| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Introduction
to 1 Samuel
This summary of the book of 1 Samuel provides information about
the title
author(s)
date of writing
chronology
theme
theology
outline
a
brief overview
and the chapters of the Book of 1 Samuel.
1 and 2 Samuel are named after the person God used to establish
monarchy in Israel. Samuel not only anointed both Saul and David
Israel's
first two kings
but he also gave definition to the new order of God's rule
over Israel. Samuel's role as God's representative in this period of Israel's
history is close to that of Moses (see Ps
99:6; Jer 15:1) since he
more than any other person
provided for covenant continuity in the transition from the rule of the judges
to that of the monarchy.
1 and 2 Samuel were originally one book. It was divided into two
parts by the translators of the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation
of the OT) -- a division subsequently followed by Jerome (in the Latin Vulgate
c. a.d. 400) and by modern versions. The title of the book has varied from time
to time
having been designated "The First and Second Books of
Kingdoms" (Septuagint)
"First and Second Kings" (Vulgate) and
"First and Second Samuel" (Hebrew tradition and most modern
versions).
Many questions have arisen pertaining to the literary character
authorship and date of 1
2 Samuel. Certain features of the book suggest that it
was compiled with the use of a number of originally independent sources
which
the author may have incorporated into his own composition as much as possible
in their original
unedited form.
Who the author was cannot be known since the book itself gives no
indication of his identity. Whoever he was
he doubtless had access to records
of the life and times of Samuel
Saul and David. Explicit reference in the book
itself is made to only one such source (the Book of Jashar
2Sa 1:18)
but the writer of Chronicles refers
to four others that pertain to this period (the book of the annals of King
David
1Ch 27:24; the records of Samuel the seer; the
records of Nathan the prophet; the records of Gad the seer
1Ch 29:29).
1 Samuel relates God's establishment of a political system in
Israel headed by a human king. Before the author describes this momentous
change in the structure of the theocracy (God's kingly rule over his people)
he effectively depicts the complexity of its context. The following events
provide both historical and theological background for the beginning of the
monarchy:
1. The birth
youth and call of Samuel (chs. 1
- 3). In a book dealing for the most
part with the reigns of Israel's first two kings
Saul and David
it is
significant that the author chose not to include a birth narrative of either of
these men
but to describe the birth of their forerunner and anointer
the
prophet Samuel. This in itself accentuates the importance the author attached
to Samuel's role in the events that follow. He seems to be saying in a subtle
way that flesh and blood are to be subordinated to word and Spirit in the
process of the establishment of kingship. For this reason chs. 1
- 3 should be viewed as integrally related to what
follows
not as a more likely component of the book of Judges or as a loosely
attached prefix to the rest of 1
2 Samuel. Kingship is given its birth and then
nurtured by the prophetic word and work of the prophet Samuel. Moreover
the
events of Samuel's nativity thematically anticipate the story of God's working
that is narrated in the rest of the book.
2. The
"ark narratives" (chs. 4
- 6). This section describes how the
ark of God was captured by the Philistines and then
after God wreaked havoc on
several Philistine cities
how it was returned to Israel. These narratives
reveal the folly of Israel's notion that possession of the ark automatically
guaranteed victory over her enemies. They also display the awesome power of the
Lord (Yahweh
the God of Israel) and his superiority over the Philistine god
Dagon. The Philistines were forced to confess openly their helplessness against
God's power by their return of the ark to Israel. The entire ark episode
performs a vital function in placing Israel's subsequent sinful desire for a
human king in proper perspective.
3. Samuel as a
judge and deliverer (ch. 7).
When Samuel called Israel to repentance and renewed dedication to the Lord
the
Lord intervened mightily in Israel's behalf and gave victory over the
Philistines. This narrative reaffirms the authority of Samuel as a divinely
ordained leader; at the same time it provides evidence of divine protection and
blessing for God's people when they place their confidence in the Lord and live
in obedience to their covenant obligations.
All the material in chs. 1
- 7 serves as a necessary preface for the
narratives of chs. 8 - 12
which describe the rise and establishment of kingship in Israel. The author has
masterfully arranged the stories in chs. 8
- 12 in order to accentuate the serious
theological conflict surrounding the historical events. In the study of these
chapters
scholars have often noted the presence of a tension or ambivalence in
the attitude toward the monarchy: On the one hand
Samuel is commanded by the
Lord to give the people a king (8:7
9
22; 9:16-17; 10:24; 12:13); on the other hand
their request for a
king is considered a sinful rejection of the Lord (8:7; 10:19; 12:12
17
19-20). These seemingly conflicting
attitudes toward the monarchy must be understood in the context of Israel's covenant
relationship with the Lord.
Moses had anticipated Israel's desire for a human king (Dt 17:14-20)
but Israelite kingship was to be
compatible with the continued rule of the Lord over his people as their Great
King. Instead
when the elders asked Samuel to give them a king (8:5
19-20)
they rejected the Lord's kingship
over them. Their desire was for a king such as the nations around them had --
to lead them in battle and give them a sense of national security and unity.
The request for a king constituted a denial of their covenant relationship to
the Lord
who was their King. Moreover
the Lord not only had promised to be
their protector but had also repeatedly demonstrated his power in their behalf
most recently in the ark narratives (chs. 4
- 6)
as well as in the great victory won over the
Philistines under the leadership of Samuel (ch. 7).
Nevertheless the Lord instructed Samuel to give the people a king.
By divine appointment Saul was brought into contact with Samuel
and Samuel was
directed to anoint him privately as king (9:1 -- 10:16). Subsequently
Samuel gathered the people
at Mizpah
where
after again admonishing them concerning their sin in desiring
a king (10:18-19)
he presided over the selection of a
king by lot. The lot fell on Saul and publicly designated him as the one whom
God had chosen (10:24). Saul did not immediately assume his
royal office
but returned home to work his fields (11:5
7). When the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead
were threatened by Nahash the Ammonite
Saul rose to the challenge
gathered an
army and led Israel to victory in battle. His success placed a final seal of
divine approval on Saul's selection to be king (cf. 10:24; 11:12-13) and occasioned the inauguration of his
reign at Gilgal (11:14 -- 12:25).
The question that still needed resolution
then
was not so much
whether Israel should have a king (it was clearly the Lord's will to give them
a king)
but rather how they could maintain their covenant with God (i.e.
preserve the theocracy) now that they had a human king. The problem was
resolved when Samuel called the people to repentance and renewal of their
allegiance to the Lord on the very occasion of the inauguration of Saul as king
(see note on 10:25). By establishing kingship in the context
of covenant renewal
Samuel placed the monarchy in Israel on a radically
different footing from that in surrounding nations. The king in Israel was not
to be autonomous in his authority and power; rather
he was to be subject to
the law of the Lord and the word of the prophet (10:25; 12:23). This was to be true not only for Saul
but also for all the kings who would occupy the throne in Israel in the future.
