but by the fact that there is a semblance of prosperity. Men are not without reason spoken of as a ”flock;”
they are disposed to go in with the rest. This is not the highest type of humanity.
The real friends of Absalom and such men as Shimei fell in with the change in public opinion, and
professed, the la er most eagerly and humbly, to welcome the king back. Allegiance is a ma er of degrees, and
springs from mixed mo ves. David had to feel for the rest of his days that policy governed the loyalty of some of his
people. In na onal life there are many causes of unsteadiness of loyal a achment to the head of the state—some
lying in the seat of authority, and some in ignorance, prejudice, or occasionally the convic ons of the people. Every
bond of union between moral beings implies a loyalty more or less defined to persons and interests. Master and
servant, husband and wife, partners in business and government, teachers and pupils, create, by the rela on formed,
a demand. for loyalty the one to the other and to the common interests professedly sought by the union. The
fellowship of the saints in Church life especially creates scope for mutual loyalty and common loyalty to Christ. We
may see many things in one, for all truth is related; and therefore, in the doub ul loyalty of men in David’s me,
with its necessary weakness to the na onal life, and injury to the highest interests of the kingdom, we see the evil
brought on the world by defec ve loyalty in the various rela onships men enter into; and especially do we see the
effect of defec ve loyalty of professing Chris ans to the Church and to Christ. The prac cal bearings of this are very
many and very wide.
The people greeted the king. Different ones came out to meet David as he returned. Some had
favors to ask of him. Others had apologies to make. Most of the people were happy to see David returning as king.
KJV 2Sa 19:16-17 And Shimei the son of Gera, a Benjamite, which was of Bahurim, hasted and came down
with the men of Judah to meet king David. And there were a thousand men of Benjamin with him, and Ziba the
servant of the house of Saul, and his fi een sons and his twenty servants with him; and they went over Jordan before
the king.
It was a beau ful ac on to hasten over Jordan and be first to bid the king welcome; the most devoted of his
friends could not do more; but for Shimei to do it, a er his conduct towards David, took away from the deed the flow
of its natural beauty. The act was evidence of an uneasy conscience merged with a cowardly, me serving policy.
That he was truly penitent is not admissible from the tenor of his words—they sound hollow. It is not the custom of
the true penitent to refer to his good deeds in proof of penitence 2Sa 19:20 For thy servant doth know that I have
sinned: therefore, behold, I am come the first this day of all the house of Joseph to go down to meet my lord the
king. And David assures him he shall not die, at his hand.
Nor, perhaps, was Ziba without a restless conscience in thus seeking early to gain the favor of the king, who would
soon learn the facts concerning his former decep on. We here see that conscience is alive, even in very base men;
that it is quiescent and seemingly at ease when either possibility of exposure or punishment is far off; that it is
nevertheless sensi ve to any change in events which tend to hasten exposure or punishment; that its greatest dread
is falling into the hands of a supreme power; and that, instead of eleva ng the man, and promp ng to renova on, it
rather drags him down to the low and plausible means of avoiding what it knows is deserved.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROPHETIC CHAPTER! HERE’S WHY
In this more than perhaps most any other chapter of the old testament, we see a prophe c picture emerge.
Consider:
150
Mephibosheth - is representa ve of the Jewish people, especially today. Recall he is the crippled and broken son of King Saul. He was heir to the throne but could not claim it because of his crippled state.
Just as the Jewish people are the heirs to the truth of Jesus, they cannot claim it because they are crippled by
their tradi ons and disbelief. Much like the custom of the days of Mephibosheth where a cripple is considered
worthless and is cast away much like a leper, today the Jewish people are considered worthless and bothersome.
Many wish they would just ’go away’ and take their pious religion with them. The truth is that Jesus came FIRST TO
THE JEWS.(John 4:21-24) ”Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this
mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. (22) Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship:
for salva on is of the Jews. (23) But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the
Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. (24) God is a Spirit: and they that worship
him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” And was rejected by them Luke 9:22 Saying, The Son of man must suffer
many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.
Because of the rejec on the Jews, like Mephibosheth, lost control of their inheritance to the Gen les,
Tzivah - represents the Gen les. He stepped in to be the steward of Saul’s estate when he was
killed and had no heir for it to go to . Remember, at the me Mephibosheth was away and presumed dead. While
administering the estate Tzivah made every effort to increase and possess its wealth. He had no one watching over
him. John 10:12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf
coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and sca ereth the sheep. He scorned and
plo ed to be sure he maintained control, much as the Gen les have done over me. David restores control of the
estate to Mephibosheth. Later Tzivah lies to David concerning Mephibosheth, and so David gives the estate over to
him. 2Sa 19:27 And he hath slandered thy servant unto my lord the king; but my lord the king is as an angel of God:
do therefore what is good in thine eyes. I much the same way as we Gen le believers slander the Jewish people
today.
King David - represents Jesus, the returning King - this event of David returning to Jerusalem to resume his
reign is either a very good analogy of when Christ Jesus returns in His 2nd coming, or it is actually and inten onally
So Essen ally, when the Jews, who were broken off from
prophe c shadow of that event.
the original word of God by their adopted tradi ons, (Mephibosheth) rejected Jesus, (not all but a majority) the
”gospel” went out to the Gen les (Tzivah) who embraced it , took if for their own, and worked heard to spread it
across the world. In the process they have polluted the message by twis ng it to conform to their long held pagan
beliefs. When confronted with defeat of the enemies, King David ( prophe c Jesus), calls all his people (Israel - Jews)
to come follow him, but some (Judah) do not immediately come. He wants to know why, they are, a er all, His flesh
and blood. Eventually all will follow the King (Jesus). No ce also when King David decides to restore the inheritance
to Mephibosheth (Jews) he says to just let Tzivah (Gen les) keep it. He is happy just to be with the King (Jesus). Isn’t
this much like what is going on between the Gen les and Jews today? As we look back over the centuries we see that
this is an accurate pa ern of what happened with Jesus and His countrymen, and how gen les came to dominate
the Church even though Messiah always made it clear that first and foremost He came to deliver His own people
151
who were to be the Master of the estate.
What ma ered to Mephibosheth was his personal rela onship
with the anointed king and that the king be on this throne; what ma ered to Tziva were all the trappings, status and
earthly benefits of controlling the estate no ma er how he had acquired it. (Romans 1:16) ”For I am not ashamed of
the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salva on to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to
the Greek.”
No ce also:
Ma hew 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming
of the Son of man be. Evangelical Chris ans quote this all the me but it always puzzled me; since when does lightning
flash from the east to the west? That’s no more true in Israel than it is in Florida or anywhere else for that ma er.
So is that just an ancient Hebraic saying of some sort? There is no evidence of it being an old tradi onal saying.
Rather, I think it is prophe c fulfillment; but prophe c of what? Here we have David returning to Jerusalem from
what direc on? From the east to the west. God’s anointed is returning to the throne but he is coming quickly from
the east towards the west. And as I’ve taught you since early in Genesis, always pay a en on to the direc on east
in the Bible, there is usually some important significance that is a ached. I think Christ’s return is being prophesied
in 2nd Samuel 19 as David returns to Jerusalem, right down to the direc on of the return. We’ll see more evidence
And so, some of the people decided they had more right to have David as King
of this shortly.–Bradford
than others.Is this what we gen le Chris ans are proclaiming today? Are we forcing our Jewish brothers to give up
that which righ ully belongs to them because we believe we have more right than they ? 2Sa 19:43 And the men
of Israel answered the men of Judah, and said, We have ten parts in the king, and we have also more right in David
than ye: why then did ye despise us, that our advice should not be first had in bringing back our king? And the words
of the men of Judah were fiercer than the words of the men of Israel. In parallel Torah studies teach us: So what
happened was this: Jesus, the anointed king, came to His people the Hebrews and many accepted him as Messiah
but most did not. As me went by more and more Jews (which by Jesus’ day was a standard label for all the Hebrews
even though it wasn’t technically correct) star ng accep ng Jesus as the Messiah un l the New Testament tells us
there were thousands upon thousands of Jewish Believers; but then something happened. As the Gospel was taken
to the gen les (par cularly by Paul), gen les not only star ng believing in droves, they also began to outnumber the
Hebrews who believed in Jesus. A er all; the sheer number of gen les in existence in that era was at least 100 mes
greater than the total number of Hebrews. So it naturally follows that in no me at all (in less than a century a er
Messiah’s death) the number of gen le Believers had overwhelmed the number of Jewish Believers and so the gen les
simply brushed aside any opposi on and gained absolute control of what we now call “the Church” By the early part
of the 2nd century A.D. the gen le Bishops who now ran the ins tu onal Church decided that Jewish Believers needed
to stop being so Jewish in their observances and instead adopt the ways of the gen les, and to let go of such things
as the Sabbath, the Biblical Feasts, and more if they were going to worship Jesus..–ibid
Most of you have heard since Sunday School of the so-called Early Church Fathers. Usually the first
Church Father is said to be either Igna us or Clement and there were several others who both overlapped
and followed them. But there is one interes ng common feature about the Early Church Fathers: all were
gen les. Isn’t it interes ng that in Chris an parlance the first Father of the Church was a gen le, as were
all subsequent to him? Does it now make sense as to why the Jews see Chris anity as a gen le religion?
It was characterized by gen les in that way since around 100 A.D. Never mind that the Bible points to
James (1/2 brother of Jesus) as the likely first recognized leader of the Church, or that the Hebrew Paul
ought to figure in that mix as well. Or that Peter is called by the Catholics the first Pope. But since
152
about 100 A.D., the Church wasn’t even considered the Church un l it was a thoroughly gen le religious
ins tu on The gen le church had ignored Paul’s warning of Romans 11( 25 For, brothers, I want you to
understand this truth which God formerly concealed but has now revealed, so that you won’t imagine you
know more than you actually do), and determined that despite the Scriptures clearly saying otherwise
that they (we) now had more right to the Hebrew estate than did the Hebrews. The early gen le Church
leaders cleverly began libeling the Jews as bloodthirsty Christ killers and openly stated that Jews ought
to have no part in worshipping the Jewish Messiah; Christ was now the gen le Messiah who belonged
to the gen le Church. Naturally this erected an impenetrable wall through which Jews could not pass.
Of course the Roman-based church conveniently forgot that although some of the self-serving Jewish
leadership in Pon us Pilate’s day had been happy and eager to see Yeshua executed, it was the gen le
Romans who condemned him, mercilessly whipped him un l He no longer looked human, and then killed
him. It was the gen le Roman soldiers that nailed Him to the hideous Roman death stake, and it was a
gen le Roman soldier that pierced Christ’s side with a Roman spear to ensure that he was indeed dead
(and this as His Jewish followers helplessly looked-on, lame and in despair). Look at the obvious parallels
from 2nd Samuel 19 and the prophecy simply jumps off the pages. Mephibosheth was the righ ul Hebrew
owner of the Israelite estate (a part of the Kingdom of God), and the anointed King David came to rescue
and restore him. But the gen le Tziva, who was graciously given the privilege to partake and benefit
of the Jewish estate, under the terms of Jewish covenant law, was not sa sfied in his role. Rather he
plo ed and planned and lied to the king by saying that the Jewish Mephibosheth wanted no part of the
anointed king and had given his loyalty to another. Tziva coveted being Master of the estate, and he
wanted the exclusive favor of the anointed king, and so to accomplish that he built up an elaborate web
of lies and distor ons about the righ ul Hebrew estate owner and in the doing was able to wrest control
of the estate away from him and now a gen le felt that he owned it. My soul aches as I tell you this
story and this prophecy and how it became fulfilled. Even though God foreknew this would happen, and
thus factored it into His plan of redemp on for all mankind, it is a sad and gut wrenching truth that the
gen le Church has stolen away the estate of the Jews, claimed it exclusively for ourselves, and then said
that the Jews have no part in it (and declare to one another that the Jews want no part in it) and that the
anointed heavenly king is through with them anyway. We have manufactured a complete role reversal:
the true Master of the estate has become lame and set aside, and the partaker has become the Master
(at least in the eyes of the false Master). Now the king returns and the gen le estate steward runs ahead
of the righ ul Jewish owner to greet the king. The Jewish estate owner is dispirited, lame and he cannot
hurry. He was damaged in life and like the crippled man in the New Testament who went to the Pool
of Bethsaida to wait for the water to s r in hopes he could crawl into it and be restored, the crowds
always beat him to it and thus there was never room for him. I know that most of you who are listening
are aware of a growing thirst among the Jewish people to receive their inheritance and their anointed
king, even if they don’t know who he is. But the Church has, for centuries, told them that the estate
inheritance is no longer theirs, and thus the returning king is for us the “new Masters”, not for them the
lame and dispossessed. Sadly the vast bulk of folks on both sides have come to accept this decep on as
God-ordained and the truth. We of Christ’s Church have become Tziva and we need to repent from this
and do all we can to undo the false man-made doctrines we’ve established and preached to ourselves
and foisted upon the Jewish people and we need to return the estate to the righ ul owners. When David
originally brought Mephibosheth before him and gave him the estate, it was an estate that Mephibosheth
didn’t realize that he already had legal right to; so it was only that the king was restoring it to him. The
Jewish people own the estate inheritance because God set it up for them, beginning with Abraham, and
we the Church need to make them aware of it. We need to equip them to handle the task and to assume
our roles not as Masters but as lawful (and grateful) partakers and partners in their estate (as Paul points
out). –Tom Bradford
2Sa 20:1 And there happened to be there a man of Belial, whose name was Sheba, the son of Bichri, a Benjamite: and
he blew a trumpet, and said, We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man
153
to his tents, O Israel. Sheba’s revolt. Some of the Israelites s ll felt that David had usurped Saul’s throne. This was
especially true of the men of Benjamin. They found a leader in Sheba. Amasa’s indolence. David had made Amasa his
captain in Joab’s stead and sent him to put down Sheba’s revolt. Amasa proved inept and was very tardy in performing
the king’s bidding.
Source: h ps://www.flickr.com/photos/55467924@N05/
Again I will insert something I no ced that has not been men oned in the commentaries that I can find. 2Sa 20:5
So Amasa went to assemble the men of Judah: but he tarried longer than the set me which he had appointed him.
When we see that he ’tarried’ it means he missed the appointment. Do we really understand that the APPOINTED
FEASTS and the SABBATHS are essen ally appointments set up by God? These are the mes and days that God says He
will meet with us. Now, this is not to say that He is never present at the mes we gather to worship Him, but it is the
APPOINTED TIMES ONLY that guarantee He is present. How long will we deny these appointments, going about our
own ideas and se ng our own appointments, our own idea of the right me to meet. Seems to me that if the Boss
is calling an appointment, we would be much be er off showing up than ignoring the mee ng and calling a different
Joab assassinates Amasa. Joab went out to assist Amasa, but he killed Amasa instead. This
one later.
cold-blooded murder of David’s captain by his former captain is inexcusable. 2Sa 20:10 But Amasa took no heed to
the sword that was in Joab’s hand: so he smote him therewith in the fi h rib, and shed out his bowels to the ground,
and struck him not again; and he died. So Joab and Abishai his brother pursued a er Sheba the son of Bichri. Joab
greeted Abishai with a tug on the beard, a playful gree ng between friends. Then he stabs him, and leaves him lying
in the road bleeding, turning with no remorse or a look back. Next we learn of Sheba’s death. David’s men under Joab
were forced to pursue Sheba to the extreme northern boundary of Israel. He had entrenched himself in the city of
Abel. Under siege, a wise woman inquired why all the trouble. When told it is because of Sheba, she promises to bring
an end to the siege by delivering his head to Joab.2Sa 20:22 Then the woman went unto all the people in her wisdom.
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab. And he blew a trumpet, and they re red
from the city, every man to his tent. And Joab returned to Jerusalem unto the king. Another commandment had been
broken here: (Deuteronomy 20:10-12) ”¶ When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace
unto it. (11) And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people
that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. (12) And if it will make no peace with
Israel’s leaders. It was necessary for the
thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it:”
kingdom to be reorganized a er Absalom’s and Sheba’s revolt. Some of the officers who were first appointed by David
were s ll in office. Other new offices had been formed and some of the older leaders had been replaced. It was s ll a
very efficient organiza on. We are given a breakdown of these officers to end this chapter. LESSONS FOR LEARNING
1. We must forgive others their trespasses against us. Jesus taught His disciples to pray, “Forgive us our debts as we
forgive our debtors” (Mat _6:12). David had sinned grievously. He wanted very much to receive God’s forgiveness of
his sins, and he was willing to forgive others their trespasses against him. Although some of his men wanted him to
wreak vengeance on his enemies, David forgave those who had spoken evilly against him and opposed him as he fled
out of Jerusalem.
154
GENERAL LESSONS. 1. Let us remember that there are daily some persons passing through fearful crises in their
religious life, and that it is possible to help all such by our prayers. 2. We should be very considerate of others who
may appear to be unduly cast down, as there may be circumstances which, if known, would strengthen our pity. 3.
It is very possible for us to misjudge others in the conduct they adopt, and make our own contracted experience a
standard of judgment. 4. We may expect that those who are u erly broken down in spirit will be called out of their
self-absorp on by the voice of Providence. 5. It is a comfort to us all to know that God understands our real thoughts
and feelings, and that we have a High Priest who is touched with a feeling of our infirmi es, he having entered into
deeper depths of sorrow than we can ever know.His example is a good model. 2. “The king is an angel of God” (2Sa
_19:27). The people had great respect for their rulers. They considered the king as a messenger of God. The apostle
Paul wrote “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers” (Rom _13:1). Chris ans should honor their rulers,
however difficult it may be. Remember, Jesus was walking the streets under the oppressive rule of the Roman Empire,
yet, we are NEVER to succumb to a leader who demands we violate God’s commandments. Personally, I would rather
risk imprisonment or death at the hands of a corrupt government, than to have my name removed from the eternal
book of life at the hand of Jesus. 3. Peaceable men are men of wisdom. When Sheba fled to Abel, some of the people
said that they were “peaceable and faithful”. These men, and the woman, did what they knew was right. A land is
blessed when it has this type of men. Some mes it takes only one to stand up and do the right thing when all the
world seems to have gone mad. 4. The powers that be are ordained of God (Rom _13:1 ). God intends for men to
have good government, David saw to it that his people had good, efficient rule, More governments of this kind are
needed in the present cri cal stage of world affairs. JEALOUSLY - O en the first downfall of man. Arising from pride,
this is one of the most insidious emo ons and mindsets. It leads to more death and destruc on than perhaps even
greed. Thou Shalt Not covet...anything that is your neighbors. Jealously is cove ng something. Whether it is another
wife, or property, or even popularity or fame. It WILL lead to downfall. Jealously is the devil’s plaything.
155
Bible in a Year- 19 Apr 2015 David’s Song of Deliverance (2015-04-19 06:00)
The watching for the New Moon has begun.
– April Schedule
INTRODUCTION
The date of the events of this chapter is uncertain. The do not appear to have occurred a er Absalom’s and Sheba’s
rebellion, and towards the la er end of David’s reign.
• That the ba les with the Philis nes, men oned here, were long a er the Philis nes were subdued,
• The numbering of the people was just before the fixing of the place of the temple and that was towards the
close of David’s life; and, it should seem, the people were numbered just a er the three years’ famine for the
Gibeonites, for that which is threatened as “three” years’ famine is called “seven” years, three more, with the
year current, added to those three.
We have here,
156
1. The Gibeonites avenged,
2. By a famine in the land
3. By the pu ng of seven of Saul’s posterity to death , care, however, being taken of their dead bodies, and of the
bones of Saul
4. The giants of the Philis nes slain in several ba les
This chapter contains a song or psalm, the same with the eighteenth psalm, and which, according to Jarchi according
to John Gill’s Commentary, was composed by David in his old age, at the end or close of his days; but others are of
the opinion that it was wri en in his youthful me, in the midst of his troubles, and was sung by him as o en as he
had a deliverance from any; and which may account for the several varia ons in it from the eighteenth psalm. Most
agree differences are not errors but reflect revisions by David.
We need to recognize that what we’ll see is a mixture of Torah Law, Middle Eastern customs, and pagan
supers ons. It is not recognizing this tragic reality that has caused many a Preacher or Bible teacher, (including
myself in a emp ng to understand) to fumble around in this chapter, trying to find some loophole or technicality to
explain David’s ac ons that many presume to be God’s direct instruc ons to him. Thus many Chris an scholars spend
a lot of me apologizing for God for what went on here and explaining that as a result of the coming of Messiah, God
has changed and would now never in our me order such a course of ac on. I will NOT be one of these as I a empt
to unravel this sec on. I pray God guides me so I may guide you without error.
S ll, PLEASE, DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH
2Sa 21:1 Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year a er year; and David enquired of
the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites. Famine
means that there was not enough food for everyone, not that there was no food. So, at some point, King David was
facing a famine in the land and he turned to God for help. He is then shown that it is because of the spilling of innocent
blood by Saul, but not what to do about it. So David devises a plan to make peace and res tu on to the offended
Gibeonites and restore his own lands from the drought. From God’s perspec ve the issue is blood guilt. Holiness is
the overriding principle of the Bible, and the underlying characteris c of God. This story of Saul and his family unjus-
killing certain residents of Gibeon is not to be found in our Bibles. In fact the only men on in any
fiably
record of such a massacre is right here. What is also important to know is that these par cular residents of Gibeon
who were killed were NOT Hebrews; they were Amorites. These par cular Amorites had made a peace treaty with
Israel that went all the way back to the days of Joshua;
(READ JOSHUA 9:1 -18 ) but what complicated the
ma er is that they made the peace treaty through deceit. 2Sa 21:3 Wherefore David said unto the Gibeonites, What
shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD?
157
There are various scholarly opinions on just what Saul’s “zeal for the people” meant. Some Rabbis think that
because these Amorites of Gibeon had become the suppliers of wood for the Tabernacle altar fire, and water carriers
for the vast amounts of water that would be used for purifica on rites at the Sanctuary of God, that they had become
dependent on the Sanctuary and priesthood for their livelihood (just as were the Levites).
So when Saul slaughtered the Priesthood at Nob, some of the Amorites were also killed and so now bad blood existed
between the Amorites and the House of Saul not only because of the deaths but because the Amorites lost their
expected source of sustenance. However, Tom Bradford suggests, The more plain meaning of the text, and the lack
of any history to explain any bad blood, was that the carnal and devious Saul was probably thinking that he could get
back onto his people’s and onto God’s good side by coming against the pagan
Amorites of Gibeah in a public demonstra on of concern for God and country. It is usual and customary with pragma c poli cians of every form of government and in every era to pick a fight with some currently unpopular group as
a means of showing their unity and sympathy with their cons tuents. Scholars such as Alfred Edersheim agree with
this as the probable cause of Saul’s genocidal ac ons against the Amorites.
Let me interject another important feature as we move along; indeed these Amorites were pagans. They
were not Israelite ci zens, but rather permanent resident aliens. We know this because they retain their Amorite
iden es. A foreigner who becomes a ci zen of Israel can only do so by becoming a worshiper of the God of Israel.
And a worshiper of the God of Israel becomes a na onal Hebrew. Thus there is no such thing as an Amorite Hebrew;
you maintain one iden ty or the other. Had an Amorite become a Hebrew he was no longer referred to as an Amorite.
This also means that even though they con nued to worship their own gods, these Amorites of Gibeon had a good
knowledge of Israel’s god and His name. They would have long ago accepted God as a legi mate god and treated Him
accordingly.
Remember all God has shown to David is that the cause of the famine is blood guilt upon Saul’s household; no precise
Whatever follows is devised between a King who seems to have precious li le
remedy was ordained.
knowledge of the Law, and these pagan Amorites. So the Gibeonites make their demands known, to deliver seven of
the descendents of Saul so they can execute them. 2Sa 21:6 Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we
will hang them up unto the LORD in Gibeah of Saul, whom the LORD did choose. And the king said, I will give them.
David agrees but he spares Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan and grandson of Saul.
These seven members of the tribe of Benjamin, who were descendants of Saul, would be executed and hung at this
sacred place. Why hang them there? Because Adonai was Saul’s god and David made it clear that this same god was
158
angry and causing the drought, so the Amorites would present these corpses to Saul’s god in this sacred place as proof
of proper atonement for the blood guilt.This was the work of the thoughts of men,Not God’s direc ons. Addi onally,
it was King David himself who decided which of Saul’s descendents would be turned over. Recall that David had once
sworn to Saul he would not end his family line. 1Sa 24:21 Swear now therefore unto me by the LORD, that thou wilt
not cut off my seed a er me, and that thou wilt not destroy my name out of my father’s house. Recall also that David
had shown mercy to Mephibosbeth, Saul’s grandson and son of Jonathan his friend. 2Sa 21:8 But the king took the
two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of
Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite: We are told here
David took Mephibosheth among the seven. This is NOT an error or a conflict. No ce this Mephibosheth is not the
son of Jonathan, but the son of Saul. He is a DIFFERENT Mephibosheth.
Next we are told the men were ”hanged in the hill before the Lord”. This is not crucifixion, the men were killed
and hung on stakes. Before the Lord indicates these Gibeonites, who are of the Amorites, knew of Israel’s God and
they did this in their pagan mindset to show proof of the avenging of the blood guilt. Crosses were not in use in
the Middle East; that was a much later inven on and it came from the north. Most scholars credit the inven on of
execu on by means of crucifixion to the Persians, around 300 B.C. Rather “to hang” meant “to impale”. They did not
use rope to hang criminals by the neck, nor did they nail them to crosses in David’s day. Rather the condemned were
killed FIRST (by stoning or by sword) and then the dead bodies were impaled on stakes usually as a warning to others.
But even then the bodies were only displayed for a day. But here the bodies were literally being presented to the God
of Israel
Rizpah
almost as a sacrifice – Bradford 2Sa 21:10 And Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it for her upon
the rock, from the beginning of harvest un l water dropped upon them out of heaven, and suffered neither the birds
of the air to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field by night. This would have been the period of about April
through August. The inten on to leave the men ’hanging’ and deny a burial was the utmost and ul mate disrespect.
Rizpah remained in mourning, guarding the bodies of her two sons (and probably the others), shooing away the birds
But it is not un l
and wai ng to God to sent the rain as a confirma on that He had accepted the sacrifice.
