can hardly be invented more full of respect and humility; (a) for he pays a deference to From 1 Sam. Nabal, either upon the account of his seniority, or descent from the same tribe, and de- i. to the end sires no rarities, no delicacies, but any thing that first came to hand, and what he could most conveniently spare. Nabal (as we just now hinted) was of the same tribe with David, and could not therefore be supposed ignorant either of his exploits, in defence of his country, or of the true cause of Saul's indignation against him; and yet, observe the rudeness and insolence of his answer to such a civil message and humble request: (b)" Who is David, and who is the son of Jesse? There are many servants, now-a-days, that break every man from his master. Shall I take the provisions I have made for my shearers, and give them unto men whom I know not whence they are?" Nothing certainly could be more provoking than such an answer as this. The charging David with being a vagabond, and rebel to his prince, was a reproach insufferable to a man of a liberal spirit, who knew himself innocent; and therefore no wonder that David, upon the report of the messengers, who were themselves brought under the same predicament, and therefore had no reason to alleviate matters, was resolved, in his passion, to be revenged upon Nabal. For (c) there were four things in the matter before us that seem to have inflamed his resentment, and put him upon this sanguinary design: 1st, The want which both he and his companions at present laboured under, but hoped to have relieved out of the abundance of a wealthy man, who might easily have done it without hurting himself; 2dly, The deception he was under in finding no compensation made him for the care which he and his people had taken of Nabal's cattle, though perhaps he had given them his word and assurance, that something of this kind would be done; 3dly, The resentment which easily rises in the breast of any generous man, when, instead of thanks, and a grateful acknowledgment, he meets with contumely and opprobrious language; and, 4thly, The vexation which an innocent man, conscious of his own merits, and the services he had done his king and country, must necessarily feel, when he perceives himself vilified and treated as a scoundrel. (d) Fugitive and slave are imputations of the grossest nature; and, when retorted by an ungrateful person upon his guardian and benefactor, are provocations past bearing. Any one of these things singly was enough to irritate a man of a lofty spirit; but all put together could hardly fail of inflaming the mind to such a degree as to make him lose the government of his passion, and fall into the most vindictive rage, which is generally more observable in military men, whose courage and spirits run high, and, being too much accustomed to blood and slaughter, even in lawful wars, have not that dread and abhorrence of cruel and outrageous executions as the rest of mankind have who live more retired and peaceable lives. 66 It was to the sudden transport of David's passion then, and perhaps that exasperated by the instigations of his own men, that we are to impute his vow, and design of destroying Nabal's family; and though in this we cannot commend him, yet certainly there is something praise-worthy in his speedy reconciliation, upon Abigail's first address and application to him in the room of her husband: (e) " Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, which sent thee this day to meet me; and blessed be thy advice, and blessed be thou, which hast kept me this day from coming to shed blood, and from avenging myself with my own hand." (f)" In a word, the resolution against Nabal (as one elegantly expresses it) was the resolution of a mortal, not to say a military man, too much injured and provoked, and urged by necessity and self-preservation; the change and (a) Patrick's and Calmet's Commentaries. Comment. in locum. (f) The Life of King David. (b) 1 Sam. xxv. 10, 11. (d) The Life of King David. (c) Le Clerc's (e) 1 Sam. xxv. 32, 33. A. M. 2888, the thanksgiving upon being averted from evil, were the sentiments of an hero and a &c. or 4301. saint." Ant. Chris. 1116, &c. The Jews indeed (as we quoted the objection from Josephus) give us an high comor 1110. mendation of Saul, and seem to prefer him before David himself in regard to the magnanimity of his death. But it is much to be questioned, whether self-murder (which was certainly Saul's case) be an act of magnanimity or not. For, besides that the laws of all nations have condemned it as abhorrent to the dictates of nature and reason, of self-love and self-preservation; the wisest of the heathen world ever looked upon it as an instance of madness and brutality, and, with great wisdom, have concluded, that such an action is so far from savouring of true courage and generosity, that it is the sure effect of a weak and pusillanimous temper of mind; since true greatness of soul "(as they justly argue) consists in supporting the evils of adversity, and not in shifting them off, which is a mark of a poor impatient spirit, sinking under the common calamities of life, and not knowing how to bear the blows of bad fortune. (a)" Draw thy sword, and thrust me through therewith, lest the uncircumcised come and mock, or abuse me," *2 was the request which Saul made to his armour-bearer, and shews that it was not bravery and courage, but the fear of insults, and a conscious inability to bear them with a becoming superiority of mind, that made him shun the storm, when he saw it approaching, by withdrawing from the stage of life. Saul's case indeed was very dolorous, but he had not therefore any authority to destroy himself. His life was a sacred depositum of God's, and not to be taken away without invading his right, and violating his laws at the same time. For, whatever some may think of the silence of the Scripture concerning self-murder, there is no question to be made, but that it is included in the sixth commandment, under which Saul then lived. (b) The commandment forbids murder in general; and it is certainly as much murder to kill ourselves as to kill another man: And the reason which the Scripture gives, why we are not allowed to do it in both cases, is the same, because (c) " in the image of God made he man." For if