The king was to be an instrument of the Lord's rule over his people
and the
people as well as the king were to continue to recognize the Lord as their
ultimate Sovereign (12:14-15).
Saul soon demonstrated that he was unwilling to submit to the
requirements of his theocratic office (chs. 13
- 15). When he disobeyed the instructions of the
prophet Samuel in preparation for battle against the Philistines (13:13)
and when he refused to totally destroy
the Amalekites as he had been commanded to do by the word of the Lord through
Samuel (ch. 15)
he ceased to be an instrument of the Lord's
rule over his people. These abrogations of the requirements of his theocratic
office led to his rejection as king (15:23).
The remainder of 1 Samuel (chs. 16
- 31) depicts the Lord's choice of David to be
Saul's successor
and then describes the long road by which David is prepared
for accession to the throne. Although Saul's rule became increasingly
antitheocratic in nature
David refused to usurp the throne by forceful means
but left his accession to office in the Lord's hands. Eventually Saul was
wounded in a battle with the Philistines and
fearing capture
took his own
life. Three of Saul's sons
including David's loyal friend Jonathan
were
killed in the same battle (ch. 31).
Even though the narratives of 1
2 Samuel contain some statements
of chronological import (see
e.g.
1Sa 6:1; 7:2; 8:1
5; 13:1; 25:1; 2Sa 2:10-11; 5:4-5; 14:28; 15:7)
the data are insufficient to establish a
precise chronology for the major events of this period of Israel's history.
Except for the dates of David's birth and the duration of his reign
which are
quite firm (see 2Sa 5:4-5)
most other dates can only be
approximated. The textual problem with the chronological data on the age of
Saul when he became king and the length of his reign (see NIV text notes on 1Sa 13:1) contributes to uncertainty concerning
the precise time of his birth and the beginning of his reign. No information is
given concerning the time of Samuel's birth (1Sa 1:20) or death (25:1). His lifetime probably overlapped that of
Samson and that of Obed
son of Ruth and Boaz and grandfather of David. It is
indicated that he was well along in years when the elders of Israel asked him
to give them a king (see 8:1
5). One other factor contributing to
chronological uncertainty is that the author has not always arranged his
material in strict chronological sequence. It seems clear
e.g.
that 2Sa 7 is
to be placed chronologically after David's conquests described in 2Sa 8:1-14 (see notes on 2Sa 7:1; 8:1). The story of the famine sent by God on Israel during
the reign of David because of Saul's violation of a treaty with the Gibeonites
is found in 2Sa 21:1-14
though chronologically it occurred
prior to the time of Absalom's rebellion recorded in 2Sa 15-18 (see further the
notes on 2Sa 21:1-14). The following dates
however
provide an approximate chronological framework for the times of Samuel
Saul
and David.
|
1105 b.c. |
Birth of Samuel (1Sa 1:20) |
|
1080 |
Birth of Saul |
|
1050 |
Saul anointed to be king (1Sa 10:1) |
|
1040 |
Birth of David |
|
1025 |
David anointed to be Saul's successor (1Sa 16:1-13) |
|
1010 |
Death of Saul and beginning of David's reign over Judah in
Hebron |
|
1003 |
Beginning of David's reign over all Israel and capture of
Jerusalem (2Sa 5) |
|
997-992 |
David's wars (2Sa 8:1-14) |
|
991 |
Birth of Solomon (2Sa 12:24) |
|
980 |
David's census (2Sa 24:1-9) |
|
970 |
End of David's reign (2Sa 5:4-5; 1Ki 2:10-11) |
I.
Historical Setting for the Beginning of Kingship in Israel (chs. 1-7)
A.
Samuel's Birth
Youth and Call to Be a Prophet (chs. 1-3)
II.
The Beginning of Kingship in Israel under the Guidance of Samuel (8:1;16:13)
III.
The Establishment of Kingship in Israel (16:14;31:13)
IV.
The Consolidation of Kingship in Israel (2Sa 1-20)
V.
Final Reflections on David's Reign (2Sa 21-24)
──《New International Version》
Introduction to 1 Samuel
In this book we have an account of Eli
and
the wickedness of his sons; also of Samuel
his character and actions. Then of
the advancement of Saul to be the king of Israel
and his ill behaviour
until
his death made way for David's succession to the throne
who was an eminent
type of Christ. David's patience
modesty
constancy
persecution by open
enemies and feigned friends
are a pattern and example to the church
and to
every member of it. Many things in this book encourage the faith
hope
and
patience of the suffering believer. It contains also many useful cautions and
awful warnings.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on 1 Samuel》
00 Overview
1 SAMUEL
INTRODUCTION
The Writer of the History
Ichabod! the glory was gone; the palladium of truth and liberty
was departed from Israel; chaos and confusion covered the land. Who has told
the tale of these hundred years of shame
of sorrow
and of triumph? He made
his purpose clear in writing this short history of the “No-Glory” when faith
cut loose
as it was in his days
from the ancient moorings
drifted on a sea
of uncertainty
till it was at last piloted back to its anchorage of safety by
Samuel and David. He has written on the forefront of his work that this undoing
of an evil past was his object and plan. Who was he? A soldier would have
written as he writes; a prophet
retired to one of the schools of Samuel
would
have touched as lightly as be does on their sins and failings. He is no mere
annalist writing bald chronicles and genealogies at a king’s court. The clew of
eternal youth glistens on his pages. To conceive the writer as a soldier-prophet
like Gad
who followed David in his flight from Saul
who took part in his
campaigns and knew intimately the secrets of his court and camp
but retired to
some calm and holy sanctuary
where he might spend the evening of life in the
way a pious and veteran soldier would like to do
meets nearly all the
requirements for fixing the authorship of this history. Who
then
best meets
the requirements? It is not difficult to say. Sometimes in these memories--for
such the history is--situations occur in which no one but David could have
recounted the events set down. He was the only survivor of the anointing scene
(1 Samuel 16:1-23)
and fear of Saul would have held back both Samuel and Jesse from committing it
to writing. Of the journey to Saul’s court
the return home
and the fight with
Goliath there are many touches whereof he alone knew; and knew so well that the
idea of a reader misapprehending his words did not enter his mind. The same
thing is true of the plots formed against his life
and revealed to him by
Michal and Jonathan. And who but David himself would or could have written out
the stories told of his life among the Philistines
of his last interview with
Jonathan
of his speeches and appeals to Saul
of his feelings towards Nabal
and Abigail
and of his midnight conversation with Abishai in Saul’s camp? It
is questionable if any one but the King would have had the courage to recount
his sins in the matter of Uriah the Hittite
his repentance
and the terrible
doom that befell his household. Of 106 Hebrew pages in the two books of Samuel
David could have written
as no other man could
78 pages from his personal
knowledge of facts; while of the remaining 28
he could have derived his
knowledge
as no other man could
from those most intimately concerned with the
history
Samuel and Jonathan. It is round David that nearly the whole history
of this period of “No Glory” may be said to turn
and the charm of a poet’s pen
is felt on every page of the narrative. But probability does not rise to
certainty here. That he was the writer of this history involves no serious
difficulty
while it clears away not a few. The work bears the stamp of David’s
hand and heart; and the manuscript may have been entrusted to his friend and
counsellor
Nathan the prophet
a more likely view than to suppose that Nathan
or Gad wrote the book. (The Temple Bible.)