David makes the atonement which includes the proper burial of Saul and Jonathan.The ming of when God accepted
Israel’s pe on for the drought to end was a er the bones of Saul, Jonathan, and all the seven bodies were properly
buried. And this is why many Rabbis say that the issue of God hearing Israel’s plea and relen ng had to have something
to do with Saul and Jonathan not ge ng a proper burial, as opposed to the land being cleansed of blood guilt by the
deaths of the 7 descendants of Saul.–ibid 2Sa 21:14 And the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son buried they in the
country of Benjamin in Zelah, in the sepulchre of Kish his father: and they performed all that the king commanded.
And a er that God was intreated for the land. We must take into account here what scripture tells us in Deut 24:16
16 ”Fathers are not to be executed for the children, nor are children to be executed for the fathers; every person
CJB
will be executed for his own sin. But, scripture also tells us that our children may experience a nega ve effect in their
lives because of what we do Exodus 20:5 NAS ………. for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visi ng the iniquity
of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth genera ons of those who hate Me,
Modern
Chris ans some mes apply the term “genera onal curses” to this reality. It is NOT that the new genera on bears the
159
responsibility for the sins of previous one; rather it is that o en the new genera on will bear the BURDEN of the sins
of the commi ed the previous genera on.
Rambam (Maimonides) explains that Israel was not culpable for the sin of allowing the bodies to hang
exposed for so long, because neither David nor the court sanc oned it. David turned the 7 men over to
the Gibeonites and it was they who commi ed the desecra on of the bodies. Other Rabbis fancy other
ideas to take any onus off of David for this infamous incident because they cannot allow David to ever
take on a sin as he is their perfect model for a Messiah, even going so far as to ra onalize ma ers by
saying that if God allowed it, it was because God sanc oned it. And to that I say, nonsense. This is how
far leaders from Judaism and at mes Chris anity will go to uphold a doctrine that is obviously flawed
but serves their purposes. And we must all be on guard for such instances.–Bradford
You and I have the same choice before us as David had: seek God’s Word and in obedience do what is right in the
Lord’s eyes (and certainly encounter resistance from all sides). Or we can con nue with what has become normal
and customary within our Western society and religious circles because then we’ll not disrupt our comfortable and
familiar situa on; or even worse, we’ll not have to admit our wrong, repent, and make changes to our lives and
lifestyles.
Now here we go with those pesky Philis nes again. Remember, in the story of David and
Goliath, the young king in wai ng killed the giant in a standoff with the Philis nes. Now we are told they had more
”giants” among their ranks and here again they come to ba le. 2Sa 21:16 And Ishbibenob, which was of the sons of
the giant, the weight of whose spear weighed three hundred shekels of brass in weight, he being girded with a new
sword, thought to have slain David. Now, King David, being an old man by now, was told to stay home during these
ba les because of Ishbibenob who almost killed him.
Where most Bibles will say, “one of the sons of the giant” or ”born to the giant” , what it actually says in the original
Hebrew is, “yalid ha Rapha”. This translates literally to, “born to Rapha”. The ancient Hebrew sages explain that Rapha
is the name of the father of the race named a er him the Rephaim (or in another way to spell it, Raphaim). So as
an analogy this would be like calling David, “one born to Israel”. Jacob called Israel isn’t David’s biological father, but
rather this is a means of explaining ancient family es that today we would called a race of people (in David’s case
Next we are told of several ba les which included ”giants”, brothers of Goliath. One
called Israel-ites)–ibid
even had, it tells us, six toes and fingers. But, eventually they were killed. 2Sa 21:22 These four were born to the giant
in Gath, and fell by the hand of David, and by the hand of his servants. And so the Philis nes are again defeated.
Before we finish chapter 21 I want us all consider that before we shake our heads in sadness or disgust
at these ancient Hebrews, modern Judaism and much (though by no means all) of modern Chris anity
is on a parallel path. Manmade doctrines that purport to speak for the Scriptures o en override God’s
holy Word. Historically pagan symbols and rituals have been woven into our worship prac ces, holidays,
and even into our speech. And unless we determine to carefully examine even the most basic tenants of
our faith, and compare them to Holy Scripture, we have no idea such improper ideas and foreign beliefs
are even there. David reacted on impulse and normal religious and social protocol for his day; this is
what we tend to do as well. He determined that he was doing what was right, solving a problem that
the Lord had put before him. But had he thought to consult God’s Word, instead of relying on embedded
cultural tradi ons or the council of men whom he considered to be religious experts, no doubt the route
he took to try and expiate the blood guilt caused by Saul would have been very different. I also have no
doubt that had he taken the course of ac on that is prescribed by the Torah that he would have faced
nearly universal resistance from his royal court and from his people. Why? Because it would have been
160
unfamiliar to them. Today many of you (us) (me) who have for a long me sensed that something is not
quite right about where we have arrived in our journey with the Lord, and that something essen al is
amiss within our cherished religious ins tu ons, have pressed the Pause bu on. You have determined to
go to the source, the Bible, and see what God has to say about things, rather than con nuing to rely on
what men have to say about what God has to say. And you are mee ng a lot of resistance, aren’t you? ( I
know I certainly am) You try to show others what the Word of God says, and they look at you like you have
horns and are snor ng fire. You are accused of causing disunity in the Body, or even of rejec ng Christ.
Some mes your family becomes greatly concerned for you, perhaps even shuns you (certainly true for
me) . Your pastors and ministers do all they can to remind you that you are merely a layman (I went out
and got my ’creden als’ because of this) and that they are the ones who are the experts and the keepers
of God’s truth; for you to study Holy Scripture (especially if it includes the Old Testament) is a danger to
your spiritual health and well being.–Well Said Tom Bradford
Seek the word of God and DO what He commands, Jesus tells us in His revela on to John: (Revela on 3:1-6) ” And unto
the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I
know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead. (2) Be watchful, and strengthen the things which
remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God. (3) Remember therefore how thou
hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief,
and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee. (4) Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not
defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy. (5) He that overcometh, the same
shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name
before my Father, and before his angels. (6) He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.”
The rains finally come and relieve the drought. The Philis nes are defeated along with the giants, brothers
of Goliath and David s ll lives. 2Sa 22:1 And David spake unto the LORD the words of this song in the day that the
LORD had delivered him out of the hand of all his enemies, and out of the hand of Saul: so David sings praise to God.
He begins with recoun ng the ba les with the Philis nes. This is the same, with only minor differences a ributed
The other thing that becomes obvious in this Psalm is that we see
to revisions, as Psalm 18
the ul mate cosmic conundrum expressed that both Judaism and Church have struggled with migh ly; it is that God
has two primary a ributes. These are totally at odds with each another. It therefore seems impossible for the same
being to have both characters simultaneously. Our Modern thinking would tell us he is ’bi-polar’ or schizophrenic.
On the one hand God, YHWH mercifully and lovingly watches over His worshipers and saves and delivers them from
trouble; and on the other hand He is a fierce and ruthless warrior , a God who punishes and destroys (his enemies but
some mes His own worshipers who have become unfaithful). These are characteris cs that are Biblically associated
with the Messiah as well that again both Judaism and Chris anity have struggled with or even to accept. Judaism calls
the saving a ribute of God that is manifested in the Messiah as Ben Yosef (son of Joseph). They call the fierce and
ruthless warrior manifesta on as Messiah Ben David (son of David). Thus Judaism solves the problem by saying that
since it is impossible that a single being could harbor these opposite a ributes then there will be two Messiahs (one
that is a Deliverer, the other that is a destruc ve Warrior). Chris anity has generally solved the problem by saying that
Messiah is ONLY a Deliverer, and the Warrior a ribute is dead and gone and belongs only to the Old Testament God.
Thus the Church tends to apologize for the former blood thirsty God of the Hebrew Bible who has (thankfully) been
replaced by the loving and self-sacrificial God of the New Testament. As I once reminded a dear friend of mine who
indeed is the poster child for this view that our New Testament Messiah’s character is a singular one of mercy, peace
and love; then who is this mysterious person who leads the saints into the ba le of Armageddon, personally killing
millions of the enemy, un l blood in that enormous valley of their conflict rises to the level of a horses’ bridle?– ibid
2Sa 22:2 And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; The Hebrew word used in this instance
for rock is selah. Selah refers to a cliff or a crag (a rocky outcropping) located upon a high place. The second use of the
161
word rock is a different Hebrew word: tsur. And tsur more refers to a boulder (the way we typically think of a rock).
Tsur is regularly used in the Bible metaphorically as a symbol of stability and strength. 2Sa 22:3 The God of my rock; in
him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salva on, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest
Throughout this Psalm, in the original Hebrew, the name of God, YHWH is
me from violence.
used, as opposed to God or the Lord or Adonai which are only tles. So, David is calling on the ”name of God”. He is
glorifying God for not only His word but for His ac ons. The descrip ons such as ’smoke out of His nostrils” or ”fire
out of Him mouth” are metaphors and not actual descrip ons. 2Sa 22:6 The sorrows of hell compassed me about;
the snares of death prevented me; David is seeing himself slip down the slippery slope to hell, Sheol, and calls out to
God, and all nature reacts to God’s wrath in His protec on of His chosen. This passage is a me when the Lord God
becomes so enraged at the treatment of those who are His chosen and elected people; when the Creator decides
to move decisively and destruc vely against the forces of wickedness who were on the verge of winning the eternal
ba le against the righteous, that He became personally involved. This is not an event that happens every day. In fact
the next me this happens will be when Our Lord and Christ, Jesus returns. David is describing the Day of the Lord.
We do not know the year of our Our Lord’s return, but we can know the season. And the season is the Fall
Feast: the Feast of Tabernacles when He will fulfill the final Feasts as He did the first Feasts of Passover, Unleavened
Bread,and First fruits, and Pentecost. We just do not know in WHICH YEAR this will occur! 2Sa 22:12 And he made
darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies. “He (God) made choshek (spiritual
darkness) His sukkah (His booth) around Him, and thick clouds in the skies dense with mayim (water, rain). The Day
of the Lord will in the End Times (we are told) be as the day of darkness was in Egypt. That horrifying darkness in
Egypt that shook Israel’s captors to their core was not layil (the benign and regular darkness of nigh me) but rather
2Sa 22:21 The LORD
choshek, a spiritual darkness, obscurity, deno ng divinely caused calamity. –ibid
rewarded me according to my righteousness: according to the cleanness of my hands hath he recompensed me. Our
first thought might be, Really? We are o en put into a posi on of having to take all that we have learned by studying
God’s Word from the beginning, and building upon His laws and principles step by step so that we are equipped to
detect when a Biblical character is making a right or a wrong decision; taking a good or an evil ac on. Because so
o en these characters’ words or ac ons receive no nega ve or posi ve reinforcement or affirma on in the Bible;
they are not commented on but rather merely le to stand as reported as accurate historical fact. What we see here
seems to be the ’eye-for-an-eye” type of philosophy. David is the anointed King. He is held up to a higher standard,
yet, in his own mind and within the customs of the mes, he is giving us benefit of his prideful boasts over to being
rewards for his works. Now, we KNOW that salva on does not come by works. We also know that in many things
David was not ’righteous’. Nathan the prophet immediately comes to mind as he tells David of his errors. We should
also understand by now that while the Israelites claimed ONLY ONE GOD, Adonai, they lived among the heathen
communi es and adopted many pagan ways of doing things. Yet, here, David tells us he never turned away from God.
Tom Bradford
We also know it has been said that David is the apple of God’s eye. So, what is going on?
explains this well: So far we’ve seen that God u erly destroys His enemies without hope and without mercy. But for
those who He sees as His people, He will save them. Yet even among the saved are those who become arrogant, see
162
themselves as holier-than-thou, and who believe themselves to stand above the rules (God’s rules) and so live their
lives in that way. And to those, God will humble, bring low (sounds like a pre y good descrip on of David to me);
but God doesn’t abandon them. Here is a principle that has been abandoned in too many of our modern Churches.
The principle is that God will punish those whom He has saved for doing what is wrong. He will not leave them for
wrong behavior, but He will cause them great harm on this earth as a consequence for wrong behavior. On the other
hand God will abandon those who claim to be His (and we’ll not debate whether they actually at one me were His or
were really only pretenders) but whose behavior is an outward reflec on of who and what it is that they iden fy with.
David and Saul are excellent examples of this principle. Saul and David each commi ed the most horrible, ungodly
behaviors; and did so over an extended period of me in a number of se ngs and circumstances (so the bad behaviors
certainly weren’t flukes or excep ons to the rule). Yet Saul was permanently expelled from God’s presence and from
God’s Kingdom, while David was chas sed and severely punished but allowed to remain within God’s presence and
within God’s Kingdom. Saul was vomited out of God’s mouth for his wrong behavior; David was harshly disciplined but
remained loved by God. Why the different treatment? In a nutshell it came down to two factors: iden fica on and
zeal.
This rings true to my mind and in my understanding of scripture. Recall when I quoted Revela on
chapter 3:14-16, about being hot or cold? Saul fought God on almost every front, speaking His praises but not doing
His will. David on the other hand, never denied God, although it seems that some mes he did not fully turn to him
or fully obey him. This is why Nathan gave him warnings. LET ME BE CLEAR: Based on scripture, God WILL Discipline
His people. This is NOT the same thing as abandoning them, which is the way most Chris ans take it. Just because
we are undergoing some trial we should not believe for even a second that God has abandoned or turned away from
us. To the contrary, because He loves us and because He is with us, He o en disciplines us to teach us where we have
gone astray. To get us back on the right path. Paul explains: (1 Corinthians 6:8-11) ”Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud,
and that your brethren. (9) Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived:
neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, (10) Nor
thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extor oners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (11) And such
were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanc fied, but ye are jus fied in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by
Our daily behavior neither gets us into nor gets us ejected from heaven.
the Spirit of our God.”
But our daily behavior (as Believers) will merit us either God’s mercy and blessings or God’s severe discipline. Christ’s
death on the cross saved us from the curse of eternal death for our sinful behavior and our sinful nature; but it did NOT
save us from God’s curse of punishments and calami es, and His discipline on this earth, during our physical life span,
in response to our bad behavior (our sins). King David is held up by Judaism as the example of Messianic perfec on;
however what he really is, is a perfect example of the life and journey, the highs and lows, the successes and failures,
of a Believer. It is an example that demonstrates that our trust and zeal in the Lord God is God’s only measure for our
eternal salva on. Our daily behavior, our obedience to His commandments and principles, is what will merit us His
earthly blessings or earthly punishments.–ibid 2Sa 22:26-28 With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful, and
with the upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright. With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward
thou wilt shew thyself unsavoury. And the afflicted people thou wilt save: but thine eyes are upon the haughty, that
David further recounts his life and con nues to praise God for
thou mayest bring them down.
all His loving care. This example tells us that IN ALL THINGS GIVE THANKS. It is difficult to be thankful when we are
facing life head on. When we are suffering a loss, or some troubles. But, IF, in all things we will remember, Jesus our
Lord took our spiritual punishment in atonement for our sins, and IF we TRUST in God, during the good mes (don’t
forget Him) and in the bad mes (don’t blame Him), then we too can become like David and know we are to enter
our eternal rest in His loving care. 2Sa 22:50 Therefore I will give thanks unto thee, O LORD, among the heathen, and
I will sing praises unto thy name. He is the tower of salva on for his king: and sheweth mercy to his anointed, unto
163
David, and to his seed for evermore.
Bible in a Year- 20 Apr 2015 David’s Sin in Numbering the People (2015-04-20 06:00)
Observers have reported that the new moon was not sighted on Sunday April 19, 2015 from Israel. It was uncertain that the moon would have been sighted even under ideal condi ons. As it looks now, the new moon will be
tonight, Monday April 20, 2015, Making tomorrow New Moon Day.
164
– April Schedule
INTRODUCTION
The historian is now drawing towards the conclusion of David’s reign, and therefore gives us an account here,
• Of some of his last words, which he spoke by inspira on, and which seem to have reference to his seed that
was to be for evermore, spoken of in the close of the foregoing chapter
• Of the great men, especially the military men, that were employed under him, the first three , two of the next
three , and then the thirty .
The last words of David, which we read in the chapter before, were admirably good, but in this chapter we read of
some of his last works, which were none of the best; yet he repented, and did his first works again, and so he finished
well. We have here,
• His sin, which was numbering the people in the pride of his heart
• II. His convic on of the sin, and repentance for it
• The judgment inflicted upon him for it
• The staying of the judgment
• The erec ng of an altar in token of God’s reconcilia on to him and his people
IFRAME: //player.vimeo.com/video/92839483? tle=0 &byline=0
There are 3 a ributes of David that are all seen as direct ac ons or gi s of God:
• David was raised up (made a monarch in men’s eyes),
• he was anointed of God (he was God’s chosen king from a spiritual point of view), and
• he is an inspira onal song writer and musician.
165
We might call the song that begins chapter 23 as a prophe c will and testament of David that more or less unfolds
the significance of David’s kingship in rela onship to the sacred history of the future.This en re song is basically an
expansion of the prophe c oracle given hundreds of years earlier, as pronounced by the pagan gen le seer Balaam
in Numbers 24
2Sa 23:1-2 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.
We will see, however that these may not be the actual, ’last words’ but only some of them. Tomorrow we will read in
1 Kings chapter 2 a deathbed speech to Solomon whereby David gives his son some admoni ons and instruc ons.
David is not just wri ng a Psalm, but he is repea ng the words of the Spirit of the Lord given to him. Actually in
Hebrew the verse says something even more powerful; it says that the ruach of Yehoveh dabbar in David; the Lord’s
millah was placed upon David’s tongue. Millah has a similar meaning to ne’um (oracle) except that it can be used
more generically. The idea is that a millah is a complete message as opposed to a saying or a brief instruc on. So it
is a complete and important message from God that David is going to u er. But it is the word dabbar that gets the
Rabbis’ a en on. Rashi says that in Holy Scripture dabbar is an important term and it is not used to characterize any
other of David’s songs or Psalms. In Hebrew there is a common word for commandments and it is mitzvot but that
is not the word used in the Bible for the 10 Commandments. Rather that word is dabbar, which means “word”. So
what Moses received were the 10 dabarim and not the 10 mitzvot; the 10 Words and not the 10 Commandments.We
are told in Scripture that Messiah is the Word (the dabbar) of God. The word “word” (dabbar) is meant to evoke
the idea of the very essence or embodiment of God, just as we think of the Father, the Holy Spirit, and the Son as
essences of the One God.– Torah TeachingsThe Bible uses a formula (so to speak) when introducing a divine oracle or
a divine prophecy, and we see that formula in use here. It says something to the effect that the person speaking
the words are not speaking his own words, but rather is repea ng (usually word for word) something that God told
them. The words themselves openly and unambiguously claim that these are God’s direct words thus these words
are not divinely inspired; they are divine. Let me take a moment to explain the difference. The bulk of the recorded
Bible (that we all carry about) is NOT full of direct statements made by the Lord; rather most are statements made by
humans but whose words have been inspired by the Holy Spirit. They are words that come from these men’s minds
(they are their own words) but theses humans have been enlightened in some area of understanding and so are being
led by God to say them. A divine oracle is different. When a prophet says, “this is a message from God”, then what
he is saying is NOT his own words coming from his own mind. Rather he was given a speech directly from God and
it is that prophet’s duty to pass it along without modifica on, interpreta on, or corrup on. A Biblical scholar might
say that a divine oracle as pronounced by a prophet is of a higher level of inspira on than words spoken by even the
greatest Bible heroes. And I think that is a pre y good way to think about it.–Torah Teachings We are to view the first 7
verses of Chapter 23 as on a higher level of divine inspira on since they are not David’s words at all but God’s spoken
through David’s mouth. Thus we are NOT free to ques on the voracity of what is spoken; instead we are to take it as
Almost 400 years earlier, before Israel entered the land promised
unassailable, perfect divine truth.
by god we read about David in Numbers 24:1-19 Num 24:16 He hath said, which heard the words of God, and knew
the knowledge of the most High, which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open:
Num 24:19 Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion, and shall destroy him that remaineth of the city. He
is speaking of this me when David will rule the land but ALSO of a me in the future when Jesus, the true King, a ’star
out of Jacob’ will arise and rule the world. the standard Chris an doctrine is that God did not want Israel to have a
king; but that is simply not so and the Scriptures tell us the opposite. In fact the en re Book of Judges demonstrates
166
to Israel their need for king and it records the prepara on for a king. And here as early as Numbers we find a gen le
seer being used by God to pronounce a blessing (NOT a curse) that Israel WILL have a king and that the Lord will use
him to crush God’s enemies.
2Sa 23:3 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. From the original Hebrew Here is the be er sense of this
verse: “The God of Israel says, the Rock of Israel speaks to me; a Ruler over men, just, a Ruler in the fear of God”. A
corona on speech.
So imagine that you are among mul tudes of worshippers in the courtyard of the coming 3rd Temple
of Israel, and it has been prepared as the palace of the coming King of Israel, the one we know of as the
Christ. There stands Yeshua before the adoring crowds and the ceremony gets underway with a booming
voice out of the heavens (God’s voice thundering like at Mt. Sinai) as the Father presents Israel with His
Son who is their forever king by saying, “Here before you stands the Ruler over men; He is just; He is a
Ruler in the fear of God”. That is the sense of this scene (and it just gives me (and me) the shivers!)--ibid
and foremost a Ruler over
We have God the Father pronouncing that His Anointed (His Mashiach) is first
all mankind (and not just Israel). Second the Father pronounces His king as just; the Hebrew word is tzadek and it is
either a noun or an adjec ve. So tzadek (righteously just) it is NOT what this forever king is doing, it is what He IS. He
is just; perfectly just and this is due to his divine nature. And the third part of the corona on announcement is that
this king is a Ruler in the fear of God. That is, this Ruler is not coming in His own name or with a new divine law or
en rely on His own accord; rather He is coming in the name of God the Father, He is being SENT on the command
of God the Father, and His jus ce is en rely based on the regula ons of God the Father. Thus the future Kingdom
of God will encompass all Crea on and all Crea on will be ruled over by one person: the Messiah, Jesus Christ. 2Sa
23:4 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 a er rain. An earlier promise is being fulfilled. (2 Samuel 7:10-17)
”Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own,
and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as before me, (11) And as since
the me that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies.
Also the LORD telleth thee that he will make thee an house. (12) ¶ And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt
sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed a er thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish
his kingdom. (13) He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (14) I
will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the
stripes of the children of men: (15) But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put
away before thee. (16) And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall
be established for ever. (17) According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto
David.” So in verse five we see David referring to this covenant, a covenant that secures the lineage of the coming
Jesus Christ. It is uncondi onal. Even though David was not always completely obedient, or if his descendents were
rebellious, God would keep this covenant. He would, HE DID, send Jesus to the world. And this, is Grace. It is NOT
a New Testament promise, but Jesus is the fulfillment of this Covenant with David.
2Sa 23:6 But the
sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns thrust away, because they cannot be taken with hands: These thorns are
167
“godless men”, but in reality it only says that the thorns are the belial (not even sons of belial as some transla ons use
to at least get it a li le closer to the original). Belial is more an expression than a word; and as more research is done
to understand what it meant to the ancient mind, modern scholars such as Kyle McCarter say that a be er transla on
would be something like “fiends of hell”; it is that strong of a statement. So “worthless” or “godless” only scratches
the surface of just how horrible these people are in the Lord’s eyes, and thus worthy only to ” To touch them one uses
pitchfork or spear-sha , and then only to burn them where they lie.” (vs 7)
READ REVELATION
19:11 -16 No ce how Christ is going to rule the na ons with an iron instrument. And that he is the One who is going
to lead heaven’s armies in carrying out God’s wrath upon the unrighteous (the thorns). And in EZEKIEL 39:6 -10 - This
of course is speaking to the great ba le with Gog and Magog that we usually call the Ba le of Armageddon. And here
the abandoned weapons of the wicked (the thorns) will be gathered only to be burned to produce heat for warming
God’s people.
We then move on to a straigh orward accoun ng of David’s war heroes that begins
in verse 8 and goes to the end of the chapter. This same list can also be found in 1 Chronicles 11, but there we’ll find
16 more names added to the list. I will delve into this more deeply then, so here we have David’s ’heroes’ divided into
three ranks.2Sa 23:39 ... thirty and seven in all. 2Sa 24:1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel,
and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. You cannot reasonably hope to understand
the New Testament without knowledge of the Old because the New Testament assumes that you already have that
knowledge base. Many of the things in the New Testament are not explained because we are supposed to already
know them from the Old Testament. Things like atonement, sacrifice, commandments, feasts of God and so on. The
New Testament is Our Invita on to join the ranks of God’s people, but we cannot get there by ignoring or skipping
por ons of the founda ons given by God. Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were un l John: since that me
the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the
words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were wri en in the
law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. This same list appears in expanded form in 1
Chronicles 11, and in that there are more names. Interes ngly the somewhat parallel one to this in 1 Chronicles 11 is
followed by another list in the following chapter and it consists of those who joined in with David before he became
king and while he was s ll fleeing from the murderous and paranoid King Saul. And then there is even a 3rd list of
men ( 1Chronicles 12) that are the “leaders of those mobilized for the army, who came to David at Hebron to transfer
Saul’s kingship over to him (David)”. So it seems as though we might have 4 different periods of David’s life that these
various lists cover; however not all scholars agree with that premise. For the sake of me and clarity, I am sharing
this video with you to complete this sec on. I hope the visual will give you a li le more understanding. It is from the
Torah Studies by Tom Bradford. I use His commentary and materials as a supplement because I have found them to
be quite scriptural. But as always, watch with scripture in mind, and prove everything.
168
Bible in a Year - Summary of the Books of Samuel (2015-04-20 06:10)
Observers have reported that the new moon was not sighted on Sunday April 19, 2015 from Israel. It was uncertain that the moon would have been sighted even under ideal condi ons. As it looks now, the new moon will be
tonight, Monday April 20, 2015.
– April Schedule
169
We come to the end of the Second Book of Samuel and with this a summary of the two books. Remember that
originally the Books of 1st and 2nd Samuel were one book with the books of Judges and Ruth. They were split later
primarily for convenience.
I invite you to go back as o en as you wish to review the MANY lessons and founda onal messages in these books.