I must not shed the blood of another because he is made in the image of God, I must not shed the blood of mine own self, because I also am a man, and made in the image of God as well as he. The reason therefore why we have not more frequent prohibitions against this sin, is plainly this,-(d). That what ever sins or offences God, as a lawgiver, prohibits, he prohibits with a penalty, i. e. he affixes such a punishment to such a crime, and he who commits the crime is to undergo the punishment in this world, whether it be restitution, loss of limb, or loss of life itself. But now this can never happen in the case of self-murder, because self-murder prevents all punishment, (the man being dead before any cognizance can be taken of his offence) and therefore prevents all laws concerning it; and can, consequently, only be included under general commands, and forbidden as a sin, whereof God alone can take cognizance in the world to come. Since, upon the whole then, Saul may be said to have died in an act of cowardice, * Si rationem rectè consulas, non vera animi mag- sect, and the example of its founder, says-Morbum, ** How much nobler was that resolution of Darius, (d) Fleetwood, ibid. i. to the end and in the violation of God's law, whereof he had no space to repent; it has been a From 1 Sam. matter of some enquiry, what we are to think of his salvation. The Scripture indeed. tells us, that (a)" Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the Lord, and also for asking counsel of one who had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it, and enquired not of the Lord, and therefore the Lord slew him :" But it is doing a manifest violence to the sense of these words, to apply them (as some have done) to his final perdition, when they plainly relate to no more than his temporal death. The dangerous and destructive nature of self-murder is, that it makes repentance (the only revealed condition of man's salvation) impossible; but then we are to know, that, in that inexhaustible fountain of goodness, there may be some uncovenanted mercy, some sovereign and prerogative grace, that may make favourable allowances for the distraction of mens thoughts or passions, the violence of their fears or troubles, or the over-bearing weight of any other temptation. But (to determine this question more peremptorily) though it certainly be consonant to the mercy and goodness of God, to think, that no man shall answer for any miscarriage, which is wholly occasioned by the power of a disease, or the distraction of the brain, because whatever is committed in such a case is not the man's free act, and consequently cannot be his guilt; yet we have no reason to presume, that the case is not so with those, who, out of pride or haughtiness, fear of miseries to come, or impatience under present sufferings, distrust of God's providence, or despair of his mercy, lay violent hands upon themselves; because the act was both voluntary and vicious, and not to be amended by repentance: But without limiting thy goodness, O Lord, unto thy mercy we commit their souls! Thus we have endeavoured to satisfy most of the popular objections which have been raised against several facts occurring in the first book of Samuel; and for the farther confirmation hereof, we shall only instance in one or two ancient traditions among the heathens, which, in all probability, derived their original from this part of Sacred History The Scythians, upon their return out of Egypt, passing through the country of the Philistines, robbed the temple of Venus at Askelon, and for their punishment (as (b) Herodotus tells us) they and their posterity were, for a long while after, afflicted with emerods: Whereupon (c) the learned Prideaux remarks, that the Philistines had till then preserved the memory of what they had formerly suffered on account of the ark of God. The Athenians, when the mysteries of Bacchus were brought out of Bootia, having not received them with all the pomp and solemnity that the god expected, were smitten (d) with a disease in their secret parts, which resembled the malady of the people of Ashdod, and so did their cure too; for, having consulted the oracle, they were informed, that the way to get rid of their plague, was to offer unto Bacchus golden figures of the part wherein they were afflicted. The Grecians, at the taking of Troy, discovered an ark dedicated to Bacchus, and when Eurypilus (as Pausanias (e) tells us) adventured to open it, he found therein the image of the god, but was immediately deprived of his senses for daring to look into it; which seems to be a plain transcript from the irreverence and fate of the Bethshemites. (f) Clemens Alexandrinus has ob served, that the fable of Eacus's praying for rain in a great drought, and when Greece was sadly distressed for want of corn, was borrowed from that part of Samuel's history, where he is said to have called down thunder and rain in the time of wheat-harvest, when the sky was all serene and clear: And therefore we need less wonder at the story between Saul and the witch of Endor, when we read of Circe, Medea, Erichtho, Manto, Antonoë, and several other women, who, in the heathen world, became famous for their necromancy, and of the many votaries that resorted to them; when we find Statius in (a) 1 Chron. x. 13, 14. i. book i. page 44. (f) Stromat. vi. (b) Lib. i. (c) Connection of the Old and New Testament, part (d) Vide Aristoph. Scholiast. in Acharn. Act ii. (e) In Achaic. c. xix. pag. 572 Ant. Chris. or 1110. A. M. 2888, troducing Tiresias as raising altars, making libations, and offering sacrifices, with so&c. or 4301. lemn invocations to the infernal gods; and Homer himself spending a great part of (a) 1116, &c. one book of his poem, in representing Ulysses as invocating the ghost of this same Tiresias, and attending to the oracles which proceeded from his mouth. These things had their foundation in some early traditions, which at first arose from the facts contained in the Sacred Writings, which are confessedly the most ancient records we have; and, in this respect, are an argument of their veracity, since we find them alluded to by subsequent authors, who had no regard to their authority. DISSERTATION C. ON THE DURATION OF THE JEWISH THEOCRACY. [IT is of much importance to him who would