The Jews universally believed that the early portion of the First
Book
down to the end of the twenty-fourth chapter
was written by Samuel
but
on what grounds that belief rested is unknown; while the remainder of the
first
and the whole of the second book
they ascribed to Nathan and Gad
founding this opinion on 1 Chronicles 29:29.
Modern scholars
however
are divided about the matter
some supposing that the
statements in 1 Chronicles 2:26;
1 Chronicles 3:1
indicate the hand of the judge himself
or a contemporary; while others think
that 1 Samuel 5:5;
1 Samuel 5:18;
1 Samuel 12:5;
1 Samuel 30:25
also 9:9 (Thenius); 2 Samuel 4:8;
2 Samuel 6:8;
2 Samuel 18:18;
2 Samuel 21:2
that its composition must be referred to a later age. It is highly probable
however
that
these supposed marks of an after period were interpolations of
Ezra (Eichhorn). In fact
there is strong internal evidence that these two
books were in existence and well known in the ancient church before either
Kings or Chronicles were published
for in both of the latter a variety of circumstances
are contained
which are evidently derived from the book of Samuel. The old
Jewish opinion which ascribes the greater part of the first book to the prophet
is likely to stand. (Robert Jamieson
D. D.)
The Books of Samuel probably original and independent compositions
In advancing a single step beyond the songs of the Book of Samuel
we enter into the region of conjecture as to the materials which were at the
command of the author . . . The truthful simplicity and extraordinary vividness
of some portions of the Book of Samuel naturally suggest the idea that they
were founded on contemporary documents or a peculiarly trustworthy tradition .
. . On the other hand
it is to be remembered that vividness of description
often depends more on the discerning faculties of the narrator than on mere
bodily presence. “It is the mind that sees
” so that 200 years after the
meeting of the long Parliament a powerful imaginative writer shall portray
Cromwell more vividly than Ludlow
a contemporary who knew him and conversed
with him. Moreover
Livy has described events of early Roman history which
educated men regard in their details as imaginary; and Defoe and Swift and the
authors of the Arabian Nights have described events which all men admit to be
imaginary with such seemingly authentic details
with such a charm of reality
movement
and spirit
that it is only sometimes by a strong effort of reason
that we escape from the illusion that the narratives are true. In the absence
therefore
of any external evidence on this point
it is safer to suspend our
judgment as to whether any portion of the Book of Samuel is founded on the
writing of a contemporary
or on a tradition entitled to any peculiar credit. (W.
Smith
D. D.)
Meaning of the Title
The title Samuel does not denote authorship
but
like the titles
Joshua
Ruth
and Esther
commemorates the prominent actor in the events
recorded in the book. Its adaptation shows a true insight into the connexion of
the history it contains. The second Book of Samuel must seem a strange title
for a book of which not a line was written by Samuel
and in which his name is
not once mentioned
unless these two considerations are borne in mind:
Date of the Books of Samuel
There are some indications as to the date of the work
and yet no
precision is attainable. Evidence on this head is either external or internal.
The earliest undeniable external evidence of the existence of the book would
seem to be the Greek translation of it in the Septuagint. The exact date
however
of the translation itself is uncertain
though it must have been made
at some time between the translation of the Pentateuch in the reign of Ptolemy
Philadelphus
who died B.C. 247
and the century before the birth of Christ.
The next best external testimony is that of a passage in the second Book of
Maccabees (2:13)
in which it is said of Nehemiah that “he founding a library
gathered together the acts of the kings
and the prophets
and of David
and
the epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts.” Now
although this
passage cannot be relied on for proving that Nehemiah himself did
in fact
ever found such a library
yet it is good evidence to prove that the “Acts of
the Kings” were in existence when the passage was written; and it cannot
reasonably be doubted that this phrase was intended to include the Book of
Samuel
which is equivalent to the two first books of Kings in the Septuagint.
Hence there is external evidence that the Book of Samuel was written before the
Second Book of Maccabees. The passage in 1 Chronicles 29:29
seems likely to prove externally that the Book of Samuel was written before the
Chronicles. This is not absolutely certain
but it seems to be the most natural
inference from the words that the history of David
first and last
is
contained in the history of Samuel
the history of Nathan
and the history of
Gad. For as a work has come down to us entitled Samuel
which contains an
account of the life of David till within a short period before his death
it
appears most reasonable to conclude (although this point is open to dispute)
that the writer to the Chronicles referred to this work by the title History of
Samuel. In this case
admitting the date assigned
on internal grounds
to the
Chronicles by a modern Jewish writer of undoubted learning and critical powers
there would be external evidence for the existence of the Book of Samuel
earlier than 247 B.C.
though not earlier than 312 B.C.
the era of the Seleucidae.
If
however
instead of looking solely to the external evidence
the internal
evidence respecting the Book of Samuel is examined
there are indications of
its having been written some centuries earlier. (Wm. Smith
D. D.)
The Chronology of the Books
Samuel differs in a marked degree from Judges and Kings in the
absence of a regular chronological scheme. It is evident
however
that the
period covered by the book is practically equivalent to the long life of Samuel
(cf. 1 Samuel 28:14)
with David’s reign of forty years in addition
in all rather more than a
hundred years. This is confirmed by the repeated references to the descendants
of Eli
of whom we can trace no fewer than five generations
ending with the
youthful Jonathan
the son of Abiathar (1 Samuel 14:8;
1 Samuel 22:18
2 Samuel 15:27).
For the later part of this period we have the trustworthy editorial note
2 Samuel 5:4
f.
and several invaluable data in 2 Samuel 13:1-39
ff. Assuming that Solomon reigned from 970 B.C (cf. Skinner’s tables in his Kings)
David ascended the throne of Judah in 1010
and that of all Israel 1003-02.