Here are a few highlights:
In our me the King of Kings, Jesus, is restoring Mephibosheth (represen ng the broken Jewish people 2 Sam 19)
to his righ ul inheritance; but the gen le caretaker (represented by Tzivah 2 Sam 19) is not very comfortable with
this turn of events and is struggling with all that it means. Where do we (the church of Jesus Christ) fit in now that
the prophe c has become reality? How do we handle that all these centuries of erec ng a wall between us and the
Jewish people is now being challenged and dismantled by God? What do we do about all of those founda onal manmade church doctrines that take Israel’s inheritance from them and give it us, now that it is so very clear that those
doctrines were misguided from their incep on?
I’d like to think that this is at the core of what this Bible in a Year study is all about. I could spend quite a long
me talking about the history of the church as rela ng to this story, but I’m going to assume that the reason you are
even here is that God has already opened your spiritual eyes to these reali es.
To the Glory of God, I have a empted to bring you insights based on the commentaries of respected Theologians,
Research which o en includes archeological discoveries, and ’Torah Studies’ offered by respected Hebrew Roots teachers and Messianic Rabbis. In addi on, I have also offered insights I believe God has opened my eyes to.
In these books we have been given a FOUNDATION that is essen al to our understanding of God our Father, Jesus
Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Essen al to our faith and in our understanding of what Jesus actually said and did and what
it meant, as opposed to the tradi ons we have been taught by misguided religious bodies. I am not here to condemn
but to offer truth to the best of my ability and within the sight God has granted.
We learned how the people and events in these books are shadows of Jesus, and / or prophe c words for our me.
We are living in the mes the bible calls the Last Genera on. The signs of this are all around us every day. We are
called to be Watchers. The Church and the Israelis need to understand that to resist the 90 % of the world that wants
Israel to abandon much of the Promised Land to pagans is to fight the good fight. This is the pa ence of the Saints,
this is the tribula on and the persecu on we are to live through and told to persist in God’s word to the end. We are
to protect the villages and towns of Israel with all of our might. Not because the Jews who live there somehow merit
it, but because this is God’s Kingdom and He has declared by means of the Abrahamic Covenant that the Hebrew
people are the only divinely authorized land tenants. Make no mistake.
The events of the ’end- mes prophecies’ are being, and will be, played out in the Promised Land of Israel and the
Jewish people, the children of God. The ramifica ons of this ba le will reach to all corners of the earth.
Which side will you choose?
This is the word-by-word preface to the seminal work by Keil and Deutsch, the Commentary on the Old Testament.
Pay close a en on to what they are explaining to us all, and I hope you will take it to heart and never forget it. Keep
in mind that this was wri en more than 150 years ago.
”The Old Testament is the basis of the New. God, who at sundry mes and in divers manners spake unto the
fathers by the prophets, hath spoken unto us by His only-bego en Son.”
The Church of Christ is built upon the founda on of the apostles and prophets. For Christ came not to de170
stroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfill.
As He said to the Jews, ”Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they
which tes fy of Me;” so also, a short me before His ascension, He opened the understanding of His disciples, that
they might understand the Scriptures, and beginning at Moses and all the prophets, expounded unto them in all the
Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
With firm faith in the truth of this tes mony of our Lord, the fathers and teachers of the Church in all ages
have studied the Old Testament Scriptures, and have expounded the revela ons of God under the Old Covenant in
learned and edifying works, unfolding to the Chris an community the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God
which they contain, and impressing them upon the heart, for doctrine, for reproof, for improvement, for instruc on
in righteousness.
It was reserved for the Deism, Naturalism, and Ra onalism which became so prevalent in the closing quarter
of the eighteenth century, to be the first to undermine the belief in the inspira on of the first covenant, and more
and more to choke up this well of saving truth; so that at the present day deprecia on of the Holy Scriptures of the
Old Testament is as widely spread as ignorance of what they really contain.
At the same me, very much has been done during the last thirty years on the part of believers in divine revela on, to bring about a just apprecia on and correct understanding of the Old Testament Scriptures.
May the Lord grant His blessing upon our labors, and assist with His own Spirit and power a work designed to
promote the knowledge of His holy Word.” F. Keil
So:
We are told (1 Samuel) that Elkanah and his family went up to Shiloh annually to worship Yehoveh Tzava’ot, a
phrase that is usually rendered in English as “the Lord of Hosts”. This is a brand new tle for the God of Israel, and
the first me in the bible it is discovered. There is no evidence that before Samuel’s me that it was in use. We’ll find
it employed in 3 different combina ons from here forward in Holy Scripture: Elohim Tzava’ot (GOD of hosts), Adonai
Tzava’ot (LORD of hosts), and YHWH Tzava’ot (YEHOVEH of hosts).
What does that tle, Lord of Hosts, really mean? What is it trying to get across? Well in Genesis the term
“hosts” is used in conjunc on with two things: angels and stars. No ce in both cases Tzava’ot (hosts, plural) is
speaking of heavenly hosts, or be er, heavenly bodies. A “host” of something means it is a mul tude, or it’s a
countless number (it is virtually synonymous with the biblical expression, ‘as many as the sands of the sea’). So at
mes the bible will speak of a “host” of angels or a “host” of stars but when it does, the Hebrew word is not tzava’ot
but rather tzava. Now this is technical but if you’ll pay a en on this will give you a li le bible fact to impress and
dazzle your friends with. When the bible uses the term tzava, it is used like an adjec ve; that is, a tzava (a host) of
stars. But we’ll also find the bible using a kind of shorthand form of the phrase that means the same thing. Rather
than say, for instance, tzava malachim (host of angels), at mes the bible will just say tzava’ot, meaning “hosts”
(plural). That is the word tzava’ot just stands by itself, and you won’t see the en re phrase “host of angels”.
So when we see the word “hosts” (plural) just used by itself (as the subject or noun), then it MEANS a huge
army of stars or a huge army of angels (depending on the context). Tzava is an adjec ve that explains a noun (like
stars or angels); Tzava’ot is a noun that is a shorthand meaning for host of stars or host of angels. Another common
transla on of Tzava’ot is “heavenly hosts” (and again, depending on the context, can be referring to angels, or stars,
or both).
Thus when we see the 3 forms of Elohim Tzava’ot, Adonai Tzava’ot, or YHWH Tzava’ot they are all alluding to
171
the God who is the God of BOTH the stars and the angels; each innumerable in quan ty. And of course there is an
interes ng characteris c of stars and angels that we need to consider: stars are physical objects, while angels are
spiritual beings. Stars are visible, angels are invisible. So this tle for God that is expressed in 3 slightly different ways
is a majes c expression meant to speak of the King and Master over all the seen and the unseen, and God’s created
creatures and God’s created objects. There’s a lot behind those small Hebrew words that is not so easy to bring
across with a simple translitera on.
1Sa 4:8 Woe unto us! who shall deliver us out of the hand of these mighty Gods? these are the Gods that
smote the Egyp ans with all the plagues in the wilderness. Now as we read of the recorded thoughts of the Philis ne
soldiers we no ce something interes ng; they kept referring to the “gods” (plural) of Israel. The same gods who had
wrecked Egypt on behalf of these Hebrews. Here’s a li le p for those who like to study a bit of Hebrew when looking
at these Old Testament passages. The word that is being translated as “gods” is elohim. Now most of the me this is
NOT translated as plural, but singular WHEN it is referring to the God of Israel. So how do we know to translate this
as “gods” and not “god” (one god) in this case? Context. When a common foreigner is speaking about the Hebrew
deity and the term elohim is used, it is to be thought of in the common way of speaking among pagans and therefore
indicates “mul ple gods”. On the other hand when a Hebrew is speaking about the God of the Hebrews and u ers
the word “elohim”, then it is in the gramma cal form called the plural of majesty and it simply means “God”.
Why didn’t the Philis nes know that the Israelites worshiped ONLY ONE GOD?
The sad answer is that Israel was so dysfunc onal and casual in their worship of Yehoveh that it made no impression on their neighbors. Instead of Israel influencing the Canaanites and the Philis nes, Israel began to look a lot
like the Canaanites and the Philis nes. Instead of the Philis nes fully understanding that the Israelites recognized
but one unique and all-powerful God, they saw nothing special or terribly different about how Israel went about
their religion; they looked pre y much like everybody else.
Idolatry was running rampant not just throughout the common folk of the 12 tribes but also their leadership
and even the Levite Priesthood. And even if the Levite Priesthood wasn’t necessarily directly worshiping other
known dei es, they were abandoning Gods laws and commands in favor of rituals and prac ces that they invented
and preferred (and most of these were borrowed from their Canaanite neighbors).
Here’s another of those Old Testament happenings where we modern Believers tend to be a li le arrogant and
shake our heads in disgust at these awful Hebrews, while being u erly blind to the similarity between that and
many of our own prac ces within the modern Church. Naturally I’m generalizing and in no way am I issuing some
all-encompassing indictment. But as you surf the Internet or drive down the streets of our communi es we’ll find
Gay churches, churches that do not acknowledge the deity of Christ, churches that scoff at a virgin birth or even the
possibility of resurrec on, churches that preach that the be-all end-all of our existence is for God to make us wealthy,
and denomina ons who say that any kind of faith in any kind of god is a good, respectable, and valid faith. If a
non-Believer didn’t see us pull up into the parking lot of a church building o en mes they’d have no idea we were any
different than they are; and that’s because they have influenced us far more than we have influenced them. We sure
don’t read of any Philis nes worshiping Yehoveh, or conver ng to become Hebrews, or even knowing much about the
Hebrew religion. But we see plenty of Hebrews adop ng the Philis ne religious system, marrying into the Philis nes,
and at the least being quite familiar and intrigued with the Philis ne gods. Not much new under the sun, is there? Tom Bradford Truism
Many a wonderful theologian has no ced this a tude and commented on this par cular passage of Scripture,
but few as wonderfully and eloquently put as from an anonymous contributor to the Berleburger Bible (a German
transla on) from the early 1700’s: “It is just the same now, when we take MERELY a historical Christ outside of us
for our Redeemer. He must prove His help chiefly internally by His Holy Spirit, to redeem us out of the hand of the
Philis nes; though externally he must not be thrown into the shade, as accomplishing our jus fica on. If we had not
172
Christ, we could never stand. For there is no help in heaven and on earth besides Him. But if we have Him in no other
way than merely without (outside) of us and under us, if we only preach about Him, teach, hear, read, talk, discuss,
and dispute about Him, take His name into our mouth, but will NOT let Him work and show His power in us, He will
be of no more help to us than the Ark helped the Israelites”.
All in the same day (1 Sam 4-5) the people of Israel were punished for centuries of ever-increasing lawlessness and apostasy by losing 30,000 of their men in ba le. The Priesthood was emp ed out and those in charge, from
the High Priest to the next two most senior priests (Hophni and Pinchas) were also dead. The power behind the
priesthood (the Glory of God) and the Ark (the sign of God’s Glory) were en rely removed from Israel’s possession.
The Tabernacle no longer had purpose or meaning because the one who used to dwell there and gave it purpose
and meaning has abandoned it. And the PLACE of the empty Tabernacle (Shiloh) was now just another cult site, not
much different than any other religious site as used by pagans. Thus Shiloh ceased to have any religious meaning for
the Hebrews.The God of Israel merely used their arrogance as a means to wreak havoc upon both the Israelites and
the Philis nes (and Ammonites and any other enemies of God).
God is the God over history. Not just Israel’s history but all history.
“How is it that the Philis nes were able to handle the Ark of the Covenant and not be instantly killed by God”?
It is that ONLY those who are joined to Israel’s covenants are subject to the TERMS of those covenants. In other
words, the curses and the blessings that come with our membership in the Kingdom of God are only for we members
and not for outsiders. The rela onship between God and His people is established through His covenants; those who
have not signed on to those covenants have no rela onship with the Lord and thus the terms of those covenants (both
posi ve and nega ve terms) do not apply to them.
Here is one of the greatest of all Biblical principles: God’s Laws are ONLY for God’s elect. There is (generally speaking)
no requirement for a pagan to abide by the 10 Commandments. There is no requirement (and thus no outstanding
penalty) for the heathen to avoid worshiping the heavenly bodies; in fact the Bible makes it clear that the Lord put
those luminaries in the sky just for that purpose. As I have proclaimed on scores of occasions the Torah, the Law,
Jesus Christ (and all the covenants of God with humans) are ONLY for those with whom He has covenanted. And the
ONLY people He has EVER created a covenant with were the Hebrews, but He did make provision that those gen les
(foreigners, ger) who wished to join themselves to Israel’s covenants made with Israel’s God would be accepted into
the Kingdom of God. Un l Jesus’ day that joining had to be a physical joining usually accompanied with a pledge of
na onal allegiance to Israel, even involving circumcision if the foreign convert was a male. But since Messiah the
joining with Israel’s covenants by an outsider is a be er joining, a spiritual joining, by means of faith in the Jewish
Messiah (Jesus of Nazareth).
Believers in Jesus and worshipers of God , hear me: you HAVE been joined to God’s covenants with Israel (even if you
hadn’t realized it) and therefore you DO have obliga ons to the Lord. If you begin to be disobedient and it’s causing
harm to yourself or your rela onship with God, you will be divinely disciplined (partly to try to get you back on
track) because you are viola ng the covenant you signed on to. You WILL suffer consequences for viola ng His Law,
because viola ng His Law was, is, and shall always be called “sin”. What else is a sin than viola ng God’s commands?
Now as Believers you and I have the benefit of having a Messiah, Jesus, who pays the price for our viola ons of God’s
commands, but that doesn’t mean it has no effect on us. The point is that a penalty is always due (and is always
extracted) when a Believer trespasses (sins) against God; it’s just that Jesus takes our stripes instead of us so o en
mes we don’t even feel it. There will s ll be consequences to pay while we are in the flesh (on earth). Our Salva on
is in the Spiritual.
German Bible commentator C.F. Kiel says it so very well: “All conscious disobedience (to God) is actually idolatry because disobedience makes self-will (the human “I”, “me”) into a god”. When God says to do this or don’t do
that and we say “no” or do otherwise, we have put our own opinions, intellect, and wills above the Lord’s. There is no
173
be er defini on of idolatry than this. I know we don’t usually think of it that way, but reducing all sin to essen ally
either idolatry or sorcery (which is the dealing with other gods) is very much a parallel thought with the well known
Biblical statement about the founda onal principle that under grids all of God’s commandments:
The founda on of all good is to love God and to love your fellow man. The founda on of all sin and evil is
idolatry and sorcery. To love God is to obey God. To commit idolatry is to put our will above His. And that is exactly
what King Saul has done by making the decision to allow the Amalekite leader, Agag, to live and by not destroying
all the spoils but instead taking some for himself and the people of Israel. So here’s another one of those s cky and
hard hi ng ques ons that we must, as Believers, face: is knowing of and believing in God the same thing as trus ng
and obeying Him? Is knowing of and believing in Christ Jesus the same thing as trus ng Him and daily following in
His ways? Does tearfully walking an aisle in a Church building and declaring that you believe in God, and then leaving
and living your life as though you didn’t, a saving declara on?
CJB Ma hew 7:21 ”Not everyone who says to me, ’Lord, Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, only
those who do what my Father in heaven wants. 22 On that Day, many will say to me, ’Lord, Lord! Didn’t we
prophesy in your name? Didn’t we expel demons in your name? Didn’t we perform many miracles in your name?’
23 Then I will tell them to their faces, ’I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’
The Devil doesn’t waste his me with unbelievers except to use them as pawns to do his dirty work. Rather
his main efforts are to confound the lives of disciples of Jesus, and to derail the wonderful purposes that The Father
has for our lives especially as it pertains to the Kingdom of God.
Revela on 20:12 And I saw the dead, both great and small, standing in front of the throne. Books were opened;
and another book was opened, the Book of Life; and the dead were judged from what was wri en in the books,
according to what they had done. (Rev 20:12 CJB)
You WILL suffer consequences for viola ng His Law, because viola ng His Law was, is, and shall always be
called “sin”. What else is a sin than viola ng God’s commands? Now as Believers you and I have the benefit of having
a Messiah who pays the price for our viola ons of God’s commands, but that doesn’t mean it has no effect on us.
The point is that a penalty is always due (and is always extracted) when a Believer trespasses (sins) against God; it’s
just that Jesus takes our stripes instead of us so o en mes we don’t even feel it.
We learned that :
But “bundle of life” is actually an ancient Hebrew expression that we are running into so we need to see if we
can understand what it meant to people of that day to “be bound into the bundle of life”. The Hebrew expression is
bisror hahayyim and it is indeed speaking of some kind of bundle and oflife, but the bundle is referring not to a bag
or to a package but rather to a document. In the days of David a document for the Hebrews was usually a scroll; or
even be er, an animal skin with words wri en on and then rolled up and ed with a leather string to form a bundle.
Thus a be er and more apt transla on is Document of Life or Document of the Living. So the bundle of life is some
kind of heavenly document where those whom the Lord chooses have their names place into it, and so their life
essences, their souls, are tucked safely away forever. Sound familiar? Obviously this is a very early way of the Old
Testament speaking of the Heavenly Book of Life.
So as we have discovered, the many principles (such as eternal life and the Book of Life) that we find in the
New Testament are but progressive developments of principles already established (even if only vaguely) in the
Tanach, the Old Testament.
174
In 2 Samuel we learn that David had a heart for God, for this there can no debate; but he also had a desire
for life and to live as a leader of men. He also had a desire for beau ful women, no ma er what their legal marital
status. He had a bit of a crusader mentality and so would put his own life on the line to right what he saw as moral
wrongs. He valued life on the one hand, but on the other hand he could take life without remorse if he felt it was
jus fiable in his own eyes. He was amazingly deep and introspec ve as demonstrated by his many Psalms; he was
also impulsive and rash as demonstrated by his determina on to kill Nabal for merely being insulted, and to keep his
own ac vi es private by killing countless men and women so that Achish couldn’t ques on them. And yet, God loved
him and used him migh ly and (outside of God’s own Son, Jesus) may be the most revered Bible hero by Chris ans
and Jews, and the most beloved of the divine Father.
This ought to give each of us who loves the Lord the greatest hope. Even when we fail, miserably, provided
we maintain unwavering loyalty to God, He will con nue to claim us. Even through those stages of our lives that
we’re too embarrassed to reveal to those closest to us, and a er some of our darkest moments, God can s ll use us
for His Kingdom if we will s ck to Him and not close off the possibility (on our own accord) due to our shame and
guilt and belief that there is no way that we are anything but sha ered and useless vessels.
We learned that:
Ten is a number of fullness (in the sense that all has been brought to its fullest extent). Ten is a number of
perfect completeness; not a perfect end, but rather something that has been made all it was purposed to be. Ten is
a number of divine order as opposed to chaos. Thus also the proper measure of the giving of our wealth back to the
Lord is 1 tenth. Evidence is gathering in modern physics that there are ten dimensions of existence (Jewish mys cism
has for 500 years made the claim that the Bible describes ten dimensions of existence). So when we come across the
number 10 in the Bible, always pay special a en on just as we do when we see the number 7.
We can now understand that God, in Jesus, is NOT a grandfatherly figure spreading goodness and mercy and
unlimited grace.
I o en receive either startled looks or blank faces when I ask these pastors and lay people to explain who it is,
then, that will be leading the war to end all wars (Armageddon), and will personally cause the blood of God’s enemies
to fill the Jezreel Valley up to height of a horse’s bridle. The answer of course, is Jesus Christ; the same one who
gently led 12, and then thousands, to redemp on as a shepherd only to be led (Himself) as a lamb to the slaughter on
Calvary. Like David, Our Messiah is shepherd and warrior and I don’t think it is long-coming un l we’ll be reminded
of that.–Tom Bradford We saw a very upset David who feels that he has been cheated; a man who is roiling this over in
his mind, replaying his anger again and again. A modern psychologist might say he is playing those nega ve tapes in
his head and he won’t turn them off. And truly, just as for us in our me, this was David sort of enjoying being mad
and not par cularly anxious to let it go and move on. Folks, this is sin that is being displayed; it was so then, and it
remains so today. What a lesson there is for every man, especially for followers of Jesus. Lest we think too highly of
ourselves, no ma er how godly our intents might be to us, our wicked natures lurk ready to pounce. How o en our
evil inclina ons get in the way of our rela onship with our God and our service to Him. Some mes it’s not as blatant
as doing wrong; it’s as subtle as choosing a way that is not the way that God’s perfect will has for us. It may not be
that we don’t prosper from it; rather that the Kingdom of God was meant to prosper from it and didn’t. Without
our even knowing it we are constantly invisibly guided; unaware the Lord intervenes in circumstance and deed. If
He did not, we all would lose our way and destroy the very purpose for which we were born. You didn’t get that
job you coveted? Perhaps it was the Lord protec ng you from failure. You never did amass the wealth you felt you
needed to be happy? Perhaps the Father knew in His mercy that it was more than you could handle and s ll remain
true to Him. That girl you wanted to marry so desperately broke your heart when she said “no”? Maybe the Lord
has another, more perfect spouse for you that will help you fulfill your spiritual des ny (one that you aren’t even
aware of). Pa erns. It’s all about pa erns. A pa ern was established here in the story of the massacre of the Priests
175
of Nob that we’ll see repeated 1000 years from King Saul’s me, and that some of us may witness yet again in the
not very distant future. A foreigner set out to kill the God-anointed and legi mate King of Israel that was divinely
scheduled to replace an illegi mate King of Israel. The same thing will happen with the paranoid King Herod when
he hears that God’s anointed king, the Messiah, has been born and so treats him as an unwelcome rival. Even more
interes ng is that both Do’eg and Herod were Edomites. Although the New Testament calls Herod an Idumean, that
is merely the Greek word for Edomite, just as Pales nian is Greek for Philis ne. The An -King/An -Christ had a pagan
henchman who somewhat masqueraded as a friend of God. His primary job was to thwart any a empt by God to
remove his bosses’ authority and turn it over to the Anointed One. And one of the best ways to do that was to kill
all of the Anointed One’s friends and followers in the process of killing the Anointed One. Does that sound a li le
like the coming An -Christ and his false prophet who will carry out all the dirty work? Does that mean that since the
first two occurrences of this pa ern were carried out by Edomites that we can look for a future false prophet of the
An -Christ who has an Edomite heritage? From our vantage point of today, I’d say “yes”. “Evil is simply the absence
of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not
create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like
the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.” Albert Einstein 1st
Samuel 16:14 and deal with the ma er of “the spirit of evil that came from God” and went into King Saul? God can
allow or not allow evil to occur, and can at mes even facilitate evil to bring about His righteous purposes. So in that
sense He can control evil by His hand. We also see that no human can be spiritually neutral; we either are occupied
with a holy spirit or a spirit of another kind. When the Holy Spirit le Saul another kind of spirit rushed in to fill the
vacuum; it entered Saul and resulted in evil being done. It was similar to the spirit that God sent to Pharaoh that
resulted in a hardened heart, which itself resulted in evil being done (but God did not directly cast evil into Pharaoh’s
heart). The idea that this spirit is “from the Lord” indicates that it is either divinely permi ed, or allowed, or directed,
or that merely the fact that God is not there automa cally meant that this alterna ve spirit would come into Saul.
Yet there is also divine purpose behind it; this spirit (even though it is not a holy spirit) will play its part in Saul’s life
in working out the divine plan that brings David into power and (in ways hard to fathom at this point in the Bible)
eventually pave the way for Messiah. God is a spirit being, he is not a physical being or super human. His ways are
not our ways. Our vocabulary will never allow us to adequately describe those mysterious things of God that can
only exist, and therefore only be understood, in the context of the spiritual sphere. Thus it is so terribly important
for us to comprehend the founda onal principles of God that are presented in the Torah (those precious few things
that ARE comprehensible for us) so that we don’t see a confounding statement in the Scriptures and (simply due to
our willful ignorance) make something out of it that runs counter to God’s nature and jus ce system.
I REPEAT Believers, worshipers of God Almighty, hear me: you HAVE been joined to God’s covenants with Israel (even if
you hadn’t realized it) and therefore you DO have obliga ons to the Lord. If you begin to be disobedient and it’s causing
harm to yourself or your rela onship with God, you will be divinely disciplined (partly to try to get you back on track)
because you are viola ng the covenant you signed on to. You WILL suffer consequences for viola ng His Law, because
viola ng His Law was, is, and shall always be called “sin”. What else is a sin than viola ng God’s commands? Now as
Believers you and I have the benefit of having a Messiah who pays the price for our viola ons of God’s commands,
but that doesn’t mean it has no effect on us. The point is that a penalty is always due (and is always extracted) when
a Believer trespasses (sins) against God; it’s just that Jesus takes our stripes instead of us so o en mes we don’t
even feel it. You WILL suffer consequences for viola ng His Law, because viola ng His Law was, is, and shall always be
called “sin”. What else is a sin than viola ng God’s commands? Now as Believers you and I have the benefit of having
a Messiah who pays the price for our viola ons of God’s commands, but that doesn’t mean it has no effect on us. The
point is that a penalty is always due (and is always extracted) when a Believer trespasses (sins) against God; it’s just
that Jesus takes our stripes instead of us so o en mes we don’t even feel it.
Will we con nue to hold on ght to our robes of authority and in me be subjected to shame as they are ripped away
from us at the judgment that is to come for all men? For all humankind will ul mately lay down our robes before
God, just as both the anointed King and the An -King did. One way was meant for salva on, the other for destruc on.
Which way will you choose?
176
———————————- This is a full- me work of service to God’s word of Truth. This site is for the Glory of God and
NOT for Profit. Any dona ons to sustain this work are appreciated. I do not adver se or sell on this site. Period. If
these posts have helped you won’t you help me keep this site going? No obliga on, no requests for ‘membership’,
nothing to have to sign up for, just your pocket change, a couple of dollars, can go a long way to keeping this site live. I
THANK YOU, and may God bless your gi . This is only a study guide and personal commentary which means that you
are responsible for your own interpreta on of the Bible. I have provided only a li le of my insight to these chapters,
and they are not necessarily always the best interpreta on for you. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You,
the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpreta on. You must not relinquish this to a commentator. You must
always seek the truth in scripture, take no man’s (or my) word for anything. For history proves the fickle nature we all
possess. The only true interpreta on of scripture is that of the writer…and you can Believe… 2 Tim 3:16 All scripture is
given by inspira on of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc on, for instruc on in righteousness:
Resources: My Primary resource is the King James Bible and the Complete Jewish Bible – Others include Print, online,
and so ware commentaries and databases. Please see the resources in the le sidebar and the drop down menu for
many addi onal resources to assist you in your studies. Whenever possible I have uploaded pdf files and versions of
these resources.