Since Amnon and Absalom
both born before 1003 (see 2 Samuel 3:2)
are grown up in ch. 13
we may place the episode of this chapter circa 985.
Between this point and Absalom’s rebellion eleven years elapsed (13:23
38
14:28
15:27 marg.)
bringing us down to circa 974. In the following
four years will fall the incidents of the Great Rebellion
Sheba’s abortive
insurrection (ch. 20)
and the events of 1 Kings 1:1-53
a period of time by no means too large (note the change in David
1 Kings 1:1).
As regards the reign of Saul we are less fortunate. The chronological scheme in
1 Samuel 13:1
has unfortunately been left a blank. Since the estimate of David’s forty years’
reign (2 Samuel 5:4
f) has just proved itself correct
the accompanying statement that he was
thirty years of age at his accession must also be accepted. Now if we assume
that Jonathan was approximately of the same age--he must have been
by a few
years
the elder of the two--and bear in mind that he was at least from
eighteen to twenty years of age at the beginning of his father’s reign (1 Samuel 13:2)
we are compelled to limit that reign to some fifteen years at most
from ±
1025-1010. For the preceding period the materials for a trustworthy estimate
are entirely wanting. It can only be said that the birth of Samuel must fall
somewhere in the neighbourhood of 1080-75 B.C. (The Century Bible)
The Antiquity of the Books
The high antiquity of the books of Samuel
or of the sources
whence they were principally derived
in comparison with that of the Kings and
Chronicles
appears from the absence of reference to older sources or
authorities in the former
such as is frequently made in the latter. It hence
appears that the compiler did not live at any great distance from the events
which he relates
and therefore does not deem it needful to refer his readers to
sources already known to them; whilst the original sources have for the most
part all the marks of having been written by persona contemporaneous with the
events described. There is little reason for supposing that any part of the
work was composed even so late as subsequently to the division of the kingdom.
For the expression “Israel and Judah
” which is claimed as proof of an origin
after the division of the kingdom under Rehoboam
has no such force
as must be
obvious from 2 Samuel 2:4;
2 Samuel 2:9-10;
2 Samuel 2:17;
2 Samuel 2:28;
2 Samuel 18:6-7;
2 Samuel 18:16;
2 Samuel 19:9
compared with 12
15
16
from which it is clear that the phrase
if not
already in use
originated in the circumstances that at first only the tribe of
Judah adhered to David
whilst the remaining tribes under the common name of
Israel formed a separate kingdom for seven and a half years under Ishbosheth
and afterwards for a short time under Absalom. With this claim to high
antiquity
the internal evidence so far as it goes entirely agrees. (P.
Fairbairn
D. D.)
The sources from which the Books are a compilation
What were these sources? Ingenious attempts have been made to
analyse the component parts of the book. But apart from these conjectural
theories we have several indications of the sources from which the compiler
draw his materials.
1. The chief sources were probably contemporary prophetical
histories. The compiler of the Book of Chronicles (probably Ezra) expressly
names as the original authority for the history of David’s reign “the Chronicle
(lit. words) of Samuel the seer and the Chronicle of Nathan the prophet
and
the Chronicle of Gad the seer.” It has been maintained that Samuel
Nathan and
Gad were the subjects
not the authors
of the works referred to. Even if this
was so
it is evident that they confined much valuable material for the history
of David’s reign . . . It has also been maintained that the works referred to
by the compiler of Chronicles actually were the present book of Samuel. But it
is evident that the document which he was using contained much more than these
books
while at the same time certain sections of Samuel
and Chronicles
agree
almost verbally. The most natural conclusion is that both compilers drew from
the same authority. If
then
the Book of Samuel was compiled largely from the
Chronicles of Samuel
Nathan and Gad
supplemented by other records preserved
in the Schools of the Prophets
it follows that it rests upon the best possible
authority. Samuel is the historian of his own lifetime
which included the
greater part of Saul’s reign: Nathan and Gad together give the history of
David’s reign. The events of David’s life must have been familiarly known in
the Schools of the Prophets of Ramah. An incidental notice suggests that Gad was
the medium of communication between the college at Ramah and David during his
outlaw life; both Gad and Nathan appear to have occupied official positions in
David’s court; and both appear his monitors in important crises in his life. To
Nathan we probably owe the full history of David’s sin and repentance; to Gad
may be due the account of the Numbering of the People and its consequences.
2. The Chronicles of King David
1 Chronicles 27:1-34;
1 Chronicles 24:1-31
which appear from this allusion to have been of the nature of statistical state
records
may have been consulted. From them may have been derived the formal
summaries of wars such as are given in 2 Samuel 8:1-15
and lists of officials such as those in 2 Samuel 8:6-8;
2 Samuel 20:23-26;
2 Samuel 23:8-39.
3. Express mention is made in 1 Samuel 10:25
of the fact that Samuel committed to writing the “charter of the kingdom
” and
“laid it up before the Lord
” possibly as an addition to the book of the law.
4. “The national poetic literature” was laid under contribution
1 Samuel 2:1-10
2 Samuel 3:33-34
2 Samuel 22:1-51
2 Samuel 23:1-7
2 Samuel 3:18-27.
5. Oral tradition may perhaps have supplied some particulars. (A.F.
Kirkpatrick
M. A.)
Comparison of the Civil with the Church History of the Hebrews
Although the Civil history of the Hebrews was more closely mixed
up with their Church history than is usual in modern nations
it is plain that
some even of their historical books gave greater prominence to the one than to
the other. In a churchman’s view priests
Levites
and Nethinim or Temple serfs
stood out for special mention and special honour. Elkanah
the father of
Samuel
was
as we learn from the Book of Chronicles
a Levite of the Kohathite
clan
closely connected with and living a few miles from Shiloh; but his
presence there bulked so little in the eyes of the writer of Samuel
or was
esteemed so much a matter of course
that we cannot be certain whether his
yearly visit to the town was on the occasion of one of the great feasts
or for
the discharge of his duties as a Levite in attendance on the priests at the
Tabernacle. A Church historian would have been more definite. The narrative in
Samuel is Civil history more than Church history. In the book of Chronicles
again
David’s second at
tempt to bring up the ark to Jerusalem is successful
because he did not repeat the mistake of moving it on a cart (1 Chronicles 15:2-13).