PLEASE, do your own PRAYERFUL study. I present only one interpreta on, mine, which is based in study, and research
as well as considera on for many commentaries from others. I pray God will con nue to guide me, and that nothing
I share here will in any way hinder your walk with God, but the ul mate responsibility FOR YOUR SALVATION lies with
you! Got Jesus?
In Jesus Christ’s name I pray
BIble in a Year - Introdu on to Kings (2015-04-21 05:50)
sent it.
TODAY IS New Moon Day for the 2nd month of Ziv (Iyyar) on GOD’S CALENDAR
177
– April Schedule
the Books of 1st and 2nd Kings
INTRODUCTION
As you may have already red elsewhere, I am going on vaca on this week. In the interest of trying to pre-schedule
the posts for the days I am not going to have internet access (8 days) I will be u lizing many direct quotes from some
of the commentaries I u lize in developing these Bible in a Year offerings. Today I am bringing you this introduc on
from ”The Pulpit Commentary”. (Notes are Mine)
The Pulpit Commentary drew from over 100 authors over a 30 year span to assemble this conserva ve and trustworthy homile cal commentary set. A favorite of pastors for nearly 100 years, The Pulpit Commentary offers you
ideas and insight on ”How to Preach It” throughout the en re Bible.
Rev. Joseph S. Exell, M.A., served as the Editor of Clerical World, The Homile cal Quarterly and the Monthly Interpreter. Exell was also the editor for several large commentary sets like The Men of the Bible, The Pulpit Commentary,
Preacher’s Homile c Library and The Biblical Illustrator.
Henry Donald Maurice Spence-Jones was born in London on January 14, 1836. He was educated at Corpus Chris ,
Cambridge where he received his B.A. in 1864. He was ordered deacon in 1865 and ordained as a priest is the following year. He was professor of English literature and lecturer in Hebrew at St. David’s College, Lampeter, Wales
from 1865-1870. He was rector of St. Mary-de-Crypt with All Saints and St. Owen, Gloucester from 1870-1877 and
principal of Gloucester Theological College 1875-1877. He became vicar and rural dean of St. Pancras, London 18771886, and honorary canon since 1875. He was select preacher at Cambridge in 1883,1887,1901, and 1905, and at
Oxford in 1892 and 1903. In 1906 he was elected professor of ancient history in the Royal Academy. In theology he is
a moderate evangelical. He also edited The Pulpit Commentary (48 vols., London, 1880-97) in collabora on with Rev.
J. S. Exell, to which he himself contributed the sec on on Luke, 2 vols., 1889, and edited and translated the Didache
1885. He passed away in 1917 a er authoring numerous individual tles.
You MAY also wish to view these videos from David Pawson ”Unlocking the Bible” which provides a good historical overview with some insights.
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/uT-OyH4ar4k
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/XZCNlyOv-hk
178
The Books of 1st and 2nd Kings
1. UNITY OF THE WORK
THE Books now known to us as the First and Second Books of the Kings, like 1 and 2 Samuel, were originally and
are really but one work, by one writer or compiler, and it is only for convenience of reference and because of long
established usage that we here treat them as two. In all Hebrew MSS. down to the me of Jerome certainly, and
probably down to A.D. 1518, when the Hebrew text was first printed by D. Bomberg at Venice, the division into two
books was unknown. It was first made in the Greek version by the Septuagint translators, who followed a prevailing
custom of the Alexandrine Greeks of dividing ancient works for facility of reference. The division thus introduced was
perpetuated in the La n version of Jerome, who took care, however, while following the LXX. usage, to no ce the
essen al unity of the work; and the authority of the Septuagint in the Eastern, and of the Vulgate in the Western
Church, has ensured the con nuance of this bipar te arrangement in all later me.
That the two books, however, are really one is proved by the strongest internal evidence. Not only is there no break
between them — the separa on at 1 Kings 22:53 being so purely arbitrary and ar ficial that it is actually made haphazard in the middle both of the reign of Ahaziah and of the ministry of Elijah — but the unity of purpose is conspicuous
throughout. Together they afford us a con nuous and complete history of the kings and kingdoms of the chosen
people. And the language of the two books points conclusively to a single writer. While there are no indica ons of
the manner of speech of a later period, no contradic ons or confusions such as would arise from different writers,
there are many phrases and formulae, tricks of expression, and turns of thought, which show the same hand and
mind throughout the en re work, and effectually exclude the idea of a divided authorship.
While, however, it is indisputable that we have in these two por ons of Holy Scripture the produc on of a single writer,
we have no sufficient warrant for concluding as some (Eichhorn, Jahn, al.) have done, that the division Between them
and the Books of Samuel is equally ar ficial, and that they are parts of a much greater work (called by Ewald ”the Great
Book of the Kings”) — a work which comprised along with them Judges, Ruth, and 1 and 2 Samuel. The arguments in
support of this view are stated at considerable length by Lord Arthur Hervey in Smith’s ”Dic onary of the Bible”, but
to my thinking they are en rely inconclusive, and have been effectually disposed of by, among others, Bahr, Keil, and
Rawlinson, each of whom cites a number of peculiari es not only of dic on, but of manner, arrangement, materials,
etc., which clearly dis nguish the Books of Kings from those which precede them in the sacred Canon.
Note: God agreed to give the people a king. Saul, David, and Solomon were the first kings, each reigning 40 years.
The me span of 40 years (days) is God’s me of tes ng. All began well and ended badly. Under these three Kings the
Kingdom was united. A er Solomon the United Kingdom of Israel split into two fac ons. Israel in the North consis ng
of ten tribes, and Judah in the South which included the tribes of Judah and Benjamin.
2. TITLE.
The name KINGS (��) requires but li le no ce. Whether these scriptures bore this name from the first or not —
and it is hardly likely that they did, the probability being that the Book was originally cited, like those of the Pentateuch, etc., By its ini al words, �� ,�� and was only called ”Kings” from its contents (like the Book of ”Samuel”)
at a later period — this one word aptly describes the character and subject ma er of this composi on and sufficiently
dis nguishes it from the rest of its class. It is simply a history of the kings of Israel and Judah, in the order of their
reigns. The LXX. Title, Βασιλειῶν γ.δ.. (i.e. ”Kingdoms”), expresses the same idea, for in Eastern despo sms, and
especially under the Hebrew theocracy, the history of the kingdom was prac cally that of its kings.
Note: The Book of Kingdoms, rather that Kings. In the Hebrew world a Kingdom was about the authority, not the
land. When one king died, a NEW kingdom was established. This is something we should understand when we speak
of the ”Kingdom of God”. It is about the Authority of God to rule, as much as it is about what His Authority covers.
3. CONTENTS AND PURPOSE.
It must be remembered, however, that the history of the kings of the chosen people will necessarily have a different
character and a different design from the chronicles of all other reigns and dynas es; it will, in fact, be such history
as a pious Jew would naturally write. Such a one, even without the guidance of Inspira on, would inevitably view all
the events in the history both of his own and of neighboring na ons, not so much in their secular or purely historical
179
as in their religious aspect. His firm belief in a par cular Providence superintending the affairs of men, and requi ng
them according to their deserts by temporal rewards and punishments, would alone give a stamp and color to his
narra ve very different from that of the profane historian. But when we remember that the historians of Israel were
in every case prophets; that is, that they were the advocates and spokesmen of the Most High, we may be quite sure
that history in their hands will have a ”purpose,” and that they will write with a dis nctly religious aim. Such was assuredly the case with the author of the KINGS. His is an ecclesias cal or theocra c rather than a civil history. Indeed,
as Bahr well observes, ”Hebrew an quity does not know the secular. historian.” The different kings, consequently,
are portrayed not so much in their rela ons to their subjects, or to other na ons, as to the Invisible Ruler of Israel,
whose representa ves they were, whose religion they were charged to uphold, and of whose holy law they were
the executors. It is this considera on accounts, as Rawlinson remarks, for the great length at which certain reigns
are recorded as compared with others. It is this again, and not any ”prophe co-didae c tendency,” or any idea of
advancing the prophe c order, accounts for the prominence given to the ministries of Elijah and Elisha, and to the
interposi on of various prophets at different crises of the na on’s life. It explains too the constant references to the
Pentateuch, and to the previous history of the race , and the constant comparison of the successive monarchs with
the king ”a er God’s own heart” , and their judgment by the standard of the Mosaic law The object of the historian
clearly was, not to chronicle the naked facts of Jewish history, but to show how the rise, the glories, the decline and
the fall of the Hebrew kingdoms were respec vely the results of the piety and faithfulness or of the an -religion and
idolatry of the different kings and their subjects. Wri ng during the cap vity, he would teach his countrymen how
all the miseries which had come upon them, miseries which had culminated in the destruc on of their temple, the
overthrow of their monarchy, and their own transporta on from the land of their forefathers, were the judgments of
God upon their sins and the fruits of the na onal apostasy, He would trace, too, the fulfillment, through successive
genera ons, of the great promise of the charter of the house of David, on which promise indeed the history is a connuous and striking commentary. True to his mission as the Divine ambassador, he would teach them everywhere to
see the finger of God in their na on’s history, and by the record of incontrover ble facts, and especially by showing
the fulfillment of the promises and threatenings of the Law, he would preach a return to the faith and morals of a
purer age, and would urge ”his contemporaries, living in exile with him, to cling faithfully to the covenant made by
God through Moses, and to honor steadfastly the one true God.”
The two Books embrace a period of four and a half centuries; viz. from the accession of Solomon in B.C. 1015 to the
close of the cap vity of Jehoiachin in B.C. 562.
4. DATE.
The date of the composi on of the Kings can be fixed, with much greater facility and certainty than that of many
por ons of Scripture, from the contents of the Books themselves. It must lie somewhere between B.C. 561 and B.C.
588; that is to say, it must have been in the la er part of the Babylonian cap vity. It cannot have been before B.C.
561, for that is the year of the accession of Evil-Merodach, whose kindly treatment of Jehoiachin, ”in the year that
he began to reign,” is the last event men oned in the history. Assuming that this is not an addi on by a later band,
which we have no reason to think is the case, we have thus one limit — a maximum of an quity — fixed with certainty.
And it cannot have been a er B.C. 538, the date of the return under Zerubbabel, as it is quite inconceivable that the
historian should have omi ed to no ce an event of such profound importance, and one too which had such a direct
bearing on the purpose for which the history was penned — which was partly, as we have already remarked, to trace
the fulfillment of 2 Samuel 7:12-16, in the fortunes of David’s house — had that event occurred at the me when he
wrote. We may safely assign this year, consequently, as the minimum date for the composi on of the work.
And with this conclusion, that the Books of Kings were wri en during the cap vity, the style and dic on of the Books
themselves agree. ”The language of Kings belongs unmistakably to the period of the cap vity”. Lord A. Hervey, indeed,
contends that ”the general character of the language is that of the me before the Babylonish cap vity” — elsewhere
he men ons ”the age of Jeremiah” — but even if we allow this, it does not in the least invalidate the conclusion that
the work was given to the world between B.C. 460 and B.C. 440, and probably about B.C. 460.
5. THE AUTHORSHIP is a ques on of much greater difficulty. It was long held, and it is s ll maintained by many scholars, that the Kings are the work of the prophet Jeremiah. And in support of this view may be alleged —
1. Jewish tradi on. The Talmud (Baba Bathra, f. 15.1) unhesita ngly ascribes the work to him. Jeremias scripsit librum
suum et librum regum et threnos.
180
2. The last chapter of 2 Kings agrees, except in some few par culars, with Jeremiah 52. The spelling in the la er is
more archaic and the facts recorded in vers. 28-30 differ from those of 2 Kings 25:22-26, but the general agreement
is very striking. It is alleged, accordingly, and not without reason, that the two narra ves must have had a common
origin, and more, that the final page of Jeremiah’s history of the Kings, with a few altera ons and addi ons made
by a later hand, was appended to his collec on of prophecies, as forming a fi ng conclusion to those wri ngs. And
certainly this arrangement, though it does not prove Jeremiah’s authorship of the
KINGS, does afford evidence of a very ancient belief that he was the writer.
3. There is in many cases a marked resemblance between the language of Kings and that of Jeremiah. Havernick, perhaps the most powerful and energe c advocate of this view, has furnished a striking list of phrases and expressions
common to both. And so marked are the correspondences between them that even Bahr, who summarily rejects
this hypothesis, is constrained to allow that ”the mode of thinking and expression resembles that of Jeremiah,” and
he accounts for the similarity by the conjecture that our author had before him the wri ngs of the prophet or was,
perhaps, his pupil, while Stahelin is driven to the conclusion that the writer was an imitator of Jeremiah. But the
resemblance is not confined to words and phrases: there is in both wri ngs the same tone, the same air of despondency and hopelessness, while many of the facts and narra ves again are more or less common to the history and
the prophecy.
4. Another considera on which is equally striking is the omission of all men on of the prophet Jeremiah in the Books
of Kings — an omission easily accounted for if he was the author of those Books, but difficult to explain on any other
supposi on. Modesty would very naturally lead the historian to omit all men on of the share he himself had taken
in the transac ons of his me, especially as it was recorded at length elsewhere. But the part Jeremiah sustained in
the closing scenes of the history of the kingdom of Judah was one of so much importance that it is hard to conceive
any impar al, not to say pious or theocra c historian, completely ignoring both his name and his work.
But a string of arguments, equally numerous and equally influen al, can be adduced against the authorship of
Jeremiah, prominent among which are the following:
1. That if Jeremiah did compile these histories, he must have been at the me about eighty-six or eighty.seven years
of age. Bahr regards this one considera on as conclusive. He, like Keil and others, points out that Jeremiah’s ministry
began in the thirteenth year of the reign of Josiah (Jeremiah 1:2), when, it is urged, he must have been at least twenty
years of age. But the Book of KINGS, as we have just seen, cannot have been penned earlier than B.C. 562; that is to
say, at least sixty-six years a erwards. In reply to this, however, it may fairly be remarked
(1) that it is quite possible that Jeremiah’s entrance upon the prophe c office took place before he was twenty years
old. He calls himself a child ��
��
) Jeremiah 1:6), and though the word is not always to be taken literally, or as furnishing any definite chronological datum, yet the tradi on that he was but a boy of fourteen is not wholly irra onal or
incredible.
(2) It is quite within the bounds of possibility that the work may have been wri en by an octogenarian. We have
had conspicuous instances amongst our own contemporaries of men far advanced in years retaining all their mental
vigour and engaging in arduous literary labours. And
(3) it does not absolutely follow, because the last paragraph of the Kings carries us down to B.C. 562 that that is also
the date of the composi on or compila on of the rest. It is quite obvious that the bulk of the work might have been
wri en by Jeremiah some years before, and that these concluding sentences might have been added by him in extreme old age. There is much greater force, however, in a second objec on, viz., that the KINGS must have been
wri en or completed in Babylon, whilst Jeremiah spent the concluding years of his life and died in Egypt. For, though
it is not absolutely certain, it is extremely probable that the work was finished and published in Babylon. There is not
much weight perhaps in Bahr’s remark that it cannot have been composed for the handful of fugi ves who accompanied Jeremiah to Egypt, but must have been designed for the kernel of the people in cap vity, for the prophet may
have composed the work in Tahpenes, and have at the same me hoped, perhaps even provided, for its transmission
to Babylon. But it cannot be denied that while the writer was evidently familiar with what transpired in the court of
Evil-Merodach, and was acquainted with details which could hardly have been known to a resident in Egypt, there is
an absence of all reference to the la er country and the fortunes of the remnant there. The last chapter of the work,
that is to say, points to Babylon as the place where it was wri en. So also, prima facie, does the expression of 1 Kings
4:24, ”beyond the river” (Auth. Vers. ”on this side the river”). The ”region beyond the river” can only mean that
181
west of the Euphrates, and therefore the natural conclusion is that the writer must have dwelt east of the Euphrates,
i.e., in Babylon. It is alleged, however, that this expression, which is also found in Ezra and Nehemiah, had come at
this me to have a meaning different from its strict geographical significa on, and was used by Jews, wherever they
might happen to reside, of the provinces of the Babylonian Empire (including Pales ne), west of the Great River, just
as a Roman, even a er residing in the country, might speak of Gallia Transalpina, and it cannot be denied that the
expression is used indifferently of either side of the Jordan, and therefore presumably it may designate either side of
the Euphrates. But it is to be observed —
1. that in the majority of instances where the expression is used of the Euphrates (Ezra 6:6; 7:21, 25; Nehemiah 2:7),
it is found in the lips of persons residing in Babylonia or Media;
2. that in other instances (Ezra 4:10, 11, 16) it is used in le ers of state by Persian officers, who would naturally adapt
their language to the usages of the Persian court and of their own country, even when resident abroad, and lastly,
that in the one instance (Ezra 8:36) where the words are employed of Jews resident in Pales ne, it is by a Jew who
had just returned from Persia. While therefore it is perhaps impossible to arrive at any posi ve conclusion from the
use of this formula, it is difficult to resist the impression that on the whole it suggests that the Book was wri en in
Babylon, and therefore not by Jeremiah.
3. A third considera on alleged by Keil in his earlier edi on, viz., that the varia ons of style and dic on between 2
Kings 25. and Jeremiah 52. are such as to nega ve the supposi on of their having proceeded from the same pen, or
rather such as to compel the belief that ”this sec on has been extracted by the author or editor in the two cases from
a common or more copious source,” is too precarious to require much no ce, the more so, as
(1) these varia ons, when carefully examined, prove to be inconsiderable, and
(2) even if the dis nct authorship of these two por ons, or their having been copied from a common authority, were
established, it would by no means necessarily follow that Jeremiah had not copied them, or had had no share in the
rest of the work.
It would seem, therefore, that the arguments for and against Jeremiah’s authorship of the KINGS are so evenly balanced that it is impossible to speak posi vely one way or the other. Professor Rawlinson has stated the conclusion
to which an impar al survey conducts us with great fairness and cau on. ”Though Jeremiah’s authorship appears,
all things considered, to be highly probable, we must admit that it has not been proved, and is, therefore, to some
extent, uncertain.”
6. SOURCES OF THE WORK.
The Books of Kings being obviously and necessarily, from their historical character, to a very large extent, a compilaon from other sources, the ques on now presents itself, What and of what sort were the records from which this
narra ve was constructed?
What they were the writer himself informs us. He men ons three ”books” from which his informa on must have
been largely derived — ”the book of the acts of Solomon ”(1 Kings 11:41); ”the book of the Chronicles of (lit. of the
words [or events] of the days to) the kings of Judah” (1 Kings 14:29; 15:7, 22; 22:45; 2 Kings passim); and ”the book
of the Chronicles (”the words of the days”) of the kings of Israel” (1 Kings 14:19; 15:31, etc.) That he made abundant
use of these authori es is evident from the fact that he refers to them more than thirty mes; that he constantly
quoted from them verba m is clear from the fact that passages agreeing almost verba m with those of the Kings are
found in the Books of Chronicles, and also from the use of expressions which manifestly belong, not to our author,
but to some document which he cites. It is consequently more than ”a reasonable supposi on that” this ”history
was, in part at least, derived from the works in ques on.” And there is a strong presump on that these were his only
authori es, with the excep on perhaps of a narra ve of the ministry of the prophets Elijah and Elisha, for though he
refers to them so constantly, he never once refers to any other. What, however, was the precise character of these
wri ngs is a ma er of considerable uncertainty. We are warranted in the belief, from the way in which they are cited,
that they were three separate and independent works, and that they contained fuller and more extended accounts of
the reigns of the several kings than any which we now possess, for the invariable formula in which they are referred
to is this, ”And the rest of the acts of .... are they not wri en in the Book of the Chronicles,” etc. It hardly follows,
however, as Bahr thinks, that this formula implies that the works, at the me our history was wri en, were ”in general
circula on,” or ”in the hands of many,” for our author surely might reasonably refer to them, even if they were not
generally known or readily accessible. But the great ques on in dispute is this: Were ”the books of the words of the
182
days to the kings,” as their name at first sight seems to imply, state papers; i.e.,
public archives prepared by appointed officers, or were they private memoirs of the different prophets. The former
opinion has the support of many great names. It is alleged in its favour that there was, at any rate in the kingdom of
Judah, a state func onary, ”the recorder,” whose business it was to chronicle events and prepare memoirs of the different reigns, a ”court historian,” as he has been called; that such memoirs were certainly prepared in the kingdom of
Persia by an authorized officer, and were a erwards preserved as state annals, and, lastly, that such public documents
appear to be sufficiently indicated by the very name they bear, ”The book of the chronicles to the kings.” There is no
ques on, however, despite these allega ons, that the second view is the correct one, and that the ”Chronicles” were
the compila ons, not of state officials, but of various members of the schools of the prophets. For, to begin with, the
name by which these wri ngs are known, and which has been thought to imply a civil origin, really means no more
than this, ”the Book of the history of the mes of the Kings,” etc., as Keil interprets it, and by no means indicates any
official archives. And, in the second place, we have no evidence in support of the view that the recorder or any other
officer was charged with the prepara on of the history of his me. The word ,properly means ”remembrancer,” and
he was no doubt so called ��
�� not ”because he kept the memory of events alive,” but because he reminded the
king of the state affairs which required his a en on. It is generally admi ed that he was ”more than an annalist,” but
is not so well understood that in no case in which he figures in the history is he in any way connected with the public
records, but always appears as the king’s adviser or chancellor (cf. 2 Kings 18:18, 37; 2 Chronicles 34:8). Moreover,
there are almost insuperable difficul es in the way of believing that the ”books of the Chronicles” can have been
compiled by this remembrancer. For example,
(1) there is no trace of the existence of any such func onary in the kingdom of Israel;
(2) David is said to have ins tuted the office of ”court and state scribe,” but we find that David’s history was recorded,
not in any state annals prepared by this func onary, but in ”the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan
the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer” (1 Chronicles 29:29). Now, surely, if any such officer charged with such a
duty had existed, the record of David’s life would have been composed by him, and not by unofficial and irresponsible
persons. But
(3) the state archives of the two kingdoms, including the memoirs — if such there were — of the different kings, can
hardly have escaped the sack of Samaria and the burning of Jerusalem. It has been conjectured, indeed, that the
Assyrian and Babylonian monarchs preserved the records of conquered na ons in their respec ve capitals, and permi ed such of the exiles as had acquired their favor to have access to them, but this, as Bahr observes, is obviously a
supposi on ”as unfounded as it is arbitrary,” and is beset with difficul es. Seeing that not only the royal palace, but
also ”all the great houses were burned” (2 Kings 25:9), the conclusion is almost inevitable that all the public records
must have perished. And such records — in the kingdom of Israel, at least — had also had to run the gauntlet of
intes ne warfare and dissension. A dynasty cannot be changed nine mes, and each me be destroyed, root and
branch, without the greatest danger to the archives of sharing the same fate. That amid all the changes and chances
of the two kingdoms, changes which culminated in the transporta on of the two en re na ons to distant lands, the
state annals had been preserved and were accessible to a historian of the me of the cap vity, seems almost incredible. But our author manifestly refers to the ”Books of the Chronicles,” etc., as s ll existent in his me, and, if not
generally circulated, yet guarded and accessible somewhere. But a s ll more conclusive argument against the ”state
paper” origin of our histories is found in their contents. Their tone and language absolutely forbid the supposi on
that they were based on the records of any court historiographer. They are to a very large extent histories of the sins,
idolatries, and enormi es of the respec ve sovereigns whose reigns they describe. ”The history of the reign of each
of the nineteen kings of Israel begins with the formula, ’He did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord.’ The same
formula occurs again with respect to twelve out of the twenty kings of Judah .... Even of the greatest and most glorious
king, Solomon, it is related at length how deeply he fell. ’The sin of Jeroboam who made Israel to sin’ is represented
as the source of all the evils of the kingdom: the conspiracies and murders of a Baasha, a Shallum, a Menahem; the
shameful acts of an Ahab, a Jezebel, and a Manasseh are recorded without any indulgence.” And these are the deeds
and the reigns with respect to which we are referred for fuller informa on ”to the Books of the Chronicles.” For that
these ”Chronicles” contained accounts of the impie es and abomina ons of the various kings is clear from 2 Chronicles 36:8, where we read (of Jehoiakim), ”His abomina ons which he did dud that which was found in him, behold
they are wri en in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah.” Now, it is altogether out of the ques on that any court
183
scribe can have described his late master’s reign in such terms as these; indeed no one could or would have used such
language, but men who lived at a later period, and those, courageous and high-minded prophets, who were perfectly
independent of the court and regardless of its favors. And, lastly, the constant change of dynasty on the throne of
Israel is fatal to the supposi on. We have already men oned those changes as endangering the preserva on of the
state papers, but they are equally an argument against the memoirs of the different royal houses having been wri en
by the ”recorder,” for the object of each successive dynasty would be, not to preserve a faithful record of the reigns
of its predecessor, but to stamp them with infamy, or consign them to oblivion.
We find, therefore, that the prevailing opinion as to the character of the ”books of the words of the days” is encompassed with difficul es. But these vanish at once, if we see in these records the compila ons of the schools of the
prophets. We have incontrover ble evidence that prophets did act as historians. Samuel, Nathan, Gad, Iddo, Ahijah,
Shemaiah, Jehu the son of Hanani, Isaiah the son of Amoz, are all men oned by name as the compilers of memoirs.
We know, too, that for por ons of this very history we must be indebted to members, probably unknown members,
of the prophe c order. The histories of Elijah and Elisha never formed part of the ”books of the Chronicles,” and they
contain ma ers which, in the nature of things, can only have been contributed by these prophets themselves, or by
their scholars or servants. The history of Elisha, especially, has several marks of a separate origin. It is dis nguished
by a number of peculiari es — ”provincialisms” they have been called — which betray a different hand, while the
narra ves are such as can only have proceeded, originally, from an eyewitness. But perhaps it is hardly necessary to
men on these par culars, as it is ”universally allowed that prophets generally were the historians of the Israeli sh
people.” It was almost as essen al a part of their office to trace the hand of God in the past history of the Hebrew
race as to predict future visita ons, or to promise deliverances. They were preachers of righteousness, spokesmen for
God, interpreters of his just laws and dealings, and to be this they only needed to be faithful and impar al historians.
It is not without significance, in this connec on, that the historical books of the Old Testament were known to the
Jewish fathers by the name ��
��
� ”and are dis nguished from the books strictly prophe cal only in this, that the
adjec ve �� priores, is applied to them, and to the la er �� posteriores.”
But we have evidence of the most posi ve and conclusive kind, evidence almost amoun ng to demonstra on, that
the three authori es to which our historian so repeatedly refers, were in their original form the works of different
prophets, and not of the public annalist. For we find that where the author of Kudos, a er transcribing a string of
passages, which agree almost word for word with a series in the Books of Chronicles, and which must therefore have
been derived from a common source, refers to” the book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kings 11:41), the chronicler indicates as the documents upon which he has drawn, ”the book of Nathan the prophet, and the prophecy of Ahijah the
Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo the seer. The conclusion, therefore, is irresis ble (2 Chronicles 9:29), that the ”book
of the words of the days to Solomon,” if not iden cal with the wri ngs of the three prophets who were the historians
of that reign, was nevertheless based on those wri ngs, and to a large extent composed of extracts from them. It is
possible, and indeed probable, that in the one ”book of the Chronicles,” the memoirs of the three historians had been
condensed, arranged, and harmonized; but it hardly admits of doubt that the la er were the originals of the former.
And the same remarks apply, muta s mutandis, to the ”book of the Chronicles of the kings of Judah.” The history
of Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12:1-19 is iden cal with the account of that monarch in 2 Chronicles 10:1-4; the words of 1
Kings 12:20-24 are the same that are found in 2 Chronicles 11:1-4; while 2 Chronicles 12:13 is prac cally a repe on
of 1 Kings 14:21. But the authority to which our author refers is the ”book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,”
whereas that men oned by the Chronicler is ”the book of
Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer.” Now it is clear that these parallel passages are derived from the same
source, and that source must be the book or books of these two prophets.
Nor does it invalidate this conten on that the Chronicler, in addi on to the prophe c wri ngs just named, also cites
occasionally the ”book of the kings of Israel and Judah” (2 Chronicles 16:11; 25:26; 27:7; 28:26; 32:32; 35:27, etc.);
in one place apparently called ”the book of the kings of Israel” (2 Chronicles 20:34), together with a ”Midrash of the
book of the Kings” (2 Chronicles 24:27). For we have no evidence whatsoever that any of these authori es were of a
public and civil character. On the contrary, we have ground for believing that they were composed of the memoirs of
the prophets. It is not quite clear what the Midrash just referred to was, but the two works first cited were probably
iden cal with ”the Books of the Chronicles” so o en men oned by our historian. And in one case (2 Chronicles 20:34),
we have dis nct men on of a prophe c book or wri ng — that of Jehu, the son of Hanani — which was embodied in
184
the book of the kings of Israel.
We can hardly be mistaken, therefore, in concluding from these data that the prime ”sources of this work” were really the prophe c memoirs men oned by the Chronicler (1 Chronicles 27:24; 29:29; 2 Chronicles 9:29; 12:15; 13:22;
20:34; 24:27; 26:22; 32:32; 33:18) which, together, perhaps, with other wri ngs, the authors of which are unknown
to us, furnish the materials for the ”Books of the Words of the Days,” etc.
The rela on of the KINGS to the Books of the CHRONICLES will be more appropriately discussed in the Introduc on
to that volume.
7. CREDIBILITY.
But the ques on may possibly arise, Are these wri ngs, whatever their origin, to be accepted as authen c, sober
history?
It is a ques on, happily, which may be dismissed with few words, for their veracity has never been seriously doubted.
If we except the miraculous por ons of the history — to which the only serious objec on is that they are miraculous,
and therefore in the nature of things must be mythical there is absolutely no reason for challenging the veracity and
honesty of the narra ve. Not only has it throughout the air of sober history; not only is it accepted as such including the supernatural por ons — by our Lord and His apostles, but it is everywhere confirmed by the monuments of
an quity and the records of profane historians, whensoever it and they happen to have points of contact. The reign
of Solomon, for example, his friendly rela ons with Hiram, his Temple, and his wisdom are men oned by the Tyrian
historians, from whom Dius and Menander of Ephesus derived their informa on (Jos., Contra Apion. 1. sect. 17, 18).
The proficiency of the Zidonians in the mechanical arts and their knowledge of the sea is a ested both by Homer and
Herodotus. The invasion of Judah by Shishak in the reign of Rehoboam, and the conquest of many of the ci es of
Pales ne, is proved by the inscrip on of Karnak. The name and the importance of Omri are proclaimed by the inscripons of Assyria, which also tell of the defeat of ”Ahab of Jezreel” by the Assyrian armies, of the defeat of Azariah, and
the conquest of Samaria and Damascus by Tiglath Pileser. And, to pass by later ma ers and points of less moment,
the recently discovered Moabite stone bears its silent but most striking witness to the conquest of Moab by Omri, and
its oppression by him, and by his son and successor, for forty years, and to the successful rebellion of Moab against
Israel, and also men ons by name Mesha, Omri, Chemosh, and Jehovah. In the face of such remarkable and minute
corrobora ons of the statements of our historian, and in the absence of any well-founded instances of misstatement
on his part, and, indeed, of any solid grounds for impeaching his historical accuracy, it would be the very wantonness
of cri cism to deny the credibility and truthfulness of these records.
8. CHRONOLOGY.
There is one par cular, however, in which our text, as it now stands, is open to some suspicion, and that is the ma er
of dates. Some of these, it would appear, have been accidentally altered in the course of transcrip on — a result
which need cause us no surprise, if we remember that anciently numbers were represented by le ers, and that the
Assyrian, or square characters, in which the Scriptures of the Old Testament have been handed down to us, are extremely liable to be confounded. The reader will see at a glance that the difference between � and � (which represent
respec vely two and twenty), between � and � (four and two hundred), between � and � (eight and four hundred),
is extremely slight. But other dates would appear to have been altered, or inserted — probably from the margin —
by some reviser of the text. We have nothing more than what we find elsewhere in Scripture, and even in the text
of the New Testament — the marginal gloss finding its way, almost unconsciously, into the body of the work. It will
be sufficient to men on here as instances of such imperfect or erroneous chronologies, 1 Kings 6:1; 14:21; 16:23; 2
Kings 1:17 (cf. 3:1); 13:10 (cf. 13:1); 15:1 (cf. 14:28); 17:1 (cf. 15:30, 33). But this fact, though it has occasioned no
li le difficulty to the commentator, in no way detracts, it need hardly be said, from the value of our history. And it
does this less because these correc ons or interpola ons are as a rule sufficiently conspicuous, and because, as has
been justly remarked, ”the chief difficul es of the chronology and almost all the actual contradic ons disappear, if
we subtract from the work those por ons which are generally parenthe c.”
9. LITERATURE.
Amongst the works available for the exposi on and illustra on of the text, and to which reference is most frequently
made in this Commentary, are the following: —
1. Commentar uber der Bucher der Konige. Von Dr. Karl Fried. Kiel. Moskau, 1846.
2. Biblischer Commentar uber die prophe schen-Geschichts-bucher des A. T. Dri er Band: Die Bircher der Konige.
185
Leipzig, 1874. By the same author. Both these works are accessible to the English reader in transla ons published by
Messrs. Clark of Edinburgh. I have thought it well to refer to both volumes, as though the la er, no doubt, represents
Keil’s matured judgment, s ll the former occasionally contains valuable materials not included in the la er work.
3. Die Bucher der Konige. Yon Dr. Karl C. W. F. Bahr. Bielefeld, 1873. This is one of the most valuable volumes of
Lange’s Theologisch Homile sches Bibelwerk. It has been translated, under the editorship of Dr. Philip Schaff, by Dr.
Harwood, of New Haven, Conn. (Edinb., Clark); and as the transla on, especially in its ”Textual and Gramma cal”
sec on, contains addi onal and occasionally useful ma er, I have referred both to it and to the original.
4. Symbolik des Mosaischen Cultus. By the same author. Heidelberg, 1837. For all that concerns the Temple and its
ritual, this work is indispensable, and though occasionally somewhat fanciful, is a monument of Bahr’s profound and
varied learning.
5. Die Bucher der Konige. Von O o Thenius. Leipzig, 1849. This work, I regret to say, I only know indirectly. But some
proofs of its sugges veness, and some of its destruc ve tendencies, will be found in the Exposi on.
6. Holy Bible with Commentary. (”Speaker’s Commentary.”) The Books of Kings, by the Rev. Canon Rawlinson. London, 1872. This, though perhaps somewhat meager in its textual cri cism and exegesis, is especially rich, as might
be expected from the well-known learning of its author, in historical references. I have also occasionally cited his
”Historical Illustra ons of the Old Testament” (S. P. C. K.), and his ”Bampton Lectures.”
7. The History of Israel. By Heinrich Ewald. English Transla on. London, 1878. Vols. III. and IV.
8. Syntax of the Hebrew Language. By the same author. London, 1879. The cita ons from this la er work are dis nguished from those from the ”History of Israel” by the sec onal number and le er, thus: 280 b.
9. The Holy Bible. Vol. III. By Bishop Wordsworth. Oxford, 1877. The great feature of this commentary, it is hardly
necessary to say, in addi on to the patris c learning which it reveals, and the piety which breathes through it, is the
moral and spiritual teaching which the author never fails to draw from the text. There is perhaps a tendency to over
spiritualize, and I have been unable to follow the writer in many of his mys cal interpreta ons. (Today we know this
as the Oxford Study Bible)
10. Lectures on the Jewish Church. Vol. II. By Dean Stanley. London, 1865. Though differing repeatedly and very
widely from his conclusions, I am very sensible of the great charm of picturesqueness and the graphic power which
marks everything that this highly gi ed author touches.
11. Sinai and Pales ne. By the same. Fi h Edi on. London, 1858.
12. Biblical Researches in the Holy Land. By the Rev. Dr. Robinson. 3 vols. London, 1856.
13. Handbook for Travelers in Syria and Pales ne. By the Rev. J. L. Porter. London, Murray, 1858.
14. The Land and the Book. By the Rev. Dr. Thomson. 2 vols. London, 1859.
15. Tent-work in Pales ne. By Lieut. Conder, R.E. This is by far the most readable and valuable work which the recent
Explora on of Pales ne has produced. New Edi on. London, 1880.
16. Handbook to the Bible. By F. R. Conder and C. R. Conder, R.E. London, 1879. This is cited as ”Conder, Handbook.”
”Conder” alone always refers to the ”Tent-work.”
17. Narra ve of a Journey through Syria and Pales ne. By Lieut. C.W.M. Van de Velde. 2 vols. Edinburgh and London,
1854.
18. Contempla ons on the Historical Passages of the Old Testament. By Bishop Hall. 3 vols. S.P.C.K.
19. Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyp ans. By Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson. New Edi on. London, 1880.
20. Elias der Thisbiter. Von F. W. Krummacher. Elberfeld, 1835.
21. Gesenii Thesaurus Philologicus Cri cus Linguae Hebraeae Veteris Testamen .
Lipsiae, 1835.
22. Gesenius’s Hebrew Grammar. Fourteenth Edi on, enlarged and improved by E. Roediger. London, 1846.
plaything.
186
helped you won’t you help me keep this site going? No obliga on, no requests for ‘membership’, nothing to have to
I present only one interpreta on, mine, which is based in study, and research as well as considera on for many commentaries from others. I pray God will con nue to guide me, and that nothing I share here will in any way hinder your
walk with God, but the ul mate responsibility FOR YOUR SALVATION lies with you! Got Jesus?
187
Bible in a Year- 21 Apr 2015 David’s Charge to Solomon (2015-04-21 06:00)
sent it.
TODAY IS NEW MOON marking the beginning of the 2nd month Ziv (Iyyar) on GOD’S CALENDAR
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 Kings Chapters 1-2
INTRODUCTION
Whew. We made it through Judges and Samuel and we are now on to the books of Kings. Again I will be taking
1st and 2nd Kings as one book, so the summary will cover both books. We will see that this provision for Kings is the
universal order of God’s ways: to set up blessing first under the responsibility of man, to be accomplished a erwards
according to His counsels by His power and grace. And it is to be noted that the first thing man has always done is to
fail. Thus Adam, thus Noah, thus under law, thus the priesthood, thus as here the royalty under law, so Nebuchadnezzar where it was absolute, so, I add, the church. Already in the apostles’ days all sought their own, not the things of
Jesus Christ. God con nues His own dealings in grace in spite of this, all through, besides His government according
to responsibility in the public body in this world, but a government full of pa ence and grace.
In the most correct and ancient edi ons of the Hebrew Bible, the two books of Kings are only one, with some mes a
li le break, the first book beginning with 1 Samuel 22:40. Some of the ancient fathers seem to have begun the First
Book of Kings at the death of David, 1Ki _2:12. The more modern copies of the Hebrew Bible have the same division
as ours; but in the me of the Masoretes they certainly made but one book; as both, like the books of Samuel, are
included under one enumera on of sec ons, verses, etc., in the Masora. The tles to these books have been various, though it appears from Origen that they had their name from their first words, �� vehammelech David,
“and King David;” as Genesis had its name from �� bereshith, “in the beginning.” The Septuagint simply term it
βασιλειων, of reigns, or kingdoms; of which it calls Samuel the first and second, and these two the third and fourth.
The Vulgate has Liber Regum ter us; secundum Hebraeos, Liber Malachim: “The Third Book of Kings; but, according
188
to the Hebrews, the First Book of Malachim.” The Syriac has, “Here follows the Book of the Kings who flourished
among this ancient people; and in this is also exhibited the history of the prophets who flourished in their mes.” The
Arabic has the following tle: “In the name of the most merciful and compassionate God; the Book of Solomon, the
son of David the prophet, whose benedic ons be upon us. - Amen.–Adam Clark” In the first Chapter of Kings we see:
• David, grown old, is, by the advice of his physicians, cherished by Abishag the Shunammite,
• Adonijah conspires with Joab and Abiathar to seize on the government,
• Nathan and Bathsheba communicate these dings to the aged king,
• David immediately pronounces Solomon his successor, and causes Zadok and Nathan to proclaim and anoint
him king,
• Adonijah and his friends hear of it, are afraid, and flee away, Adonijah laying hold on the horns of the altar, from
which he refuses to go ll Solomon shall promise him his life; this he does, and banishes him to his own house,
This is followed by
• David leaves his dying charge with Solomon, rela ve to his own personal conduct, to Joab, to Barzillai, and to
Shimei.
• He dies, and Solomon is established in the kingdom,
• Adonijah requests to have Abishag to wife, and is put to death by Solomon,
• Abiathar the priest is banished to his estate at Anathoth,
• Joab, fearing for his life, flees to the horns of the altar, and is slain there by Benaiah,
• Benaiah is made captain of the host in his stead,
• Shimei is ordered to confine himself to Jerusalem, and never leave it on pain of death,
• A er three years he follows some of his runaway servants to Gath, and thereby forfeits his life,
• Solomon sends for him, upbraids him, and commands him to be slain by Benaiah,
You MAY wish to watch this video by Tom Bradford on 1 Kings
1 Kings Chapters 1-2 Remember, our goal is to study scripture book by book. I am therefore not going to mix in a lot
of other scripture, but rather look at some of the important things we can see in the pages as we go forward. Please
be sure to READ these chapters to pick up all the details.
1Ki 1:1 Now king David was old and stricken in
years; and they covered him with clothes, but he gat no heat. David was probably now about sixty-nine years of age.
He was thirty years old when he began to reign, reigned forty, and died in his seven eth year; and the transac ons
men oned here are supposed to have taken place about a year before his death. Sixty-nine was not an advanced age;
but he had been exhausted with various escapades, wars, stressful encounters, and especially family afflic ons, so
that he was much older in cons tu on than in years. David’s illness and death necessitated a hasty and premature
corona on of Solomon, and exercised an important influence on the beginning of his reign .In the natural order of
189
events, Solomon would not have succeeded un l his father’s death, but Adonijah’s a empt to take the throne required
the immediate eleva on of Solomon. This a empt had been suggested by David’s extreme feebleness,therefore we
begin his history with an account of David’s decay and death. In the opening verses, consequently, we are introduced
into the chamber of sickness.The materials for this part of the history were quite possibly derived from the ”Book of
1Ki
Nathan the prophet” (1Ch _29:29; 2Ch _9:29). The date of these events is said to be about 1015.B.C.
1:4 And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him: but the king knew her not. Stretched
upon a couch, covered with many folds of rich Eastern drapery, we see a feeble, decrepit, a enuated man. At his side
stands a fair young girl, assiduously ministering to his wants. From me to me the door opens, and prophet, priest,
and warrior enter to receive his instruc ons; for happily the mind is not a wreck like the body. Its vigor is hardly abated,
though the bodily strength is well nigh exhausted. He has but reached the appointed threescore years and ten, and
yet—such have been the hardships of his life—the vital force is spent. They cover him with clothes, but he gets no
warmth. The flame of life is slowly but surely expiring. But we see at once that this is no ordinary room; that this is
no common pa ent. The gorgeous apparel, the purple and fine linen, the ”a endance of ministers, the standing of
servants,” proclaim it a king’s court. And the insignia, the pomp, the profound homage proclaim that this sick man is
a king. Yes, it is David, second king of Israel, but second to none in goodness and true greatness, who lies here. His up
and down life, so full of romance, of chivalry, of piety, is drawing near its close. But the hour of death is preceded by
a period of feebleness and decay. For sickness is no respecter of persons. It, too, like death, ”thunders at the palace
gates of kings and the dwellings of the poor.
” There is no release in that war, ”Sceptre and crown must tumble down, And in the dust be equal made With the
poor common scythe and spade.” --Pulpit Commentary The sickness of David, then, may fi ngly suggest some thoughts
as to sickness in general.
• What, let us ask, is its purpose, what its uses?
• Why is it that, as a rule, a period of gradual decay precedes death?
For it is worthy of remark that man alone, of all the animals, dies of disease. Among all the myriad forms of life, that
is, he alone dies gradually. The lower animals,(in nature) as a rule, prey upon each other. Beasts, birds, fishes, insects,
all die a violent death. No sooner is one of them a acked by sickness, or enfeebled by old age, than it is dispatched
and devoured by its fellows. It is thus the balance of the species is preserved. But in the case of men, sudden death
is the excep on. For them there remains, as a rule, a discipline of pain prior to dissolu on. It is well to ask why this
is. The general answer is, of course, obvious. It is because of that other life, that future reckoning which awaits men
a er death. Let us consider, however, in what ways sickness and pain are a prepara on for the life and the judgment
SICKNESS IS GOD’S NOTICE TO QUIT. We should think it hard to be ejected from our home and
to come.
turned into the street without due no ce. We want a li le me to make prepara ons. Especially is this the case
when we are leaving our earthly tabernacle—leaving not a home, but a world. Now God has given us abundant and
repeated no ce in the various accidents and occurrences of life. Too o en, however, both the lessons of Providence
and the warnings of the preacher are unheeded. So the Lover of souls will give men a final warning, and one that
they cannot mistake, cannot well disregard. They shall feel it in their own persons. Sickness shall bid them set their
house in order and prepare to meet their God. A German fable tells us that once upon a me Death promised a young
man that he would not summon him un l he had first sent several messengers to apprize him of his coming. So the
youth took his fill of pleasure, and wasted health and strength in riotous living. Presently, a fever laid him low. But as
no messenger had appeared, he had no apprehensions; and when he recovered, he returned forthwith to his former
sins. He then fell a prey to other maladies, but, remembering his covenant with Death, made light of them. ”I am not
going to die,” he cried; ”the first messenger has not yet come.” But one day some one tapped him on the shoulder.
190
He turned, and saw Death standing at his elbow. ”Follow me.” said the King of Terrors; ”the hour of thy departure is
come.” ”How is this?” exclaimed the youth; ”thou art false to thy word! Thou didst promise to send me messengers,
and I have seen none.” ”Silence!” sternly answered the Destroyer. ”I have sent thee messenger a er messenger. What
was the fever? What was the apoplexy? What was each sickness that befell thee? Each was my herald; each was my
messenger.” Yes, the first use of sickness is to remind men of death. And how much they need that reminder we
may learn from the case of David. He had long been familiar with death, lie was no stranger to his imminent deadly
breach,” had known many ”hairbreadth ’scapes,” and o en there had been ”but a step between his soul and death.”
He had once seen the Destroyer himself, seen him standing with his drawn sword ready to smite. And yet the man
who had faced death, who had long carried his life in his hand, receives a final warning near its close. That sickness,
perhaps, first brought home to him his mortality, first cried to him, ”Thus saith the LORD GOD, Remove the diadem
and take off the crown”. But
SICKNESS IS GOD’S WAY OF WEANING MEN FROM THE WORLD. It is natural
to cling to life; but it is necessary we should be made willing to leave it. The wrench is felt the less when some of the
es which bind us to earth have been sundered: when life loses its a rac ons. It is the office of pain and sickness to
make life valueless, to make men anxious to depart. How o en it happens that men who at the beginning of illness
will not hear of death are presently found praying for their release. Such are the ”uses of adversity.” An old writer
compares afflic on to the bi er unguent which nursing mothers who would wean their offspring some mes put upon
their breast. A few weeks on the couch of pain, and we soon cry out that life is not worth the living.
SICKNESS IS GOD’S DISCIPLINE FOR PARADISE. True it is that all ”earthly care is a heavenly discipline.” All the ills that
flesh is heir to are designed to be the instruments of our perfec on. Like the Captain of our salva on, we are ”made
perfect through sufferings.” For us, as for Him, ”the cross is the ladder to heaven.” Those are two sugges ve words,
which only differ by one le er—παθήματα, μαθήματα, ”afflic ons, instruc ons.” But while all afflic on is a school,
the last illness should be the finishing school. At the last assay the furnace must he heated more than it has been
wont to be. ”I have learned more,” said Mr. Cecil, ”within these curtains in six weeks than I have learned in all my
life before.” This has been true for me personally. In a me when I have not been able to work, I suddenly realized
God was direc ng me elsewhere, and here, doing this Bible in a Year study, I have indeed learned more in the past
The chamber of sickness is an enforced Retreat. There, ears
months that I have in my whole life before.
”that the preacher could not school” are compelled to listen. There, ”lips say ’God be pi ful’ which ne’er said ’God be
praised.’ There, many have learned for the first me to know themselves. And how necessary is this last discipline
David’s sick chamber may teach us; for he had already had his share of troubles. His life had been largely spent in.
the school of adversity.” In journeys o en, in peril of robbers,” .These words aptly describe his early career. And even
since he ascended to the throne, how o en has the sword gone through his soul. Amnon, Absalom, Tamer, Abner,
Amasa, what tragedies are connected with these names. Few men have experienced such a long and bi er discipline
as he; and it would seem, too, to have accomplished its world. If we may judge by some of his later Psalms, full of
contri on, of humility, of devout breathings a er God, that sweet and sanc fied soul had ”learned obedience by the
things which he suffered.” But he is not spared the final chastening. The sweet singer of Israel, the man a er God’s
own heart, must go awhile into the gloom and the silence of the sick room, there to be made fully ”meet for the
191
inheritance of the saints in light.”
Men o en pray to be spared a long sickness, o en are saddened
by and for those who experience one. But we have learned that it has its uses. We see that it is a last chance given
to men: a last solemn warning, a final chastening to prepare them for the bea fic vision. The Neapolitans call one of
the wards of their hospital L’Antecamera della Motre—the ante chamber of death. It is thus that we should regard
every ”chamber of sickness.” 1Ki 2:2 I go the way of all the earth: be thou strong therefore, and shew thyself a man;
David adds something a bit unexpected; he adds a condi on to God’s promise of an everlas ng Davidic
dynasty that we haven’t heard un l now. 1Ki 2:4 That the LORD may con nue his word which he spake concerning
me, saying, If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul,
there shall not fail thee (said he) a man on the throne of Israel. That is David tells his son that God told him that IF
David’s royal descendants follow the Lord with all of their heart and being, THEN there will always be a member of
David’s family on the throne of Israel.Solomon is King of Israel. David is s ll alive but is weak and bedridden. It has
taken a somewhat contrived and self-serving mee ng arranged by Nathan but between Bathsheba and David to get
Solomon officially crowned as king because apparently David had decided that he just didn’t have the heart to choose
between the son who was first-in-line by birthright for the throne (Adonijah) and Solomon (Bathsheba’s son) who
was God’s choice. 1Ki 2:10 So David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David. Adonijah’s .Adoniyah
son of Haggit; he was the 4th son born to David. Adonijah means “my lord is Yah” (my lord is Yehoveh). Yah is a
shortened name for God. By birth order he was the 4th in line for the throne, however the 3 in front of him were dead.
Amnon was killed by his half-brother Abishalom. Avbshalom was killed by David’s nephew Joab. And Chileav seems
to have died very young as we’re told of his birth but never again hear his name. Therefore by all custom and tradi on
HE WAS A SPOILED CHILD.—1Ki 1:6 And his
Adoniyah is but a heartbeat from the throne of Israel.
father had not displeased him at any me in saying, Why hast thou done so? and he also was a very goodly man; and
his mother bare him a er Absalom. . There is no greater unkindness and injus ce to a child than over indulgence.
The child is the father of the man. The boy who has all his own way will certainly want it in a er life, and will not get
it, to his own disappointment and the unhappiness of all around him. He that loves his son corrects him o en. David
was probably so engrossed with public cares and du es that his first care, a er God—his family—was neglected. How
unwise are those parents who discharge the care of their children at the most cri cal and impressionable me of life
to others, who are o en ill suited or unequal to the charge. One of the first du es a child demands of its parents is
that it should be corrected and conquered. The will must be broken in youth. The sapling may be bent, not so the
trunk. David’s unwise indulgence, his sparing the rod, prepared a rod for his own and Adonijah’s back. It was the sin
of Eli that ”his sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not.” And one sin of David was that he had not
checked and ”displeased” this willful son.