This minute detail of ritual is found in the Church history of Chronicles
while in the Civil history of Samuel it has to be inferred
but is not directly
mentioned. Samuel and his two sons are known to have been Levites; but
though
judges in the land
and no one was reckoned more honourable or more worthy or
more likely to rule than they
they are never called priests. Nor is there the
slightest evidence that Samuel ever consulted the Lord about Saul or David’s
affairs by Urim and Thummim
although priests
who were not true high priests
repeatedly did so
and with satisfactory results. Samuel was called the seer or
the prophet; he was also a Levite
but he was not a priest
and is never so
called. Between the priests of the Tabernacle
and Levites like Samuel
his
father and his sons
there was an impassable official barrier in the days of
No-Glory. Surely there are grounds sufficient in a Civil history
so brief and
compact as the First Book of Samuel
for recognising
as underlying it
the
Books of Moses. Without them the history in Samuel is unintelligible from
beginning to end. In the Book of Samuel the gorgeous veils of the palace tent
of Jehovah are passed over in silence where they might have been spoken of; but
after a silence of more than a thousand years
comes
from a Church history of
the day
a reminder of what was first made in the time of Moses
“he made the
yell of blue
and purple
and crimson
and fine linen” (2 Chronicles 3:14).
(The Temple Bible.)
The relation of the Books of Samuel to the Pentateuch
In the unsettled times of the judges the observance of the ritual
enjoined in the books of Moses had fallen greatly into disuse. The Pentateuch
seems go exert little influence on the habits of the people as described in
Samuel
or on the ideas and language of the writers. There are
indeed
fewer
allusions to Moses and his writings in Samuel than in any other of the early
books of Scripture. But this may
doubtless
be in part accounted for by the
disorganised and somewhat anomalous state into which matters fell in
consequence of the capture of the ark by the Philistines
and the essentially
new era which was shortly afterwards introduced by the institution of the
kingdom
with the stirring events that followed in the personal histories of
Saul and David. The name of Moses occurs fifty-six times in Joshua
in Judges
three
in Samuel two
in Kings ten
in Chronicles thirty-one. The law of Moses
is never once named in Samuel. (P. Fairbairn
D. D.)
The relation of the Books of Samuel to the Books of Chronicles
It can scarcely be maintained that
the author of the Chronicles
has derived from the books of Samuel all the materials for the narratives which
are common to both works. There are so many variations between the history as
related by the Chronicler and as related in Samuel as to render it
probable
not that the Chronicler derived everything from Samuel
but that
he had access
to the sources used also by the compiler of Samuel. This may be explained by a
comparison of 2 Samuel 5:1-10;
2 Samuel 23:8-39
with 1 Chronicles 11:1-47;
1 Chronicles 12:1-40.
The Chronicler has placed in continuous narrative David’s anointing as King of
Israel at Hebron
the capture of Jerusalem
the building of the city of David
and the list of David’s heroes with t
heir deeds
probably as he found them
connected in the documents which he used; whilst
in Samuel they are detached
the list of heroes being placed separately in the history of the latest period
of the life of David. So in 1 Chronicles 3:1-24
the list
of David’s children is given in a form probably drawn from some
official register to which the writer of Samuel had access
as he gives the
list in two portions to suit the course of his narrative
2 Samuel 3:2;
2 Samuel 3:5;
2 Samuel 5:14-16.
(P. Fairbairn
D. D.)
The Books of Samuel and the Books of Chronicles compared
Much that contained in Samuel is omitted in Chronicles
and much
of the information in Chronicles is supplementary to the narrative of Samuel .
. . In general the compiler of the Book of Samuel gives a history of David’s
reign with special reference
The compiler of Chronicles gives prominence
David’s reign.--The main results of David’s reign may be summed up
as follows:--
1. He consolidated the tribes into a nation
binding together the
discordant elements of which it was composed into a vigorous unity
not without
struggles and opposition. Short as was the duration of this unity
it gave a
new strength and new aspirations to Israel.
2. By his conquests he secured to Israel the undisputed possession of
its country
thereby ensuring the free field which was indispensable for the
expansion and development of the nation
and through it of the true religion
which had been entrusted to its guardianship. In these two points Saul had to
some extent anticipated him
and made his success possible.
3. But the noblest result of David’s work was the harmonious union of
all the highest influences for good which were at work in the nation. For once
the religious and the secular powers acted in perfect cooperation
each
contributing to the other’s efficiency. David
though not without relapses and
failures
on the whole realised the ideal
and was Israel’s greatest
because
truest
king.
4. His reign was always looked back to as the golden age of the
nation
the type of a still more glorious age
to which the national hope
looked forward as the crown and consummation of its destiny. (A. F.
Kirkpatrick
M. A.)
Contents of the Books
The prominent
dominant idea is “The Kingdom”: its matter
manner
renewal
and rending; its translation from Saul the Apostate
its deliverance
from Absalom the Usurper
and its establishment in the hands of David. The name
“Messiah” is first found here (1 Samuel 2:10
Hebrew). The narrative abounds in suggestions.
1. Poetical retribution finds examples in Saul’s history; also in
David’s
whose great sin brought corrective punishment in its own line
in the
death of the child of his crime
and the incest of Amnon and Absalom.
2. Implicit obedience is enforced. David’s attempt to bring up the
ark on a cart issued in the death of Uzzah; three months later he had it borne
on the shoulders of the Levites
as God had directed.
3. Godly repentance is illustrated. The guilt of adultery
treachery
and murder lay heavy on David. Nathan’s parable of the ewe-lamb
touched the spring of godly sorrow which overflows in Psalm Ii.
4. Grace finds illustration in David’s treatment of Absalom and
Mephibosheth
and in the arrested judgment at Araunah’s threshing floor
which
became the site of the Temple with its Altar of Atonement. (Arthur T.
Pierson
D. D.)
.
1 SAMUEL
INTRODUCTION
The Writer of the History
Ichabod! the glory was gone; the palladium of truth and liberty
was departed from Israel; chaos and confusion covered the land. Who has told
the tale of these hundred years of shame
of sorrow
and of triumph? He made
his purpose clear in writing this short history of the “No-Glory” when faith
cut loose
as it was in his days
from the ancient moorings
drifted on a sea
of uncertainty
till it was at last piloted back to its anchorage of safety by
Samuel and David. He has written on the forefront of his work that this undoing
of an evil past was his object and plan. Who was he? A soldier would have
written as he writes; a prophet
retired to one of the schools of Samuel
would
have touched as lightly as be does on their sins and failings. He is no mere
annalist writing bald chronicles and genealogies at a king’s court. The clew of
eternal youth glistens on his pages. To conceive the writer as a
soldier-prophet
like Gad
who followed David in his flight from Saul
who took
part in his campaigns and knew intimately the secrets of his court and camp
but retired to some calm and holy sanctuary
where he might spend the evening
of life in the way a pious and veteran soldier would like to do
meets nearly
all the requirements for fixing the authorship of this history. Who
then
best
meets the requirements? It is not difficult to say. Sometimes in these
memories--for such the history is--situations occur in which no one but David
could have recounted the events set down. He was the only survivor of the
anointing scene (1 Samuel 16:1-23)
and fear of Saul would have held back both Samuel and Jesse from committing it
to writing. Of the journey to Saul’s court
the return home
and the fight with
Goliath there are many touches whereof he alone knew; and knew so well that the
idea of a reader misapprehending his words did not enter his mind. The same
thing is true of the plots formed against his life
and revealed to him by
Michal and Jonathan. And who but David himself would or could have written out
the stories told of his life among the Philistines
of his last interview with
Jonathan
of his speeches and appeals to Saul
of his feelings towards Nabal
and Abigail
and of his midnight conversation with Abishai in Saul’s camp? It
is questionable if any one but the King would have had the courage to recount
his sins in the matter of Uriah the Hittite
his repentance
and the terrible
doom that befell his household. Of 106 Hebrew pages in the two books of Samuel
David could have written
as no other man could
78 pages from his personal
knowledge of facts; while of the remaining 28
he could have derived his
knowledge
as no other man could
from those most intimately concerned with the
history
Samuel and Jonathan. It is round David that nearly the whole history
of this period of “No Glory” may be said to turn
and the charm of a poet’s pen
is felt on every page of the narrative. But probability does not rise to
certainty here. That he was the writer of this history involves no serious
difficulty
while it clears away not a few. The work bears the stamp of David’s
hand and heart; and the manuscript may have been entrusted to his friend and
counsellor
Nathan the prophet
a more likely view than to suppose that Nathan
or Gad wrote the book. (The Temple Bible.)
The Jews universally believed that the early portion of the First
Book
down to the end of the twenty-fourth chapter
was written by Samuel
but
on what grounds that belief rested is unknown; while the remainder of the
first
and the whole of the second book
they ascribed to Nathan and Gad
founding this opinion on 1 Chronicles 29:29.
Modern scholars
however
are divided about the matter
some supposing that the
statements in 1 Chronicles 2:26;
1 Chronicles 3:1
indicate the hand of the judge himself
or a contemporary; while others think
that 1 Samuel 5:5;
1 Samuel 5:18;
1 Samuel 12:5;
1 Samuel 30:25
also 9:9 (Thenius); 2 Samuel 4:8;
2 Samuel 6:8;
2 Samuel 18:18;
2 Samuel 21:2
that its composition must be referred to a later age. It is highly probable
however
that
these supposed marks of an after period were interpolations of
Ezra (Eichhorn). In fact
there is strong internal evidence that these two
books were in existence and well known in the ancient church before either
Kings or Chronicles were published
for in both of the latter a variety of
circumstances are contained
which are evidently derived from the book of
Samuel. The old Jewish opinion which ascribes the greater part of the first
book to the prophet is likely to stand. (Robert Jamieson
D. D.)
The Books of Samuel probably original and independent compositions
In advancing a single step beyond the songs of the Book of Samuel
we enter into the region of conjecture as to the materials which were at the
command of the author . . . The truthful simplicity and extraordinary vividness
of some portions of the Book of Samuel naturally suggest the idea that they
were founded on contemporary documents or a peculiarly trustworthy tradition .
. . On the other hand
it is to be remembered that vividness of description
often depends more on the discerning faculties of the narrator than on mere
bodily presence. “It is the mind that sees
” so that 200 years after the
meeting of the long Parliament a powerful imaginative writer shall portray Cromwell
more vividly than Ludlow
a contemporary who knew him and conversed with him.
Moreover
Livy has described events of early Roman history which educated men
regard in their details as imaginary; and Defoe and Swift and the authors of
the Arabian Nights have described events which all men admit to be imaginary
with such seemingly authentic details
with such a charm of reality
movement
and spirit
that it is only sometimes by a strong effort of reason that we
escape from the illusion that the narratives are true. In the absence
therefore
of any external evidence on this point
it is safer to suspend our
judgment as to whether any portion of the Book of Samuel is founded on the
writing of a contemporary
or on a tradition entitled to any peculiar credit. (W.
Smith
D. D.)
Meaning of the Title
The title Samuel does not denote authorship
but
like the titles
Joshua
Ruth
and Esther
commemorates the prominent actor in the events
recorded in the book. Its adaptation shows a true insight into the connexion of
the history it contains. The second Book of Samuel must seem a strange title
for a book of which not a line was written by Samuel
and in which his name is
not once mentioned
unless these two considerations are borne in mind:
Date of the Books of Samuel
There are some indications as to the date of the work
and yet no
precision is attainable. Evidence on this head is either external or internal.
The earliest undeniable external evidence of the existence of the book would
seem to be the Greek translation of it in the Septuagint. The exact date
however
of the translation itself is uncertain
though it must have been made
at some time between the translation of the Pentateuch in the reign of Ptolemy
Philadelphus
who died B.C. 247
and the century before the birth of Christ.
The next best external testimony is that of a passage in the second Book of
Maccabees (2:13)
in which it is said of Nehemiah that “he founding a library
gathered together the acts of the kings
and the prophets
and of David
and
the epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts.” Now
although this
passage cannot be relied on for proving that Nehemiah himself did
in fact
ever found such a library
yet it is good evidence to prove that the “Acts of
the Kings” were in existence when the passage was written; and it cannot
reasonably be doubted that this phrase was intended to include the Book of
Samuel
which is equivalent to the two first books of Kings in the Septuagint.