HE WAS ENDOWED BY NATURE WITH A DANGEROUS
ATTRIBUTE. ”He also was a very goodly man.” Gi s of form and feature, much as all admire them, and much as some
covet them, are frequently a snare to their possessor. Perhaps, upon the whole, personal beauty has o ener proved
a curse than a blessing. ”For the most part,” says Lord Bacon, ”it maketh a dissolute youth.” O ener s ll it spoils the
character. The conceit of the Platonist, that a beau ful body loves to have a beau ful soul to inhabit it, is unhappily
not borne out by facts. ”A pre y woman,” it has been said, and it is o en true, ”adores herself” (Eugenie de Guerin).
192
The natural tendency of this a ribute is to engender pride, selfishness, conceit, ambi on. A striking exterior has o en
cost its possessor dear. It did both Absalom and Adonijah no good. It is worthy of no ce that it was David’s ”goodly”
sons who conspired against him, and it was his ”fair” daughter Tamar who was dishonored. Adonijah’s face was an
important factor in his history: it contributed to his ruin. It favored, perhaps it suggested, his pretensions to the
throne. He thought, no doubt, ”the first in beauty should be first in might.” Had he been blessed with an insignificant
appearance he would probably have saved his head. As it was, courted and admired, he thought the fairest woman of
her me was alone a fit match for him; and pride whispered that a man of such a presence was marked out for a king,
and so urged him to his ruin. Let us teach our children to covet only ”the beauty of the soul.” Oh how much we store
we put in ’good looks’. We idolize and adore those who, in our percep on, is above average in looks. We strive to be
like them. Doubt me? Just turn on a TV or awards show. An how o en do we read of the troubles of these people
we adore?
HE WAS CURSED WITH AN INORDINATE AMBITION. 1Ki 1:5 Then Adonijah the son of Haggith
exalted himself, saying, I will be king: and he prepared him chariots and horsemen, and fi y men to run before him.
”I will be king.” But is seems he is more ”Cursed,” for it has cursed and blighted many lives. Ambi on has lured men to
their destruc on. It has been well called ”a deadly tyrant, an inexorable master.” ”Ambi on,” says the most eloquent
of divines, ”is the most troublesome and veracious passion that can afflict the sons of men. It is full of distrac ons, it
teems with stratagems, and is swelled with expecta ons as with a symphony. It is an infinite labor to make a man’s
self miserable; he makes his days full of sorrow to acquire a three years’ reign.” What a striking illustra on of these
words does Adonijah’s history supply. If he could but have been content to fill the second place he might have lived
honored, happy, and useful. But ambi on soured and then cut short his life. How much of the misery of the world
is caused by despising ”that state of life unto which it has pleased God to call us” and stretching out a er another
for which we are not fi ed. Adonijah’s history teaches this lesson—Solomon may have partly drawn it from his life
and death—”Pride goes before destruc on,” . 1Ki 2:23 Then king Solomon sware by the LORD, saying, God do so to
HE STOOPED
me, and more also, if Adonijah have not spoken this word against his own life.
TO UNWORTHY MEANS TO ATTAIN HIS OBJECT. ”Chariots,” ”horses, fi y men to run before him.” It is much like the
Roman device, ”Panem et circenses.” History repeats itself. But these things were almost innocent compared with the
measures he took when these failed.We will read of the smooth intrigue of a marriage, the employment of the king’s
mother as his tool, the plausible words, the semblance of resigna on to the Divine will—and all this to overthrow a
brother who had generously spared his life. And all this was the outcome of ambi on—ambi on which makes men
trample on the living and the dead. Alas! we never know to what base courses we may be reduced if we once embark
in immoral enterprises. Adonijah’s ”I will be king” led to conspiracy, rebellion, intrigue, ingra tude; to defiance of
a father, of a brother, of God.
HE WAS NOT WITHOUT WARNING, BUT IT WAS IN VAIN. 1Ki
1:52 And Solomon said, If he will shew himself a worthy man, there shall not an hair of him fall to the earth: but if
wickedness shall be found in him, he shall die. The failure of his first conspiracy, the abject terror which followed, the
flight to the sanctuary, the terrified clinging to the horns of the altar, the piteous entreaty for life—these things should
have been remembered, should have ”changed his hand and checked his pride.” S ll more, his brother’s magnanimity,
”there shall not an hair of him fall to the earth;” or, if not that, his message, ”If wickedness be found in him he shall
die.” All are of no avail. The passion for empire, like the passion for play, is almost incurable. Adonijah was playing
193
for a throne: he staked honor, safety, piety—and lost. He played again—and this me a drawn sword was suspended
over his head—he staked his life, and lost it.
HE WAS SUDDENLY CUT OFF, AND THAT WITHOUT
REMEDY. 1Ki 1:53 So king Solomon sent, and they brought him down from the altar. And he came and bowed himself
to king Solomon: and Solomon said unto him, Go to thine house. And this was the end of the spoiled child, of the
”curled darling;” this the end of his pomp and circumstance, of his fla ery and intrigue, of his steadfast resistance of
the will of heaven—that, as we will see, the sword of the headsman smote him that he died. Instead of the throne,
the tomb; instead of the scepter, the sword. Chariots and horses, visions of empire, visions of love—one fell thrust of
the steel will put an end to all that. Died Adonijah as a fool dieth, ingloriously, ignobly. ”When we are dead, all the
world sees who was the fool.” Adonijah’s death was the fi ng and natural conclusion of his life. He has sowed to the
wind: what wonder if he reaps to the whirlwind. The conspiracy of Adonijah and its issue may suggest some lessons
as to the kingdom of Christ and those who oppose His reign. Consider— SOLOMON IS A TYPE OF OUR BLESSED LORD.
This is universally accepted. The true ”son of David” is the Son of God, just as the True son of Almighty God is Jesus
Christ. He is the Divine Wisdom, the true Anointed One, the eternal King of Israel. Solomon ”the peaceful” prefigured
the great ”Prince of Peace.” THE KINGDOM OF SOLOMON FORESHADOWED CHRIST’S REIGN. This is taught ”by most
certain warrants of Holy Scripture” (see e.g; Luk _1:32-3, 2Sa _7:11-12, Psa _72:11, Isa _9:7; Isa _16:5; Jer _23:5). THE
OPPOSITION TO SOLOMON’S RULE PREFIGURED THE RESISTANCE OF THE POWERS OF THIS WORLD TO CHRIST. The
second Psalm, the primary reference of which is to Solomon, has its absolute fulfillment in our Lord (Act _4:25-27).
Note here:
• As against Solomon were leagued princes, priest, and general, so against the Christ were gathered , priests, and
proconsul.
• As the aid of religion was invoked against Solomon by Adonijah and Abiathar so it was invoked against our
blessed LORD by Annas and Caiaphas (Mat _26:65; Joh _19:7). In both cases, religion was used as a cloak.
Now no ce— THE COURSE OF ADONIJAH’S CONSPIRACY FORESHADOWS THE BRIEF SUCCESS, AND THE
SUDDEN OVERTHROW, OF THE POWERS OF EVIL.
• The brief success. As for a me everything seemed to favor the conspirators—David’s indecision, Adonijah’s
following, etc.—so now the powers of this world seem to have their own way. The silence of God, a corrupt
priesthood, physical force, the chariots and horses of the world, the pomp and gli er of wealth—all seem to
promise success. The cause of Christ, like that of Solomon, seems to be desperate. But
• The sudden overthrow. In the very hour of apparent success, amid cries of ”God save King Adonijah,” the trumpet blast proclaimed the destruc on of their hopes, and the trembling and terrified guests hurriedly dispersed
to their homes. So, at the trump of the archangel, if not before, the ”gates of hell” shall be overcome and the
enemies of our Lord shall be put to confusion, and flee to the mountains and hills to cover them (Luk _23:30).
Meanwhile the Church and her ministers, like Bathsheba and Nathan, must cry to the Eternal Father, ”Lord,
how long” (Rev _6:10)?
THE DURATION OF THE CONSPIRACY PREFIGURES THE BRIEF REJECTION AND THE ETERNAL REIGN OF CHRIST. The
conspiracy lasted at the longest a few weeks; the peaceful reign of Solomon extended over forty years. The conspiracy
against Christ has lasted over 1800 years—for ”we see not yet all things put under him”—but what is this compared
with eternity, and ”He shall reign forever and ever” (Rev _11:15; and. Dan _6:26). THE END OF THE CONSPIRATORS
FORESHADOWS THE JUDGMENT AND THE DOOM OF THE ENEMIES OF CHRIST.
• The judgment. No sooner was Solomon anointed king than he sat in judgment upon Adonijah and no long me
a erwards upon Joab and Abiathar.
194
• The doom. He condemned Abiathar to banishment and appointed Adonijah and Joab to be slain. Even so
our Lord will presently sit upon the judgment throne and will in like manner banish (”Depart, ye cursed”) and
deliver to death (”These mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay
them before me”) the opposers of His glorious reign.
The Jewish prophet: an example to the Chris an pastor. The dealings of Nathan with David may suggest some
thoughts as to (1) the office, and (2) the du es of the Chris an minister.
THE CHRISTIAN MINISTER OCCUPIES IN THE NEW DISPENSATION A POSITION SOME, WHAT ANALOGOUS TO THAT OF THE PROPHET IN THE
OLD. Prophecy, that is to say, is one of his func ons. For prophecy does not, strictly and properly, mean predic on
(or foretelling), but preaching (or forth-telling). The prophētēs was the spokesman or interpreter of God. The ”prophesyings” of the New Testament were preachings or exposi ons; and in this sense the word is used by Lord Bacon, and
others. So the prophet was, and the preacher is, an ambassador for God, an expounder of his laws, a herald of his
kingdom. The former, therefore, may well serve as a pa ern to the la er. Now the dealings of the prophet Nathan
with King David were of two kinds: 1. He admonished him in health; 2. He counseled him in sickness. Therefore we
should learn that we owe doctrine, reproof, correc on, instruc on in righteousness; in other words, ”both public and
private moni ons and exhorta ons, as well to the sick as to the whole within our cures.” Although the la er are liable
to be overlooked. But the prophet further suggests to us (1) what are the ministra ons or admoni ons the pastor
owes to his flock, and (2) what is the spirit in which he should offer them. He teaches the former by his dealings with
David in health, and the la er by his dealings with David in sickness.Under the first , no ce that, 1. He boldly denounced David’s sin (2Sa _12:7) at the risk, perhaps, of his life, and fearlessly threatened him with shame (1Ki _1:11)
and sword (1Ki _1:10). 2. He proclaimed forgiveness on David’s repentance (1Ki _1:13). 3. He ministered comfort
in David’s sorrow (1Ki _1:25). 4. He encouraged and advised David in his undertakings . (A great churchman once
confessed that he had not served his God as faithfully as he had served his king. Nathan was true to both.) 3. He was
disinterested. He asks no favors for himself. It is for the Hebrew commonwealth, for the Jewish Church, that he act
and speaks. He does not abuse his posi on to extort gi s from a dying man. 4. He was discreet. ”Wise as serpent, but
harmless as dove.” He approaches Bathsheba (2Sa _7:11), excites her alarm (2Sa _7:12), uses her as the most likely
agent to prevail with the king, instructs her (2Sa _7:13), follows her (2Sa _7:22). ”The policy of Nathan was of use as
well as his prophecy”–Hall Thus the prophet teaches the pastor to use all fidelity, to show true loyalty and courtesy,
to act purely and unselfishly, to use the means God has put within reach with considera on and discre on.
Ambi on of Clergy is o en without equal. It was such an ambi on, a desire to retain power and wealth, that led to
the crucifixion of our Savior. God uses men, even in their sin, to bring about His Will.
A Word about the SIN of ambi on. Ambi on is not always wrong. It is a common inspira on; and when the desire for
dis nc on is associated with fitness for it, the call to effort and advance is from God. If is wasn’t for such ambi on the
world would stagnate. When the schoolboy is working for a prize, when the writer or speaker resolves to be amongst
the foremost men of his age, when the man of business presses on towards the front ranks in the commercial world,
we see what should be applauded and not condemned, so long as lawful objects are sought by lawful means. Let us,
in all our pursuits, remember God’s laws for exalta on. Men are to go higher, when they have fulfilled the du es of
the lower sphere. They are to rise on performances, and not on discontent. Therefore, if ambi on be conscien ous,
it will prompt to the minutely faithful performance of trivial du es. With a reless hand crooked things will be made
straight, and rough places plain, before the glory is revealed. If, however, ambi on be not ruled by righteousness, or
195
modified by love, if it is regardless of the rights of others and of the will of God, then it is a sin; the sin which was
the herald of disobedience and death, the source of the tyranny and bloodshed which have desolated the world. It
was this sin of which Adonijah was guilty when he ”exalted himself, saying, I will be king!”
Moral ruin in
a religious home. It is a notorious fact that the sons of devout men some mes prove a curse to their parents, and
bring dishonor on the cause of God. When sin entered the world, it caused the earth, on which flowers had before
blossomed, to bring forth thorns and briars. This is a picture of a sad truth, known in the first home, and in many
another since. Eve rejoiced over the fair child she had ”go en from the Lord,” and did not suspect that passions
were sleeping within him which would nerve his arm to strike the fatal blow which slew his brother and destroyed
his mother’s peace. Such sorrow has been experienced in subsequent history. Isaac’s heart was rent by the deceit of
Jacob and the self will of Esau. Jacob found his own sin repeated against himself, for he who had deceived his father
when he was old and blind, suffered an agony of grief for years, because he was falsely told by his sons that Joseph
was dead. Probably few have had more domes c sorrow than David. He experienced, in its bi erest form, the grief of
a parent who has wished that before his son had brought such dishonor on the home, he had been, in the innocence
of his childhood, laid to rest beneath the daisies.
• Of David’s sons, Amnon, the eldest, a er commi ng a hideous sin, had been assassinated by the order of
Absalom, his brother.
• Absalom himself had rebelled against his father, and had been killed by Joab, as he hung helpless in the oak.
• Chileab (or Daniel) was dead.
• And now of the fourth son, the eldest surviving, Adonijah, this sad story is told. Adonijah’s sin seems so unnatural at first sight that we must try and discover the sources whence so bi er and desola ng a stream flowed.
We shall find them in THREE ADVERSE INFLUENCES AROUND HIM AT HOME, which are hinted at in our text.
ADONIJAH INHERITED A CONSTITUTIONAL TENDENCY AMBITION AND SELF CONCEIT. His associa on with Absalom is
not without significance. The two brothers were alike in their sin and in the tendencies which led to it. These were
inherited,
ADONIJAH WAS MISLED BY ADULATION. ”He was also a very goodly man.” Physically, as
well as morally, he was a repe on of Absalom. His parents were guilty of par ality. David loved him the more because
(like the lost boy) Adonijah was so fair, so noble in mien, so princely in stature. Cour ers and soldiers (who looked,
as they did in Saul’s me, for a noble-looking king) fla ered him. Joab and Abiathar joined the adulators. Intoxicated
with vanity, Adonijah set up a royal court, as Absalom had done . Every posi on in life has its own tempta ons.
The ill-favored child who is the bu at school and the scapegoat at home is tempted to bi erness and revenge. His
character is likely to be unsightly, as a plant would be, which grows in a damp, dark vault. There can beli le beauty
if there is no sunshine. On the other hand, if the gi of physical beauty a racts a en on and wins admira on, or if
conversa onal power be brilliant, etc; it is a source of peril. Many a one has thus been fooled into sin and misery, or
entrapped into an unhappy marriage, and by lifelong sadness paid the penalty of folly, or venturing too far, prompted
by ambi on, has fallen, like Icarus when his waxen wings melted in the sunshine. When that me of disappointment
and disenchantment comes, happy is it when such an one, like the prodigal, comes to himself, and says, ”I will arise,
and go to my father!”
ADONIJAH WAS UNDISCIPLINED AT HOME. ”His father had not displeased him at any
me in saying, Why hast thou done so?” This refers not only to the special act of rebellion, but to the tendencies and
196
habits leading up to it, which David had not checked, for fear of oppressing the high spirited lad. The weak indulgence
of children (such as that which Eli exhibited) is the cause of untold misery. Not many parents blazon abroad the story
of their domes c grief. Loyal hands draw down the veil over the discord at home, and that agony of prayer which is
heard by ”the Father who seeth in secret.”
• You do not see the girl who mars the beauty of her early womanhood by a flippant disregard of her parents,
and whose own pleasure seems to be the only law of her life.
• You do not see the child whose hasty passion and uncontrolled temper are the dread of the household; who,
by his tantrums of rage, gets what he wishes, ll authority is disregarded and trodden underfoot.
• You do not see the son who thinks it manly to be callous to a mother’s anxiety and a father’s counsels, who likes
to forget home associa ons, and is sinking in haunts of evil, where you may weep over him as a wreck.
But, though you may not recognize them, they exist. Far otherwise, in some of these sad experiences, it might have
been. Suppose there had been firm resolu on instead of habitual indulgence; suppose that authority had been asserted and used in days before these evil habits were formed; suppose that, instead of leaving the future to chance,
counsels and prayers had molded character during molding me—might there not have been joy where now there
is grief? Heavy are our responsibili es as parents. Yet splendid are our possibili es! These children who may prove
our curses may, with God’s blessing on our fidelity, grow up to be wise, pure hearted, courageous men of God, who
will sweeten the atmosphere of the home, and purge this na on of its sins, and make the name of ”the King of saints”
honored and praised throughout the world! ”Train them up in the nurture and admoni on of the Lord.”—A.R. What
More Can We Learn 1Ki 2:3 And keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and
his commandments, and his judgments, and his tes monies, as it is wri en in the law of Moses, that thou mayest
VAIN THOUGHTS ARE TO BE
prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself:
EXPELLED BY THE INCOMING OF WHAT IS WISE AND GOOD. The Psalmist hated ”vain thoughts,” because he loved
God’s law (Psa _119:113). When the heart is empty, swept, and garnished, there is room for worse evils to come (Mat
_12:44). The full mind and heart are safe. Apply to the conquest of wandering thoughts in worship, of vanity in children, etc. SELF WILL IS TO BE CONQUERED BY A NOBLER AND STRONGER WILL. Every child carries out his own wishes
without regard to others, ll he recognizes that the parent’s will is authorita ve. Sooner or later there is struggle,
and only when it is decided in one way is there rest. Similarly we have to learn to subordinate our thoughts to God’s
revela on, our wishes to His will, and this lesson is more painfully learned as the years pass by and the habit of self
rule grows stronger. UNWORTHY AFFECTIONS ARE TO BE OVERCOME BY A WORTHY LOVE. When love is set on the
unworthy, force is useless, argument is vain. But if the love is diverted to a nobler object, it naturally disentangles its
tendrils from the unworthy. In the highest sphere it may be said of love to our Lord, ”that love shall all vain love expel.”
ERROR IS TO BE SUBDUED BY TRUTH. The hatred of ar sans to machinery when first introduced was not conquered
by dragoons, nor by prisons, but by the discovery on their part of the mistake they had ignorantly made. So with
all errors. We shall not destroy heathenism by the abuse of the idols, but by the presenta on of Christ. CARE IS TO
BE EXTIRPATED BY PRAYER. In many hearts care is enthroned. To many a one our Lord might say, ”Thou art careful
and troubled about many things.” We cannot reason away our anxie es, nor force them from our minds, but we can
have the rest our children have, who never trouble about the morrow, because they trust in us. It would be vain to
say, ”Be careful for nothing,” unless the apostle could add the alterna ve, ”but in everything, by prayer and supplicaon, with thanksgiving, make your requests known unto God; and the peace of God which passes all understanding
shall keep your hearts and minds.” EVILS REIGNING IN SOCIETY ARE TO BE OVERTHROWN BY WHAT IS NOBLER THAN
THEY.—Apply this broadly, for example, wholesome literature must defeat the unworthy. Low amusements, intoxica ng drinks, etc; will pass away when there is the establishment of nobler subs tutes for these. The whole subject
is summed up in Christ—the true King of humanity, the incarna on of all that is worthy of being loved and enthroned.
197
Draw the analogy between Solomon the anointed king, as he rides on the mule into Jerusalem amid the acclama ons
of the people, and the entry of our Lord into Jerusalem as described Mat _21:1-46. If worldliness, or selfishness, or
ambi on, or lust has been reigning in your heart, the usurped will be dethroned when you welcome Christ as King
and say, ”O Lord our God, other lords besides thee have had dominion over us, but now we acknowledge Thee to be
our Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
Descend to Thy Jerusalem, O Lord, Her faithful children cry with one accord; Come, ride in triumph on; behold, we lay
Our guilty lusts and proud wills in Thy way. Thy road is ready, Lord; Thy paths, made straight, In longing expecta on
seem to wait The consecra on of Thy beauteous feet, And, hark, hosannas loud Thy footsteps greet.—A. R.
We read about Solomon elimina ng those he deems a threat for different reasons. Ordering the
deaths of Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei. He also banished Abiathar the priest. And let us not forget that David instructed
Solomon to ”do what is right in his own sight” concerning Shimei, the man who had cursed David when he crossed
the Jordan. But we need to understand, God does not ordain the death sentence lightly because He values life. He
certainly doesn’t ordain death for insults among humans, or for thoughts we might have, or for traveling beyond a
geographical boundary line. Solomon now had blood on his hands.
1Ki 2:46 So the king commanded Benaiah the son of Jehoiada; which went out, and fell upon him, that he died. And
the kingdom was established in the hand of Solomon.
198
Bible in a Year- 22 Apr 2015 Solomon’s Prayer for Wisdom (2015-04-22 06:00)
This site is Dedicated to the Glory of GodIsa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of
my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing
whereto I sent it.
TODAY IS 2 Ziv (Iyyar) on GOD’S CALENDAR
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 Kings 3-4
IFRAME: //www.youtube.com/embed/2V-fRcKbR2M
You May wish to view this video from the history channel. Keep in mind, such videos are more o en than not, our
of sync with scripture and / or may propose the idea that we cannot believe the bible because...well, because those
crea ng the show do not...However, this will give a GENERAL idea of the story. Romans 11:8 (According as it is wri en,
God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto
this day.
INTRODUCTION
Solomon marries Pharaoh’s daughter,
• He serves God, and offers a thousand burnt-offerings upon one altar, at Gibeon,
• God appears to him in a dream at Gibeon; and asks what he shall give him,
• He asks wisdom; with which God is well pleased, and promises to give him not only that, but also riches and
honor; and, if obedient, long life,
199
• He comes back to Jerusalem; and offers burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, and makes a feast for his servants,
• His judgment between the two harlots,
• . He rises in the esteem of the people, 1Ki _3:28.
An account of Solomon’s chief officers,
• Names of the twelve officers that were over twelve districts, to provide victuals for the king’s household
monthly,
• Judah and Israel are very populous; and Solomon reigns over many provinces,
• The daily provision for his family,
• The extent and peace of his dominions,
• His horses, chariots, and dromedaries; with the provision made for them,
• His wisdom and understanding,
• The number of his proverbs and songs; and his knowledge in natural history,
• People from all na ons come to hear his wisdom,
1 Kings 3-4
1Ki 3:1 And Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt, and took Pharaoh’s daughter, and brought her into
the city of David, un l he had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the LORD, and the wall of
Jerusalem round about. This marriage with a stranger to the house of Israel, appears to have been a very strange
event: and yet we do not find much comment on it. Some have thought that before the marriage took place, she
Be this as it may, from the wonderful book which
would have converted to the ”true religion”.
he wrote upon this occasion, ”the Song of Songs”, which is Solomon’s, we cannot but hope that the hand of the Lord
was in it. And it is remarkable, and well worthy the Reader’s a en on, that the strange gods, which it is said in the
a er period of his life his idolatrous wives and concubines led him to, are not said to have come from Egypt. And it is
also worthy of further remark, that the prophet Isaiah speaks of Egypt as the third with Israel, and the Lord of hosts
shall bless them together, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of mine hands, and Israel mine
inheritance... Isa _19:24-25.
The Jewish Encyclopedia lists a collec on of other stories about Solomon and Pharaoh’s daughter, saying she ”brought
Solomon 1,000 different kinds of musical instruments, explaining to him that each of them was used in the worship
of a special idol. She hung over his bed a canopy embroidered with gems which shone like stars; so that every me
he intended to rise, he, on looking at the gems, thought it was s ll night. He con nued to sleep, with the keys of
the Temple under his pillow; and the priests therefore were unable to offer the morning sacrifice. They informed his
mother, Bath-sheba, who roused the king when four hours of the day had flown. She then reprimanded him for his
conduct; and the verses of Proverbs 31:1-9 are considered by the Rabbis as having been pronounced by Bathsheba
on that occasion.”–Wikipedia
200
A high place for worship
Next we are given details of the people’s and Solomon’s worship. This sacrificing on ’high places’ is uniformly spoken
of in the Old Testament scripture as improper, and contrary to the divine appointment. Deu _12:2-6. But this is where
the people had come to accept as the right and proper place. We don’t know for sure if some or all of these ’high
places’ were new construc on or rebuilt over old pagan altars. They were usually mountains but as o en they may
have just been a mound of stones gathered in a valley. The high place at Gibeon was the proper consecrated place
of worship, the tabernacle of the congrega on being there. So that this high place differed most essen ally from the
general accepta on of what is called high places in the Old Testament. See 2Ch _1:3. Thus the groundwork is being
laid for the desire to construct the Temple.
This may be jingling some bells in your mind about now (at least I hope so) because this mindset of “my way” when
it comes to our obedience before God is not exclusive to the ancient Hebrews. In modern mes Believers go through
all sorts of manmade religious gyra ons certain that we are pleasing to God, when in truth these gyra ons are as
nothing (or worse). In other cases people who iden fy themselves as Chris ans can’t tell you exactly why they are
Chris ans. Some will say it’s because they live a good life. Some will say it’s because their parents are. Others it’s
because they go to church. Some adorn themselves with religious icons head to foot, and put s ckers on their cars,
and assume such a display is like a spiritual flu vaccina on. Some who don’t go to church at all do a end on Christmas
and Easter and they rely on that to show God that they are pious. Others may a end a Passover Seder or Feast of
Tabernacles celebra on and think that’s the key. Many have no idea what Salva on or redemp on means, and don’t
think they need to be delivered; but they s ll insist that they are Chris ans. In other words, many who think they are
Believers and therefore right with God do so based on nothing more than some long-standing cultural norm, or some
small personal ac on or feeling or na onal celebra on, even if many of those things are actually forbidden by the
Lord. We tend to fill our lives with our own 21st century high places and then expect God to honor them as sanc fied
and proper worship, and to be pleased with our sincerity. If everyone is doing it, how can it be wrong? I can’t think
of a more dangerous posi on for anyone to be in; today or 3000 years ago.–Torah Teachings by Bradford
1Ki 3:5 In Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon in a dream by night: and God said, Ask what I
shall give thee. And BECAUSE Solomon asked for Wisdom with which to rule and not for power, or riches, etc., GOD
granted him wisdom AND riches and fame, and all these things.