Hence there is external evidence that the Book of Samuel was written before the
Second Book of Maccabees. The passage in 1 Chronicles 29:29
seems likely to prove externally that the Book of Samuel was written before the
Chronicles. This is not absolutely certain
but it seems to be the most natural
inference from the words that the history of David
first and last
is
contained in the history of Samuel
the history of Nathan
and the history of
Gad. For as a work has come down to us entitled Samuel
which contains an
account of the life of David till within a short period before his death
it
appears most reasonable to conclude (although this point is open to dispute)
that the writer to the Chronicles referred to this work by the title History of
Samuel. In this case
admitting the date assigned
on internal grounds
to the
Chronicles by a modern Jewish writer of undoubted learning and critical powers
there would be external evidence for the existence of the Book of Samuel
earlier than 247 B.C.
though not earlier than 312 B.C.
the era of the
Seleucidae. If
however
instead of looking solely to the external evidence
the internal evidence respecting the Book of Samuel is examined
there are
indications of its having been written some centuries earlier. (Wm. Smith
D. D.)
The Chronology of the Books
Samuel differs in a marked degree from Judges and Kings in the
absence of a regular chronological scheme. It is evident
however
that the
period covered by the book is practically equivalent to the long life of Samuel
(cf. 1 Samuel 28:14)
with David’s reign of forty years in addition
in all rather more than a
hundred years. This is confirmed by the repeated references to the descendants
of Eli
of whom we can trace no fewer than five generations
ending with the
youthful Jonathan
the son of Abiathar (1 Samuel 14:8;
1 Samuel 22:18
2 Samuel 15:27).
For the later part of this period we have the trustworthy editorial note
2 Samuel 5:4
f.
and several invaluable data in 2 Samuel 13:1-39
ff. Assuming that Solomon reigned from 970 B.C (cf. Skinner’s tables in his Kings)
David ascended the throne of Judah in 1010
and that of all Israel 1003-02.
Since Amnon and Absalom
both born before 1003 (see 2 Samuel 3:2)
are grown up in ch. 13
we may place the episode of this chapter circa 985.
Between this point and Absalom’s rebellion eleven years elapsed (13:23
38
14:28
15:27 marg.)
bringing us down to circa 974. In the following
four years will fall the incidents of the Great Rebellion
Sheba’s abortive
insurrection (ch. 20)
and the events of 1 Kings 1:1-53
a period of time by no means too large (note the change in David
1 Kings 1:1).
As regards the reign of Saul we are less fortunate. The chronological scheme in
1 Samuel 13:1
has unfortunately been left a blank. Since the estimate of David’s forty years’
reign (2 Samuel 5:4
f) has just proved itself correct
the accompanying statement that he was
thirty years of age at his accession must also be accepted. Now if we assume
that Jonathan was approximately of the same age--he must have been
by a few
years
the elder of the two--and bear in mind that he was at least from
eighteen to twenty years of age at the beginning of his father’s reign (1 Samuel 13:2)
we are compelled to limit that reign to some fifteen years at most
from ±
1025-1010. For the preceding period the materials for a trustworthy estimate
are entirely wanting. It can only be said that the birth of Samuel must fall
somewhere in the neighbourhood of 1080-75 B.C. (The Century Bible)
The Antiquity of the Books
The high antiquity of the books of Samuel
or of the sources
whence they were principally derived
in comparison with that of the Kings and
Chronicles
appears from the absence of reference to older sources or
authorities in the former
such as is frequently made in the latter. It hence
appears that the compiler did not live at any great distance from the events
which he relates
and therefore does not deem it needful to refer his readers
to sources already known to them; whilst the original sources have for the most
part all the marks of having been written by persona contemporaneous with the
events described. There is little reason for supposing that any part of the
work was composed even so late as subsequently to the division of the kingdom.
For the expression “Israel and Judah
” which is claimed as proof of an origin
after the division of the kingdom under Rehoboam
has no such force
as must be
obvious from 2 Samuel 2:4;
2 Samuel 2:9-10;
2 Samuel 2:17;
2 Samuel 2:28;
2 Samuel 18:6-7;
2 Samuel 18:16;
2 Samuel 19:9
compared with 12
15
16
from which it is clear that the phrase
if not
already in use
originated in the circumstances that at first only the tribe of
Judah adhered to David
whilst the remaining tribes under the common name of
Israel formed a separate kingdom for seven and a half years under Ishbosheth
and afterwards for a short time under Absalom. With this claim to high
antiquity
the internal evidence so far as it goes entirely agrees. (P.
Fairbairn
D. D.)
The sources from which the Books are a compilation
What were these sources? Ingenious attempts have been made to
analyse the component parts of the book. But apart from these conjectural
theories we have several indications of the sources from which the compiler
draw his materials.
1. The chief sources were probably contemporary prophetical
histories. The compiler of the Book of Chronicles (probably Ezra) expressly
names as the original authority for the history of David’s reign “the Chronicle
(lit. words) of Samuel the seer and the Chronicle of Nathan the prophet
and
the Chronicle of Gad the seer.” It has been maintained that Samuel
Nathan and
Gad were the subjects
not the authors
of the works referred to. Even if this
was so
it is evident that they confined much valuable material for the history
of David’s reign . . . It has also been maintained that the works referred to
by the compiler of Chronicles actually were the present book of Samuel. But it
is evident that the document which he was using contained much more than these
books
while at the same time certain sections of Samuel
and Chronicles
agree
almost verbally. The most natural conclusion is that both compilers drew from
the same authority. If
then
the Book of Samuel was compiled largely from the
Chronicles of Samuel
Nathan and Gad
supplemented by other records preserved
in the Schools of the Prophets
it follows that it rests upon the best possible
authority. Samuel is the historian of his own lifetime
which included the
greater part of Saul’s reign: Nathan and Gad together give the history of
David’s reign. The events of David’s life must have been familiarly known in
the Schools of the Prophets of Ramah. An incidental notice suggests that Gad
was the medium of communication between the college at Ramah and David during
his outlaw life; both Gad and Nathan appear to have occupied official positions
in David’s court; and both appear his monitors in important crises in his life.
To Nathan we probably owe the full history of David’s sin and repentance; to
Gad may be due the account of the Numbering of the People and its consequences.
2. The Chronicles of King David
1 Chronicles 27:1-34;
1 Chronicles 24:1-31
which appear from this allusion to have been of the nature of statistical state
records
may have been consulted. From them may have been derived the formal
summaries of wars such as are given in 2 Samuel 8:1-15
and lists of officials such as those in 2 Samuel 8:6-8;
2 Samuel 20:23-26;
2 Samuel 23:8-39.
3. Express mention is made in 1 Samuel 10:25
of the fact that Samuel committed to writing the “charter of the kingdom
” and
“laid it up before the Lord
” possibly as an addition to the book of the law.
4. “The national poetic literature” was laid under contribution
1 Samuel 2:1-10
2 Samuel 3:33-34
2 Samuel 22:1-51
2 Samuel 23:1-7
2 Samuel 3:18-27.
5. Oral tradition may perhaps have supplied some particulars. (A.F.
Kirkpatrick
M. A.)
Comparison of the Civil with the Church History of the Hebrews
Although the Civil history of the Hebrews was more closely mixed
up with their Church history than is usual in modern nations
it is plain that
some even of their historical books gave greater prominence to the one than to
the other. In a churchman’s view priests
Levites
and Nethinim or Temple serfs
stood out for special mention and special honour. Elkanah
the father of
Samuel
was
as we learn from the Book of Chronicles
a Levite of the Kohathite
clan
closely connected with and living a few miles from Shiloh; but his
presence there bulked so little in the eyes of the writer of Samuel
or was
esteemed so much a matter of course
that we cannot be certain whether his
yearly visit to the town was on the occasion of one of the great feasts
or for
the discharge of his duties as a Levite in attendance on the priests at the
Tabernacle. A Church historian would have been more definite. The narrative in
Samuel is Civil history more than Church history. In the book of Chronicles
again
David’s second at
tempt to bring up the ark to Jerusalem is successful
because he did not repeat the mistake of moving it on a cart (1 Chronicles 15:2-13).
This minute detail of ritual is found in the Church history of Chronicles
while in the Civil history of Samuel it has to be inferred
but is not directly
mentioned. Samuel and his two sons are known to have been Levites; but
though
judges in the land
and no one was reckoned more honourable or more worthy or
more likely to rule than they
they are never called priests. Nor is there the
slightest evidence that Samuel ever consulted the Lord about Saul or David’s
affairs by Urim and Thummim
although priests
who were not true high priests
repeatedly did so
and with satisfactory results. Samuel was called the seer or
the prophet; he was also a Levite
but he was not a priest
and is never so
called. Between the priests of the Tabernacle
and Levites like Samuel
his
father and his sons
there was an impassable official barrier in the days of
No-Glory. Surely there are grounds sufficient in a Civil history
so brief and
compact as the First Book of Samuel
for recognising
as underlying it
the
Books of Moses. Without them the history in Samuel is unintelligible from
beginning to end. In the Book of Samuel the gorgeous veils of the palace tent
of Jehovah are passed over in silence where they might have been spoken of; but
after a silence of more than a thousand years
comes
from a Church history of
the day
a reminder of what was first made in the time of Moses
“he made the
yell of blue
and purple
and crimson
and fine linen” (2 Chronicles 3:14).
(The Temple Bible.)
The relation of the Books of Samuel to the Pentateuch
In the unsettled times of the judges the observance of the ritual
enjoined in the books of Moses had fallen greatly into disuse. The Pentateuch
seems go exert little influence on the habits of the people as described in
Samuel
or on the ideas and language of the writers. There are
indeed
fewer
allusions to Moses and his writings in Samuel than in any other of the early
books of Scripture. But this may
doubtless
be in part accounted for by the
disorganised and somewhat anomalous state into which matters fell in consequence
of the capture of the ark by the Philistines
and the essentially new era which
was shortly afterwards introduced by the institution of the kingdom
with the
stirring events that followed in the personal histories of Saul and David. The
name of Moses occurs fifty-six times in Joshua
in Judges three
in Samuel two
in Kings ten
in Chronicles thirty-one. The law of Moses is never once named in
Samuel. (P. Fairbairn
D. D.)
The relation of the Books of Samuel to the Books of Chronicles
It can scarcely be maintained that
the author of the Chronicles
has derived from the books of Samuel all the materials for the narratives which
are common to both works. There are so many variations between the history as
related by the Chronicler and as related in Samuel as to render it
probable
not that the Chronicler derived everything from Samuel
but that
he had access
to the sources used also by the compiler of Samuel. This may be explained by a
comparison of 2 Samuel 5:1-10;
2 Samuel 23:8-39
with 1 Chronicles 11:1-47;
1 Chronicles 12:1-40.
The Chronicler has placed in continuous narrative David’s anointing as King of
Israel at Hebron
the capture of Jerusalem
the building of the city of David
and the list of David’s heroes with t
heir deeds
probably as he found them
connected in the documents which he used; whilst
in Samuel they are detached
the list of heroes being placed separately in the history of the latest period
of the life of David. So in 1 Chronicles 3:1-24
the list
of David’s children is given in a form probably drawn from some
official register to which the writer of Samuel had access
as he gives the
list in two portions to suit the course of his narrative
2 Samuel 3:2;
2 Samuel 3:5;
2 Samuel 5:14-16.
(P. Fairbairn
D. D.)
The Books of Samuel and the Books of Chronicles compared
Much that contained in Samuel is omitted in Chronicles
and much
of the information in Chronicles is supplementary to the narrative of Samuel .
. . In general the compiler of the Book of Samuel gives a history of David’s
reign with special reference
The compiler of Chronicles gives prominence
David’s reign.--The main results of David’s reign may be summed up
as follows:--
1. He consolidated the tribes into a nation
binding together the
discordant elements of which it was composed into a vigorous unity
not without
struggles and opposition. Short as was the duration of this unity
it gave a
new strength and new aspirations to Israel.
2. By his conquests he secured to Israel the undisputed possession of
its country
thereby ensuring the free field which was indispensable for the
expansion and development of the nation
and through it of the true religion
which had been entrusted to its guardianship. In these two points Saul had to
some extent anticipated him
and made his success possible.
3. But the noblest result of David’s work was the harmonious union of
all the highest influences for good which were at work in the nation. For once
the religious and the secular powers acted in perfect cooperation
each
contributing to the other’s efficiency. David
though not without relapses and
failures
on the whole realised the ideal
and was Israel’s greatest
because
truest
king.
4. His reign was always looked back to as the golden age of the
nation
the type of a still more glorious age
to which the national hope
looked forward as the crown and consummation of its destiny. (A. F.
Kirkpatrick
M. A.)
Contents of the Books
The prominent
dominant idea is “The Kingdom”: its matter
manner
renewal
and rending; its translation from Saul the Apostate
its deliverance
from Absalom the Usurper
and its establishment in the hands of David. The name
“Messiah” is first found here (1 Samuel 2:10
Hebrew). The narrative abounds in suggestions.
1. Poetical retribution finds examples in Saul’s history; also in
David’s
whose great sin brought corrective punishment in its own line
in the
death of the child of his crime
and the incest of Amnon and Absalom.
2. Implicit obedience is enforced. David’s attempt to bring up the
ark on a cart issued in the death of Uzzah; three months later he had it borne
on the shoulders of the Levites
as God had directed.
3. Godly repentance is illustrated. The guilt of adultery
treachery
and murder lay heavy on David. Nathan’s parable of the ewe-lamb
touched the spring of godly sorrow which overflows in Psalm Ii.
4. Grace finds illustration in David’s treatment of Absalom and
Mephibosheth
and in the arrested judgment at Araunah’s threshing floor
which
became the site of the Temple with its Altar of Atonement. (Arthur T.
Pierson
D. D.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》