So o en today a message of ”Prosperity” is being taught. We are told God will give us everything we desire. He
WANTS us to be wealthy. REALLY? I don’t think this is what God is telling us. I BELIEVE God does want us to prosper,
but NOT so much in the things of this world. God want’s us to have wisdom like Solomon, Faith like Abraham, and Love
for others like Jesus. God expects us to obey Him and His commandments. When we do these things, like Solomon,
we MAY be given much more than we have asked for with which to do even more of God’s work. Beware of those
false teachings twis ng God’s word... The point is that we were not all born to be kings or judges, so it is also not
necessary that we all ask God for the gi of knowing how to administer jus ce. The Lord has created us each with a
unique purpose; He has given each of us assignments in our lives and when that assignment becomes clear then we
201
need to ask Him how to carry it out and for the spiritual gi s to be able to do it. Those purposes and assignments
are as many as there are people; so I would not pretend to begin to list with what to pray for as pertains to each of
these purposes. But what I can tell you with confidence is that pe oning the Lord to show you how to accumulate
personal monetary wealth does not belong on that list.
1Ki 3:7 And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in. This brings to mind something Jesus said: Ma hew 18:4 Whosoever
therefore shall humble himself as this li le child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Solomon humbled
himself before God, and God responded by making him wise and a great king.
No ce we are again given an outline, of sorts, for prayer.
• We should first give thanks, being TRULY thankful for all God has already given.
• We Should then make our confessions, from the ’heart’. Confessing our sins and asking for forgiveness, being
truly repentant.
• We then ask for HELP. Not riches, or power, or whatever this world considers of value. Instead we should be
asking for help to be be er, more faithful, to do God’s appointed work with HIS help and guidance.
• Give Thanks before God for that which He has given.
1Ki 3:11 And God said unto him, Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither
hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to
discern judgment;
Now we have a very familiar story. 1Ki 3:16 Then came there two women, that were harlots,
unto the king, and stood before him. What is usually forgo en in this memorable story that most Chris ans have
heard a number of mes is that these two (women) ishah were (pros tutes or harlots) zonah. These pros tutes had
undoubtedly become pregnant through encounters with their customers. We are given the informa on that both
women lived in the same house as single women. The house may have been a tavern or inn because in that era it
was common that an inn was where pros tu on took place; in fact there is the greatest of literary evidence that
the female innkeeper was also the establishment’s pros tute. So, with God’s wisdom, Solomon determined the true
mother of the child. We are not told if any punishment was handed down to the woman who lied about the child, but
we are told that the true mother would have rather given the child up that to see it split in two (killed). 1Ki 3:28 And
all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw that the wisdom
of God was in him, to do judgment.
Torah teachings tell us that there is no proper understanding of the remaining books of the Old Testament without
understanding Israel’s poli cs and tribal affilia ons. It would be like trying to correctly understand modern day America without knowledge of Plymouth Rock and the Chris an Pilgrims, George Washington and our Revolu onary War,
202
Abraham Lincoln and the bloody Civil War, and Roosevelt and WWII. Without understanding how we expanded from
east to west, that we acquired much of the territory that forms our southwestern states in a war with Mexico, and
the role that slavery played in our na onal psyche and then later the Civil Rights movement, then to understand who
we are today as a na on is not possible.
Source: Torah Studies
Thus because foreigners don’t have this knowledge they o en get convoluted ideas about what some of our American
na onal heritage celebra ons mean, why we inten onally created a government system that can only move slowly
and incrementally, why we view religion, race and ethnicity as we do, and so on. So hang in there as we deal with
this list of districts and other historical issues in the Bible and you will be richly rewarded with a deeper and proper
understanding of God’s Word.
This chapter relates to us Solomon’s splendor and greatness, An account of his princes; his twelve officers; the peace
and expansiveness of his kingdom; and of his great wisdom. 1Ki 4:1 So king Solomon was king over all Israel. Here
we see a first difference with his father, who in the beginning of his reign had only a part of Israel. Perhaps even
in a dis nc on from all his successors, Solomon reigned over all Israel. Similarly, so Jesus rules over all his people,
notwithstanding the malice of the enemy. All power is His in heaven and in earth. He is king of na ons as well as king
of saints. For those who don’t believe this or refuse to accept this, well, we shall see soon enough. But back to the
texts.
And these were the princes which he had;
• Azariah the son of Zadok the priest,
• Elihoreph and Ahiah, the sons of Shisha, scribes;
• Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud, the recorder.
• And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over the host:
• and Zadok and Abiathar were the priests:
• Azariah the son of Nathan was over the officers:
• Zabud the son of Nathan was principal officer, and the king’s friend:
• And Ahishar was over the household:
• Adoniram the son of Abda was over the tribute.
203
There are 3 words used in the Bible that seem to refer to the same office of Scribe: caphor, capher, and sophar. Interes ngly caphor is Hebrew, capher is Aramaic and there is much disagreement over the origina on of the word sophar.
A Scribe is only difficult to explain because the duty changed and evolved so much over the centuries. In David’s and
Solomon’s day literacy was a rare skill. Only a few could read and write and this lack of literacy included most of the
royal court. Reading and wri ng was not usually needed because most communica ons were done orally. Only in
royal ma ers such as diploma c trea es, or in ma ers of commerce that involved accoun ng records did the wri en
word ma er that much. It is actually only in the last 200 years or so that the thought that words handed down orally
have come to be considered anywhere from inferior to unreliable. No doubt precision is be er in the wri en word
than in the spoken; but context and meaning is usually be er preserved and thus superior in the spoken over the
wri en. Only the most advanced and enlightened ancient socie es wrote the laws of the kingdom down; and even
then almost no one could read them.–ibid
Solomon’s kingdom was prospering under his reign. We are given details of what was required to
support such a large family and government such as that of Solomon. 1Ki 4:21 And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land of the Philis nes, and unto the border of Egypt: they brought presents, and served
Solomon all the days of his life. Now, there have been many discussions on the numbers of horses and stalls, and so
on. The account in Chronicles is somewhat different and so scholars debate the reason. Most likely it is a copy error,
but this is not the point here.
Recall that Solomon married the Pharaoh’s daughter, thus forming an alliance with Egypt. Egypt
was the main supplier of horses in those days, so it makes perfect sense that Solomon was ge ng horses from them.
Now, horses were like our modern day planes or tanks. They were used mainly for war, so for Egypt to even sell to
Solomon there must have existed some sort of truce or treaty of peace. But even this is not the point. Do you see it?
Think back to our study of Deuteronomy.
Deu 17:14-17 When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and
shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the na ons that are about me; Thou shalt in any
wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king
over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother. But he shall not mul ply horses to himEgypt, to the end that he should mul ply horses: forasmuch as
self, nor cause the people to return to
the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. Neither shall he mul ply wives to himself,
that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly mul ply to himself silver and gold.
Solomon was running headlong into trouble all the while thinking his brilliance was leading Israel into a new age
of enlightenment and peace. In this short passage alone just look at the commandments of God that he was breaking
(not only the le er but the spirit of the commandments). Should Israel appoint a king over themselves (something
warned against), the Torah says that this king ought not to lead his people back towards Egypt. That is, they were not
to create a rela onship of alliance with Egypt. This did not necessarily mean that they were to war with Egypt; but to
begin to intermingle poli cally, religiously, socially, and with intermarriage was forbidden. Not only that but the king
was not to obtain a large number of horses or a large number of wives.
Solomon not only ignored these divine instruc ons he did the opposite to the extreme. The eventual outcome was
inevitable.
204
• An qui es of the Jews
• Jewish Encyclopedia.
205
Bible in a Year Schedule - May (2015-04-22 08:06)
Here is the Reading Schedule for May 2015
(You may begin at any me, but the purpose is to read the bible en rely in one year)
You can DOWNLOAD the en re (pdf) schedule: Bible in a Year Schedule The January Schedule is Here The February Schedule is Here The March Schedule is Here The April Schedule is Here
Resources for Bible in a Year
For those wan ng some of the Bible Images used on this site January Images | February Images | March Images
(I will add April images on my return in early May)
As I post each daily readings I will link it from this page. Addi onal pages will be added for each month.
Addi onally, I will link each reading to the King James Bible ON THIS SITE and from the scriptures back to the daily
readings. I am hopeful this will help you in your studies. You can also LISTEN TO THE KING JAMES BIBLE – Audio by
ALEXANDER SCOURBY above each chapter sec on
for Faith comes by hearing. May God bless…
May 2015 The Books of II Kings and 1 and 2 Chronicles
Introduc on to the books of Samuel and Kings - Originally these four books were one and thus should be taken together. This study will con nue through May 10th.
1. II Kings 1-3 Today is 11 Ziv / Iyyar on God’s Calendar
(a) It Is the Jewish observance - Saturday Sabbath
(b) It is the The fourth week a er passover as we count the omer to (Chris an ) Pentecost / Shavout : The
word Shavuotmeans “weeks.” It marks the comple on of the seven-week coun ng (of the Omer) period
between Passover and Shavuot.Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, who has sanc fied
us with His commandments, and commanded us concerning the coun ng of the Omer.
(c) Count Today’s Omer – 29 Days in the Omer
(a) it is the Second Sabbath of the month of Ziv
206
(b) It is the The fi h week a er passover as we count the omer to Pentecost / Shavuot
(a) Summary of 1 and 2 Kings
11. I Chronicles 1-2 Today is 21 Ziv / Iyyar on God’s Calendar
(a) it is the Third Sabbath of the month of Ziv
(b) Introduc on to Chronicles - We will also take 1 and 2 Chronicles as one book.
(b) It is the The sixth week a er passover as we count the omer to Pentecost / Shavuot
(a) it is the Fourth Sabbath of the month of Ziv
20. I Chronicles 27-29 Today is _ _ _ _ _ on God’s Calendar
21. II Chronicles 1-3 Today is _ _ _ _ _ on God’s Calendar
1. It Is the Jewish observance - Saturday Sabbath
207
2. It is the The SEVENTH week a er passover as we count the omer to Pentecost ”Blessed are You, Lord our God,
King of the Universe, who has sanc fied us with His commandments, and commanded us concerning the counting of the Omer.”
1. Today Is the Jewish observance of Shavout or Chris an PENTECOST
• Summary of the Books of Chronicles
Bible in a Year-23 Apr 2015 Solomon Begins to Build the Temple (2015-04-23 06:00)
This site is Dedicated to the Glory of GodIsa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my
mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing
whereto I sent it.
208
– April Schedule
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 King chapters 5-7
You May wish to watch ”King Solomon’s Tablet of Stone” from the BBC
IFRAME: h ps://www.youtube.com/embed/e5 _wGjAQHkA
INTRODUCTION
Source: Kingdom of David and Solomon Video
The great work which Solomon was raised up to do was the building of the temple; his wealth and wisdom were given
him to qualify him for that. In this, especially, he was to be a type of Christ, for “he shall build the temple of the Lord,”
Zec _6:12. In this chapter we have an account of the prepara ons he made for that and his other buildings. Gold and
silver his good father had prepared in abundance, but mber and stones he must get ready; and about these we have
him making a treaty with Hiram king of Tyre.
• Hiram congratulated him on his accession to the throne
• Solomon signified to him his design to build the temple and desired him to furnish him with workmen and Hiram
agreed to do it
• Solomon’s work was accordingly well done and Hiram’s workmen were well paid
Great and long prepara on had been making for the building of the temple, and here, at length, comes an account of
the building of it; a noble piece of work it was, one of the wonders of the world, and taking in its spiritual significance,
one of the glories of the church. Here is,
• The me when it was built , and how long it was in the building
• The silence with which it was build
• The dimensions of it
• The message God sent to Solomon, when it was in the building
• The par culars: windows, chambers , the walls and flooring , the oracle , the cherubim , the doors , and the
inner court .
As, in the story of David, one chapter of wars and victories follows another, so, in the story of Solomon, one chapter
concerning his buildings follows another. In this chapter we have,
209
• His fi ng up several buildings for himself and his own use
• His furnishing the temple which he had built for God,
– With two pillars
– With a molten sea
– With ten basins of brass , and ten layers upon them .
– With all the other utensils of the temple
– With the things that his father had dedicated
The par cular descrip on of these things was not needless when it was wri en, nor is it now useless, as we shall see.
1 King chapters 5-7
Tyre and Israel—a lesson on personal influence. Twice in the history of Israel were its rela ons with the neighboring kingdom of Tyre close and in mate. Twice did the Phoenician race exercise an important influence on the Hebrew
people.1Ki 5:1 And Hiram king of Tyre sent his servants unto Solomon; for he had heard that they had anointed him
king in the room of his father: for Hiram was ever a lover of David.
In the days of Solomon the subjects of Hiram furnished men and materials to build a house to the name
of the Lord. The Phoenicians were not only idolaters, but they belonged to the accursed races of Canaan, yet we see
them here assis ng the holy people, and furthering the interests of the true religion. But in the days of Ahab these
rela ons were reversed. Then the kingdom of Ethbaal furnished Israel with a princess who destroyed the prophets
religion of which the temple was the shrine and center. In the
of the Lord and sought to exterminate the
first case, that is to say, we see Israel influencing Tyre for good; we hear from the lips of the Tyrian king an acknowledgment of the goodness of the Hebrew God; we see the two races combining to bring glory to God and to diffuse
the blessings of peace and civiliza on amongst men. In the second case, we see Tyre influencing Israel for evil. No
longer do the skilled ar ficers of Zidon prepare mber and stones for the Lord’s house, but the prophets and votaries
of Phoenician dei es would fain break down the carved work thereof with axes and hammers. So tar from rearing a
sanctuary to Jehovah, they would root up His worship and enthrone a foul idol in the place of the Divine Presence.
Such have been at different mes the rela ons of Tyre and Sidon to the chosen race and the true religion.
No city in the world has experienced so many vicissitudes as ”the city of the Great King.” The place of the ”vision
of peace” (or, ”founda on of peace”) has known no peace. It has been sixteen mes taken by siege since our Jesus’
day, and conqueror a er conqueror has cried, ”Rase it, rase it, even to the founda on thereof” (Psa _137:7). It has
been the carcase round which the Roman ”eagles” have repeatedly gathered; it has been the ba lefield of Saracen
and Crusader; now the Chris an has wrested it from the Muslim, and now the Muslim has torn it back from the Chrisan. The consequence is that it is a mound of ruins, a heap of debris. When the Anglican church was built, it was
necessary to dig down some forty feet, through the accumulated rubbish of ages, to get a founda on. The Jerusalem
of the past can only be reached by deep sha s. It is literally true that not one stone of the ancient city is ”le upon
another” (Mat _24:2). With ONE excep on. Amid the wreck and havoc of wax, amid the changes and chances of the
world, the colossal founda ons of Solomon remain undisturbed. His ”great stones” are to be seen at the present day
at the southeast angle and underneath the temple area (see on 1Ki _5:17). Everything built upon them has perished.
Not a trace of tower or temple remains; nay, their very sites are doub ul. But ”through all these great and various
demoli ons and restora ons on the surface, its founda ons, with their gigan c walls, have been indestruc bly preserved” (Ewald). A er the lapse of nearly three thousand years, ”The founda on standeth sure.”
210
It introduces us, by an cipa on, to that which was the crowning glory of the reign of Solomon, for his name must ever
stand connected with the magnificence of the first Temple, though it be but as a gorgeous dream of the far distant
past, which imagina on strives in vain to reproduce with dis nctness and certainty. Whether the Hiram who entered
into this treaty with Solomon is the same as the Hiram who was the friend of David is a ma er of doubt. Menander
of Ephesus (quoted by Josephus) describes him as a man of great enterprise, a lover of architecture, noted for his skill
in building and adorning the temples of the gods. And in this we have a valuable indirect confirma on of the Biblical
history.
1Ki 5:3 Thou knowest how that David my father could not build an house unto the name of the LORD his God for
the wars which were about him on every side, un l the LORD put them under the soles of his feet. We are told why
he ”could not” (1Ch _22:7-8; 1Ch _28:5). He had been ”a man of war,” and had ”shed much blood.” Noble purposes
may be conceived in a me of discord and confusion; they can be actualized only in a me of rest. The hands that
would build a worthy dwelling-place for a righteous God must be free from the blood of men. Nothing was more
natural than for Solomon, under happier mes, to resolve to do what his father had the ”heart to do,” but ”could not.”
How o en can we see a life cut short before its story half told; a laying of plans that are never worked out; a reaching
forth towards fair ideals that men have not the power or the me to turn into reali es. What can the high mission of
each succeeding genera on be but just to take up the good purposes that a previous genera on failed to accomplish
and develop them to their ripe issues? This is the real law of human progress. All honor to the son who, knowing
what was truest and deepest in his father’s heart, endeavors worthily to fulfill it.
Solomon never had the pure and lo y spirit of devo on that inspired the soul of David; but as yet, at least, his religious sen ment is deep and true. A ”house great and wonderful,” dedicated to the Lord, in the royal city, will give
it fi ng public expression. All religious feeling ins nc vely seeks to body itself forth in appropriate forms. Forbidden
as the Jews were to ”make any likeness or image” of the great Object of worship (Exo _20:4), it was quite in harmony
with the Divine dispensa on of the me that the spirit of worship should robe itself in a grand symbolic garb.
”Those temples of His grace,
How beau ful they stand!
The honor of our na ve place
And bulwark of our land.”
1Ki 5:10 So Hiram gave Solomon cedar trees and fir trees according to all his desire. The opera ve word here should
be perhaps ’sold’ rather than gave. Hiram was well paid for the trees and everything else.
The tabernacle had been the movable sanctuary, of a wandering people, the Temple should be the res ng place
of the Divine presence (Psalms 132:14) ”This is my rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.”
. Hitherto there had been a divided worship, connected both with the tabernacle at Gideon and the ark in the city of
David (1Ch _16:37-39). But in future all sacred associa ons are to be gathered up in the central glory of the Temple.
One na on, one faith, one God, one sanctuary. 1Ki 5:18 And Solomon’s builders and Hiram’s builders did hew them,
and the stonesquarers: so they prepared mber and stones to build the house.
1Ki 6:1 And it came to pass in the four hundred and eigh eth year a er the children of Israel
were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month Zif, (Ziv or Iyyar as
it is know today and the month which we are in now) which is the second month, that he began to build the house of
211
the LORD.
The erec on of this splendid sanctuary was no doubt the greatest event, both in Jewish and Gen le eyes, in the
history of the Holy City. It made Jerusalem what it had not been ll then, the religious capital. The stronghold of the
Jebusites now became the shrine and center of the Jewish system. We are not warranted, however, in believing that
it shaped the name by which the city was known to the Greeks, Ἱεροσολυμὰ (Jos; B. J. 6. 10) and Ἱερὸν Σαλομῶνος,
being probably mere a empts to ”twist Jerushalaim into a shape which should be intelligible to Greek ears” (Dict. Bib.
1:983).–Pulpit Commentary
At the same me it must be added here that, exact and detailed as is the descrip on of this
edifice, it is nevertheless so par al, and the account is, perhaps necessarily, so obscure as to leave us in considerable
doubt as to what Solomon’s Temple was really like. In fact, though ”more has been wri en regarding the temple at
Jerusalem than in respect to any other building in the known world” (Fergusson), the authori es are not agreed as
to its broad features, while as to ma ers of detail they are hopelessly divided. On one point, indeed, un l recently,
there was a pre y general agreement, viz; that the house was ”rec linear and of box form.” But it is now contended
that this primary and fundamental concep on of its shape is en rely at fault, and that its sloping or ridged roof would
give it a resemblance to the ark or to a tent. Nor have we the materials to decide between these conflic ng views; in
perhaps but drawings would enable us to restore the temple with any approach to
fact, nothing
accuracy. ”It is just as easy to portray a living man from a tolerably well preserved skeleton as to reproduce a building
in a way which shall correspond with reality when we have only a few uncertain remains of its style of architecture
in our possession”. And the difficulty is enhanced by the fact that the temple was sui generis. It was purely Jewish,
so that no informa on as to its structure and arrangements can be derived from the contemporary architecture of
Egyp ans or Assyrians. In the absence of all analogies restora on is hopeless. It is well known that all the many and
varied representa ons of different ar sts, based though they all were on the Scripture account (Exo _25:31-37) of the
seven-branched candles ck, were found to be exceedingly unlike the original, when the true shape of that original
was disclosed to the world on the Arch of Titus. It is equally certain that, were s true representa on of the temple
ever to be placed in our hands, we should find that it differed just as widely from all a empted ”restora ons” of the
edifice, based on the scanty and imperfect no ces of our historian and Ezekiel.
The men on of Ezekiel suggests a brief reference to the temple, which he describes with so much
Typically this would have been measured by the arm of the King or Ruler
precision and fulness in his for eth and following chapters. What is its bearing on the descrip on we have now to
consider? Is it an account of the temple as it actually existed in or before his me; is it a plan or sugges on for its
restora on (Gro us), or is it wholly ideal and imaginary? The first view, which long found favor with commentators,
and which has s ll some advocates, is now pre y generally abandoned. For while many of Ezekiel’s measurements,
etc; correspond exactly with those of our historian, and while it may be conceded, therefore, that this delinea on has
a historical basis, there are features in the narra ve which can never have been realized in any building, and which
prove the account to be more or less ideal. For example. The outer court of his temple (Eze _42:16-20) would cover
212
not only the whole of Mount Moriah, but more than the whole space occupied by the en re city of Jerusalem, He
speaks again of ”waters issuing out from under the threshold” (Eze _47:1), and flowing down eastward to heal the
pes lent waters of the Dead Sea, where a literal interpreta on is manifestly impossible. And it is to be remembered
that the prophet himself speaks of his temple as seen in vision (Eze _40:2; Eze _43:2, Eze _43:8). The true account of
this portraiture would therefore seem to be that, while it borrowed largely from the plan and propor ons of Solomon’s
Temple, it was designed to serve as ”the beau ideal of what a Semi c temple should be”
Two other authori es, whose accounts have a direct bearing on the sacred narra ve, must be men oned here Josephus and the Talmudic tract on the temple, called Middoth (i.e; measures). Unfortunately, neither is of much avail for
the illustra on of the text we have now to consider. Josephus, too o en unreliable, would seem to be especially so
here. ”Templum aedificat,” says Clericus, ”quale animo conceperat non quale legerat a Salomone conditum.” ”Inconsistency, inaccuracy, and exaggera on are plainly discoverable in the measurements given by Josephus”. ”Wherever
the Mishna is not in accord with Josephus the measurements of the la er are untrustworthy”. The writers of the
Mishna, again, refer generally, as might be expected, to the temple of Herod, or confuse in their accounts the three
temples of Solomon, Herod, and Ezekiel (Bδhr). The student of temple architecture consequently derives but scant
assistance in his work from the wri ngs of uninspired historians.
Perhaps this is the proper place to remark on the close correspondence between temple and
tabernacle.. In the first place, in plan and arrangement the two structures were iden cal. Each faced the east; each
had three parts, viz; porch, holy place, and holy of holies, while the side chambers of the temple (verse 5) were
analogous to the verandah formed by the projec ng roof, or curtains, which ran round three sides of the tabernacle.
Secondly, the measurements both of the whole edifice and of its component parts were exactly double those of the
tabernacle–ibid
St. Peter’s Basilica
1Ki 6:12-13 Concerning this house which thou art in building, if thou wilt walk in my statutes, and execute my judgments, and keep all my commandments to walk in them; then will I perform my word with thee, which I spake unto
David thy father: And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will not forsake my people Israel. We should no ce
that this promise contains a faint note of warning.We know that Solomon already has ordered the death of several
men. Will his disobedience con nue? What a great teaching moment that was, but tragically Solomon missed it.
However I don’t want us to miss it.
Wilderness Tabernacle
The point being made was that while building a place of worship and mee ng and sacrifice was needed and appropri213
ate for Israel, it came in a distant second to Solomon’s trust in, and obedience to, God. Therefore
Inside St. Peters
Solomon should not think that the degree of expense and perfec on of the Temple he has under construc on has
anything to do with God’s acceptance of the people of Israel, or whether His blessings for His people (and the King)
are somehow ed to it. That is pagan thinking and it is not for a set-apart people.Since me immemorial it has been
that mankind (in a kind of knee-jerk reac on to the influence of our evil inclina on) thinks that building fabulous
structures of all kinds in the name of our god is for the sake of pleasing that god.
Michelangelo Dome in St Peters
God makes it clear that while false gods seem to demand it, He does not. Besides; there is nothing on earth that
mankind could ever conjure up in our minds and make with our hands that would be grand enough to properly house
such a Holy God anyway; so the most magnificent Temple is not really any be er than a simple tent. Solomon is not
making something that will please the Lord any be er than did the original Wilderness Tabernacle. This principle is
of the greatest importance for Christ’s ecclesia (the Church) to grasp. We have always been in the habit of diver ng
our eyes from the Lord and onto building projects. We create amazing architectural works, ornate and decked out
in the best and most expensive building materials and then claim that our whole intent is to honor God with them.
We go so far as to regularly confer holiness upon those structures if they are grand enough and look upon them with
reverent awe. In fact the subconscious human thought seems to be that if we do NOT build the building beau fully
enough, we may be displeasing the Lord or the building might even wind up with a lesser degree of holiness than
the one down the street that is bigger and be er. The truth is that God is not honored one whit by these structures;
it’s the builders who are honored and this by other men. It’s the donors who supplied the funds that receive praise
and recogni on from other men. It’s the pastor or priest who presides over it all that is honored and held up high by
men.–ibid
1Ki 6:37-38 In the fourth year was the founda on of the house of the LORD laid, in the month Zif:
And in the eleventh year, in the month Bul, which is the eighth month, was the house finished throughout all the parts
thereof, and according to all the fashion of it. So was he seven years in building it.
So it took seven years to complete the temple. (Seven years and six months actually). But no ce, SEVEN
is the number of comple on in scripture. The commentators all cite Pliny’s statement that all Asia was building the
temple of Diana at Ephesus 200 years, but the cases are not at all parallel. We learn from 2Ch _3:2, that it was on
the second day of the month that the building was commenced. Bishop Wordsworth, who assigns seven years and
seven months as the me occupied in this work, sees in this hebdoma e period an analogy to the seven days of the
crea on.–ibid
1Ki 7:1 But Solomon was building his own house thirteen years, and he finished all his house.
In 1Ki _6:38 we read, ”So was he seven years in building it.” 1Ki _7:1 then proceeds, ”And he was building his own
214
house thirteen years.” Commentaries assert that the much longer period occupied in the erec on of the royal palace
is easily accounted for. In the first place, the buildings were much larger, and the undertaking altogether was a much
more extensive one (1Ki _7:2). Then, though seven years only were consumed in the actual building of the temple, yet
prepara ons for the work had been made, both by David and Solomon, for a long me beforehand. Lastly, a special
force of laborers would appear to have been employed on the temple, while it is probable that they wrought at the
palaces in greatly diminished numbers. So that the longer period spent over his own house does not argue selfishness
or worldliness on Solomon’s part. On the contrary, it speaks well for his piety that he built the temple first and urged
on that sacred work with so much vigour. The thirteen years date from the comple on of the seven years of 1Ki _6:38.
That is to say, the building of the temple and palace together occupied twenty years, as is expressly stated in 1Ki _9:10.
It is therefore one of Stanley’s reckless statements that the palace ”was commenced at the same me as the temple,
but not finished ll eight years a erwards”–ibid
The columns were given names; the one on the right was called Yakhin and the one of the le Bo’az. Yakhin means
“to be established”, and Bo’az means “strength is within”.
HOWEVER, It seems to me that this also a ests to Solomon’s ’granduer’. His pride and need to public approval in the
vein of the other kings of the me. A er all, he couldn’t appear as a pauper in front of other dignitaries, nor should
he. But God looks at the heart; and when He looked at Solomon He saw less than pure mo ves at work. And of course
as we con nue our study of the Book of Kings we’ll watch Solomon slide into idolatry and all manner of detestable
behavior, all the while indignantly denying it and even doing some of it in the name of God.
This chapter is about building Solomon’s palace, or be er, palace complex because it consisted of mul ple buildings. It is interes ng that the Book of Chronicles omits recording the construc on of his palace. It was likely very near
the Temple, just to the south of it, perhaps in the northernmost end of an area that today is called the Ophel. The
Ophel is an area uphill and just outside the original walls of the City of David, that lay between the City of David and
the Temple Mount. There are marvelously preserved ruins of this ancient area that one can stroll through to this day.
In all, the palace complex consisted of 4 structures
So we are given many details as to the building of the Temple 1Ki 7:51 So was ended all the work that king Solomon
made for the house of the LORD. And Solomon brought in the things which David his father had dedicated; even the
silver, and the gold, and the vessels, did he put among the treasures of the house of the LORD.
During the Millennium Kingdom period we have living water flowing from under the Temple itself, with God as its
source.CJB Ezekiel 47:1 Then he brought me back to the entrance of the house, and I saw water flowing eastward
from under the threshold of the house, for the house faced east. The water flowed down from under the right side
This never-ending source of mayim chayim, (living water) which will be
of the house, south of the altar.
used for sanc fica on, means that there is no longer a need to gather living water through pipes to be placed in this
great pot called the Molten Sea. We find a parallel situa on in the new earth at the end of the Millennium when there
is NO Temple, but instead God is the Temple. CJB Revela on 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the
old heaven and the old earth had passed away, and the sea was no longer there. What we need to see is that just as
the entry into the Millennial Kingdom began a series of changes to move us closer and closer to a full spiritual reality
of God’s principles, and further and further away from the physical objects of ritual that were merely shadows and
pa erns of God’s divine principles, so a er the Millennium in the new earth we come full circle. Not only is there no
215
longer a sea (the Molten Sea), there isn’t even a physical Temple!–Torah Studies
But God was not yet done with His Temple. Soon there would arise a king who would restore this dilapidated and
defiled place to glory.
Let me take one moment to explain something that I’ve addressed before, but it is so very important to our understanding of the remainder of the Bible and even of prophe c happenings that are current and future to our modern
me. What we read in the next several chapters and books of the Old Testament is of two kingdoms: one called Judah
and one called Israel. But in reality, the one called Israel was only a coali on of a group of 10 tribes usually iden fied
as the northern coali on. And it only used the name Israel for a handful of decades a er the civil war split Solomon’s
former united kingdom. Rather, that 10 tribe northern coali on was dominated by the tribe of Ephraim and so that
kingdom was named a er and called Ephraim. Thus within 30 – 50 years a er Solomon’s death in 925 B.C. there was
the Kingdom of Judah, and the Kingdom of Ephraim (also known as the Kingdom of Israel or even Ephraim/Israel).–ibid
216
Tom Bradford
NOTE: I have pre-scheduled these posts about a week or so in advance due to my being away from internet access
for a li le over a week. Due to the me required for each of these posts (4-6 hours including research) I regre ably
must u lize the teaching of others in more complete quotes that I normally would. S ll this requires 2-3 hours per post
to do the research and find QUALIFIED teachings. You will therefore see much of the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford
featured for a couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with scripture.
Bible in a Year-24 Apr 2015 The Ark of the Covenant brought In (2015-04-24 06:00)
Please see side menu for links to addi onal resources, pdf files, and schedules
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 Kings Chapters 8
217
”Sounds which address the ear are lost and die
In one short hour; while that which strikes the eye
Lives long upon the mind: the faithful sight
Graves on the memory with a beam of light.”
–Pulpit Commentary
INTRODUCTION
THE DEDICATION OF THE TEMPLE.—The stately and impressive service with which the Temple, the character and
contents of which have now been described, was dedicated, is related in this chapter, and divides itself into four secons. We have:
(1) the removal of the ark and Solomon’s ascrip on of praise on the occasion
(2) The prayer of consecra on
(3) The benedic on of the congrega on , and
(4) the festal sacrifices which followed on and completed the dedica on . The inaugural rites, it is clear, were on a
scale corresponding with the magnitude and renown of the undertaking .
1 Kings Chapters 8
Today I wish to share the full Torah Study for this chapter as it is quite full of wonderful inspira on and insight. It
consists of four videos.
PDF Text for this Video: 1stkings-lesson13-chapter8
PDF Text for this Video:1stkings-lesson14-chapter8
The next video will include por ons of Chapter 9
”For what are men be er than sheep or goats
That nourish a blind life within the brain,
If, knowing God, they li not hands in prayer
Both for themselves and those who call them friend?”
thus ”the whole round world
Is bound by golden chains around the feet of God.”–Tennyson
218
featured for a couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with scripture. I hope you will
enjoy these video lessons.
219
Bible in a Year - 25 Apr 2015 Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (2015-04-25 06:00)
whereto I sent it.
TODAY IS 5 Ziv (Iyyar) It is a Sabbath Day unto the Lord. on GOD’S CALENDAR
featured for a couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with scripture.
I hope you will enjoy these video lessons.
INTRODUCTION
1 Kings Chapters 9-11
In this chapter we have,
220
• The answer which God, in a vision, gave to Solomon’s prayer, and the terms he se led with him
• The interchanging of grateful kindnesses between Solomon and Hiram
• His workmen and buildings
• His devo on
• His trading navy
S ll Solomon looks great, and every thing in this chapter adds to his magnificence. We read nothing indeed of his
charity, of no hospitals he built, or alms-houses; he made his kingdom so rich that it did not need them; yet, no queson, many poor were relieved from the abundance of his table. A church he had built, never to be equaled; schools
or colleges he need not build any, his own palace is an academy, and his court a rendezvous of wise and learned men,
as well as the center of all the circula ng riches of that part of the world.
• What abundance of wisdom there was there appears from the applica on the queen of Sheba made to him,
and the great sa sfac on she had in her entertainment there , and others likewise
• What abundance of wealth there was there appears here by the gold imported, with other things, yearly , and
in a triennial return (
• Gold presented , and gold used in targets and shields , and vessels
• A stately throne made . His chariots and horsemen . His trade with Egypt . And the great plenty of silver and
cedars among his people . So that, pu ng all together, it must be owned, as it is here said , that “king Solomon
exceeded all the kings of the earth for riches, and for wisdom.” Yet what was he to the King of kings? Where
Christ is, by his word and Spirit, “Behold, a greater than Solomon is there.”
This chapter begins with as melancholy a “but” as almost any we find in all the Bible. Up un l now we have read
nothing of Solomon but what was great and good; but the luster both of his goodness and of his greatness is here
sullied and eclipsed, and his sun sets under a cloud.
• The glory of his piety is stained by his departure from God and his duty, in his la er days, marrying strange wives
and worshiping strange gods
• The glory of his prosperity is stained by God’s displeasure against him and the fruits of that displeasure.
– He sent him an angry message
– He s rred up enemies, who gave him disturbance, Hadad , Rezon
He gave away ten tribes of his twelve, from his posterity a er him, to Jeroboam, whom therefore he sought in vain to
slay , and this is all that remains here to be told concerning Solomon, except his death and burial , for there is nothing
perfect under the sun, but all is so above the sun.
Please view these Video Torah Studies by Tom Bradford. I am also including the PDF file for each for you to follow
along with the text.
221
Download PDF for this video :1stkings-lesson17-chapter9-10
Download PDF for this video: 1stkings-lesson18-chapter10-11
Download PDF for this video: 1stkings-lesson19-chapter11
Download PDF for this video: 1stkings-lesson20-chapter11
Download PDF for this video: 1stkings-lesson21-chapter11-12
When the king falls, how many fall with him! The laws of God
”must work their will,
Whatever human heart may bleed;
And more than they who do the ill
Must suffer for the evil deed.”–Pulpit
This is a full- me work of service to God’s word of Truth. This site is
for the Glory of God and NOT for Profit. Any dona ons to sustain this work are appreciated. I do not adver se
or sell on this site. Period. If these posts have helped you won’t you help me keep this site going? No obliga on, no
requests for ’membership’, nothing to have to sign up for, just your pocket change, a couple of dollars, can go a long
way to keeping this site live. I THANK YOU, and may God bless your gi .
222
Bible in a Year-26 Apr 2015 Prophecy Against Jeroboam (2015-04-26 06:00)
NOTE: I have pre-scheduled these posts about a week or so in advance due to my being away from internet access for
a li le over a week. Due to the me required for each of these posts (4-6 hours including research) I regre ably must
u lize the teaching of others in more complete quotes that I normally would. S ll this requires 2-3 hours per post to
do the research and find QUALIFIED teachings. I will therefore be featuring the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford for a
couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with scripture.
223
INTRODUCTION
The glory of the kingdom of Israel was in its height and perfec on in Solomon; it was long in coming to it, but it
soon declined, and began to sink and wither in the very next reign, as we find in this chapter, where we have the
kingdom divided, and thereby weakened and made li le in comparison with what it had been. Here is,
• Rehoboam’s accession to the throne and Jeroboam’s return out of Egypt
• The people’s pe on to Rehoboam for the redress of grievances, and the rough answer he gave, by the advice
of his young counsellors, to that pe on
• The revolt of the ten tribes thereupon, and their se ng up Jeroboam
• Rehoboam’s a empt to reduce them and the prohibi on God gave to that a empt
• Jeroboam’s establishment of his government upon idolatry
• Thus did Judah become weak, being deserted by their brethren, and Israel, by deser ng the house of the Lord.
We le Jeroboam a ending his altar at Beth-el, and there we find him in the beginning of this, when he received a
tes mony from God against his idolatry and apostasy. This was sent to him by a prophet, a man of God that lived in
Judah, who is the principal subject of the story of this chapter, where we are told,
• What passed between him and the new king.
• The prophet threatened Jeroboam’s altar , and gave him a sign
• which immediately came to pass
• The king threatened the prophet, and was himself made another sign, by the withering of his hand , and the
restoring of it upon his submission and the prophet’s intercession
• The prophet refused the kindness offered him thereupon
• What passed between him and the old prophet.
• The old prophet fetched him back by a lie, and gave him entertainment
• He, for accep ng it, in disobedience to the divine command, is threatened with death
• The threatening is executed, for he is slain by a lion
• and buried at Beth-el
• Jeroboam is hardened in his idolatry
• “Thy judgments, Lord, are a great deep.”
224
1 Kings 12-13
along with the text.
Download the PDF file for this video: 1stkings-lesson22-chapter12
Download the PDF file for this video:1stkings-lesson23-chapter13
1. Learn to listen for God’s message. He would make you His ”voice.”
2. Learn to dare anything in God’s name. The rarity of Chris an chivalry.
3. Learn to trust in God’s protec on. ”He that dwells in the secret place of the Most High shall abide under the shadow
of the Almighty.”
4. Learn to pray even for your persecutors. Compare Act _2:6 with Mat _5:44.—A.R.
225
Bible in a Year- 27 Apr 2015 Judah’s Apostacy (2015-04-27 06:00)
whereto I sent it.
TODAY IS 7 Ziv (Iyyar) the FIRST Sabbath of the Second Month on GOD’S CALENDAR (Note: on The Jewish calendar,
the Sabbath is ALWAYS from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday. This month the Sabbaths would fall on Sunday
if we are keeping strictly to God’s Calendar - ) Isaiah 66:23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to
another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
There is s ll much confusion on whether to keep every Friday-Saturday as the seventh Day, or to keep each seventh day beginning at the New Moon. I try to keep both (when it does not fall on the Saturday). Colossians 2:16 Let
no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath
days:
Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 Kings Chapter 14-15
I HAVE NO INTERNET ACCESS: NOTE: I have pre-scheduled these posts about a week or so in advance due to my
being away from internet access for a li le over a week. Due to the me required for each of these posts (4-6 hours
226
including research) I regre ably must u lize the teaching of others in more complete quotes than I normally would.
S ll this requires 2-3 hours per post to do the research and find QUALIFIED teachings. I will therefore be featuring
the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford for a couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with
scripture.
INTRODUCTION
The kingdom being divided into that of Judah and that of Israel, we must henceforward, in these books of Kings,
expect and a end their separate history, the succession of their kings, and the affairs of their kingdoms, accounted
for dis nctly. In this chapter we have,
• The prophecy of the destruc on of Jeroboam’s house
• The sickness of his child was the occasion of it , and the death of his child together with the conclusion of his
reign
• The history of the declension and diminu on of Rehoboam’s house and kingdom and the conclusion of his reign
. In both we may read the mischievous consequences of sin and the calami es it brings on kingdoms and families.
Next we have an abstract of the history,
• Of two of the kings of Judah, Abijam, the days of whose reign were few and evil
• and Asa, who reigned well and long
• Of two of the kings of Israel, Nadab the son of Jeroboam, and Baasha the destroyer of Jeroboam’s house
1 Kings Chapter 14-15
along with the text. I hope you will enjoy these video lessons.
Graves on the memory with a beam of light.”–Pulpit Commentary
Download the PDF file for this video teaching: 1stkings-lesson24-chapter14
Download the PDF file for this video teaching:1stkings-lesson25-chapter15
Download the PDF file for this video teaching:1stkings-lesson26-chapter15-16
227
”The search for truth is not one half so pleasant,
As s cking to the views we hold at present.”
It is every way pleasanter to choose among doctrines than to take them as revealed by God.
228
Bible in a Year-28 Apr 2015 Prophecy Against Baasha (2015-04-28 06:00)
INTRODUCTION
This chapter relates wholly to the kingdom of Israel, and the revolu ons of that kingdom - many in a short me.
The u er ruin of Jeroboam’s family, a er it had been twenty-four years a royal family, we read of in the last chapter.
In this chapter we have,
• The ruin of Baasha’s family, a er it had been but twenty-six years a royal family, foretold by a prophet , and
executed by Zimri, one of his captains
• The seven days’ reign of Zimri, and his sudden fall
• The struggle between Omri and Tibni, and Omri’s prevalency, and his reign
• The beginning of the reign of Ahab, of whom we shall a erwards read much
• The rebuilding of Jericho
All this while, in Judah, things went well.
How sad are the characters of the princes and people of Israel, as described in the last chapter, that one might have
expected God would cast off a people that had so cast him off; but, as an evidence to the contrary, never was Israel
so blessed with a good prophet as when it was so plagued with a bad king. Never was king so bold to sin as Ahab;
never was prophet so bold to reprove and threaten as Elijah, whose story begins in this chapter and is full of wonders.
Scarcely any part of the Old Testament history shines brighter than this history of the spirit and power of Elias; he only,
of all the prophets, had the honor of Enoch, the first prophet, to be translated, that he should not see death, and the
honor of Moses, the great prophet, to a end our Savior in his transfigura on. Other prophets prophesied and wrote,
he prophesied and acted, but wrote nothing; but his ac ons cast more luster on his name than their wri ngs did on
theirs. In this chapter we have,
229
• His predic on of a famine in Israel, through the want of rain
• The provision made for him in that famine,
– By the ravens at the brook Cherith
– When that failed, by the widow at Zarephath, who received him in the name of a prophet and had a
prophet’s reward; for (1.) He mul plied her meal and her oil (2.) He raised her dead son to life
Thus his story begins with judgments and miracles, designed to awaken that stupid genera on that had to deeply
corrupted themselves. PROPHECY FOR US PERHAPS?
We le the prophet Elijah wrapped up in obscurity. It does not appear that either the increase of the provision
or the raising of the child had caused him to be taken no ce of at Zarephath, for then Ahab would have discovered
him; he would rather do good than be known to do it. But in this chapter his appearance was as public as before his
re rement was close; the days appointed for his concealment (which was part of the judgment upon Israel) being
finished, he is now commanded to show himself to Ahab, and to expect rain upon the earth .Pursuant to this order
we have here,
• His interview with Obadiah, one of Ahab’s servants, by whom he sends no ce to Ahab of his coming
• His interview with Ahab himself
• His interview with all Israel upon Mount Carmel, in order to a public trial of tles between the Lord and Baal; a
most dis nguished solemnity it was, in which,
– Baal and his prophets were confounded.
– God and Elijah were honored
• The execu on he did upon the prophets of Baal
• The return of the mercy of rain, at the word of Elijah
1 Kings Chapters 16-18
I HAVE NO INTERNET ACCESS - NOTE: I have pre-scheduled these posts about a week or so in advance due to my
being away from internet access for a li le over a week. Due to the me required for each of these posts (4-6 hours
including research) I regre ably must u lize the teaching of others in more complete quotes that I normally would.
S ll this requires 2-3 hours per post to do the research and find QUALIFIED teachings. I will therefore be featuring
the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford for a couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with
scripture. I hope you will enjoy these video lessons.
Graves on the memory with a beam of light.”–Pulpit Commentary
Download the PDF for this video:1stkings-lesson27-chapter16
230
Download the PDF for this video:1stkings-lesson30-chapter18-19
Goodness will be vindicated. Sin will be shamed.
No joys can compare with the heavenly.
If sinners be not sad, the more shame.
Sin was repented. Christ was accepted.
The blessing came.
On Earth as it is in Heaven...
231
Bible in a Year- 29 Apr 2015 God’s Tender Care of His Prophet (2015-04-29 06:00)
must u lize the teaching of others in more complete quotes that I normally would. S ll, this requires hours per post
to do the research and find QUALIFIED teachings. I will therefore be featuring the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford for
a couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with scripture.
INTRODUCTION
We le Elijah at the entrance of Jezreel, s ll appearing publicly, and all the people’s eyes upon him. In this chapter we have him again absconding, and driven into obscurity, at a me when he could ill be spared; but we are to look
upon it as a punishment to Israel for the insincerity and inconstancy of their reforma on. When people will not learn
it is just with God to remove their teachers into corners.
• How he was driven into banishment by the malice of Jezebel his sworn enemy
• How he was met, in his banishment, by the favor of God, his covenant-friend.
232
• How God fed him
– How he conversed with him,
– manifested himself to him,
– heard his complaint
– directed him what to do
– and encouraged him
• How his hands were strengthened, at his return out of banishment, by the joining of Elisha with him
Now we move to the history of a war between Ben-hadad king of Syria and Ahab king of Israel, in which Ahab was,
once and again, victorious. We read nothing of Elijah or Elishain at all in this story; Jezebel’s rage, it is probable, had
abated, and the persecu on of the prophets began to cool, which gleam of peace Elijah improved. He appeared not
at court, but, being told how many thousands of good people there were in Israel more than he thought of, employed
himself, as we may suppose, in founding religious houses, schools, or colleges of prophets, in several parts of the
country, to be nurseries of religion, that they might help to reform the na on when the throne and court would not
be reformed. While he was thus busied, God favoured the na on with the successes we here read of, which were the
more remarkable because obtained against Ben-hadad king of Syria, whose successor, Hazael, was ordained to be a
scourge to Israel. They must shortly suffer by the Syrians, and yet now triumphed over them, that, if possible, they
might be led to repentance by the goodness of God. Here is,
• Ben-hadad’s descent upon Israel, and his insolent demand
• The defeat Ahab gave him, encouraged and directed by a prophet
• The Syrians rallying again, and the second defeat Ahab gave them
• The covenant of peace Ahab made with Ben-hadad, when he had him at his mercy for which he is reproved and
threatened by a prophet
1 Kings 19-20
Engraves on the memory with a beam of light.”–Pulpit Commentary
Download the PDF file for this video: 1stkings-lesson31-chapter19
233
Download the PDF files for the summary of this chapter 1stkings-lesson34-chapter21-22 and 1stkings-lesson35chapter22
234
Bible in a Year- 30 Apr 2015 Ahab’s Doom (2015-04-30 06:00)
This site is Dedicated to the Glory of GodIsa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of
my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing
whereto I sent it.
must u lize the teaching of others in more complete quotes that I normally would. S ll this requires hours per post to
do the research and find QUALIFIED teachings. I will therefore be featuring the Torah Studies by Tom Bradford for a
couple of weeks.I have found them to be quite informa ve and in line with scripture.
The video studies I have been sharing are not available for this sec on. I am including the audio and PDF files to
assist us in discovering more details. Please READ or Listen to the Book of 1 Kings 21-22
INTRODUCTION
Ahab is s ll the unhappy subject of the sacred history; from the great affairs of his camp and kingdom this chapter leads us into his garden, and gives us an account of some ill things (and ill indeed they proved to him) rela ng to
his domes c affairs.
• Ahab is sick for Naboth’s vineyard
• Naboth dies by Jezebel’s plot, that the vineyard may escheat to Ahab
• Ahab goes to take possession
• Elijah meets him, and denounces the judgments of God against him for his injus ce
• Upon his humilia on a reprieve is granted
This chapter finishes the history of Ahab’s reign. It was promised in the close of the foregoing chapter that the ruin of
his house should not come in his days, but his days were soon at an end. His war with the Syrians at Ramoth-Gilead
is given here.
• His prepara ons for that war. He consulted,
– His privy-council
– Jehoshaphat
– His prophets.
* His own, who encouraged him to go on this expedi on, Zedekiah par cularly
235
* A prophet of the Lord, Micaiah, who was desired to come by Jehoshaphat , sent for , upbraided Ahab
with his confidence in the false prophets , but foretold his fall in this expedi on , and gave him an
account how he came to be thus imposed upon by his prophets
* He is abused by Zedekiah , and imprisoned by Ahab
• The ba le itself, in which, 1. Jehoshaphat is exposed. But, 2. Ahab is slain .
In the close of the chapter we have a short account, Of the good reign of Jehoshaphat king of Judah and of the wicked
reign of Ahaziah king of Israel
1 Kings 21-22
Lesson 33 Chapters 20 - 21 1stkings-lesson33-chapter2021
[audio mp3=”h p://cagleonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/tckwk33.mp3” ][/audio]
Lesson 34 Chapter 21-22 1stkings-lesson34-chapter21-22
Lesson 34 Chapter 22 end 1stkings-lesson35-chapter22
The Books of Kings contain the history of the establishment of the kingdom in Israel under man’s responsibility,
• that of its fall,
• of the long-suffering of God,
• of God’s tes mony amid the ruin which flowed from the unfaithfulness of the first king,
• and finally that of the execu on of the judgment, a longer delay of which would but have falsified God’s own
character,
• and the tes mony that should be given to the holiness of that character. Such delay would have borne a false
tes mony with respect to that which God is.
• We see that, a er Solomon’s reign, the greater part of the narra ve refers to the tes mony given by the prophets
Elijah and Elisha in the midst of Israel, and in general to that kingdom which had en rely departed from God.
Li le is said of Judah before the complete ruin of Israel. A er this the ruin of Judah, brought on by the iniquity
of their kings, is not long delayed, although there were moments of restora on.
This is the universal order of God’s ways:
• to set up blessing first under the responsibility of man,
• to be accomplished a erwards according to His counsels by His power and grace.
And it is to be noted that the first thing man has always done is to fail.
236
• First Adam,
• then Noah,
• then under law,
• the priesthood,
• as here the royalty under law,
• Nebuchadnezzar where it was absolute,
• so, I add, the church.
Already in the apostles’ days all sought their own, not the things of Jesus Christ. God con nues His own dealings in
grace in spite of this, all through, besides His government according to responsibility in the public body in this world,
but a government full of pa ence and grace in Jesus.–Adapted from Darby Commentary
237
BlogBook v0.5,
& GNU/Linux.
E
http://www.blogbooker.com
LAT X 2ε
Edited: May 10, 2015

April Bible in a Year Blogger Book

Transcription

Similar documents

Heathkit HP23a

Ebony, David, “David Ebony`s Top 10 New York Gallery Shows for

THOUGHTS FROM BRYAN

Level 3

"This Sunday at St. Luke's" (PDF format Adobe Reader required)

Saul`s Deli - Trachtenberg Architects

Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. Psalm

Camp Awanita - Pelham Road Baptist Church

GREEN CYCLE

Invitation to Study The Bible