acquire a just notion of the great objects of the several dispensations of God to man, to be well acquainted with the constitution of the Jewish state, or that form of government under which the Israelites were placed, when they received the law from the mouth of God at Mount Sinai. That the Supreme Lord of all things condescended then to make them his peculiar people, and thus to become, in the language of that age, not only their tutelary God, but also their civil Sovereign, is universally admitted, and cannot indeed be denied by any one who reads with attention, and believes their history. With them the civil and religious societies were not, as in every other polished nation, united in the closest alliance; they were, in the strictest sense of the words, incorporated into one society, so that every act of obedience to the civil magistrate was an immediate act of religion, and every act of disobedience not barely a crime, but a sin. This was the consequence of God's having condescended to be their civil as well as religious Legislator. The form of their government was thus, as Josephus very properly terms it, a theocracy, under which sins as well as crimes were punished, and piety and private virtue, as well as public services to the state, rewarded even in this world. No other government, at least since the earliest ages, has been, or indeed could be, administered in this manner; for no government administered by mere man can either punish or reward any thing but overt acts; nor do ordinary civil governments concern themselves with the practice of religious duties or private virtues, farther than those duties and virtues affect the peace of society. Without taking cognisance of these things, however, the civil constitution of the Israelites would not have answered the purpose for which that people was separated from the rest of the world; for, as I have had frequent occasion to observe, their minds in general were too grovelling to have been restrained from the universal propensity to polytheism and idolatry which then prevailed, by any thing but immediate rewards for duties performed, and immediate punishment for impiety and vice. That this theocratic government continued until the elevation of Saul to the throne is unquestionable. From the death of Joshua to that period, the highest permanent officer in the state as well as in the church was evidently the high priest and this was the natural consequence of God himself being the Supreme civil Governor of the nation. The words of his invocation are these, Elicite, et plena redeat styga Portitor alno; (a) Odyss. xi. Occasional magistrates were indeed raised up from time to time under the denomination From 1 Sam. of judges; but from their history it appears that their office was rather military than to the end. civil; that most of them were employed in leading armies to battle against the oppressors of their country rather than in dispensing justice to the people; that they were raised up by an immediate impulse from heaven and not by the choice of the nation; and that when they were not themselves supernaturally enlightened by the Spirit of God, they were to undertake nothing of importance, either in peace or in war, but by the direction of the high priest, after he had consulted God for them by Urim. Such was the theocratic government of Israel in the time of the judges; but when towards the end of Samuel's administration the people mutinously demanded a king to reign over them, and God directed the prophet to comply with their request, the general opinion, till very lately, was, and perhaps still is, that the government of Israel ceased to be theocratic, and became such a monarchy as other civil governments which are administered by one man. Such indeed they wished it to be; for their demand was to "have a king over them, that they also might be like all the nations ;" and in this sense their demand was understood both by God and by the prophet. They have not rejected thee, (said the Lord to Samuel) but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them :" and had their demand been granted to the utmost extent of their wishes, they would very quickly have proceeded to abrogate the law, and to reject Jehovah as their only God. 66 The magistrate called a king, in those days and in the countries around them, was supreme and absolute. His edicts were laws, which he could enforce, suspend, or abrogate, at his pleasure; but such authority never was possessed by Saul, by David, or by any other king either of Israel or of Judah. All writers on politics have agreed-indeed all men capable of reflection must agree, that in every government there is necessarily a power, from which the constitution has provided no appeal, and which may therefore be termed absolute, omnipotent, and uncontrollable; but this power can be nothing else than the legislature; and where the right of enacting and executing the laws is vested in different bodies, the government is more or less free according to circumstances. The sole Legislator of Israel was God; and therefore as the kings could nei ther enact a new law nor repeal an old one, the government continued to be a theocracy, as well under their permanent administration, as it was under the occasional administration of the judges; and the only difference that we can discover between the two species of government, is, that the conduct of the judges was generally directed by Urim, and that of the kings either by the inspiration of God vouchsafed to themselves, or by prophets raised up from time to time to reclaim them when deviating from their duty as laid down by the law. That the theocracy ended not with the judges, has been proved by Bishop Warburton in so masterly a manner, that I should do my reader injustice, were I not to lay before him an abstract of that learned and ingenious prelate's reasoning on the subject. 1. "Though the people's purpose, in their clamours for a king, was indeed to live un der a Gentile monarchy, like their idolatrous neighbours; yet in compassion to their blindness, God, in this instance, as in many others, indulged their prejudices, without exposing them to the fatal consequences of their project; which, if complied with in the sense in which they had formed it, would have been a withdrawing from them of his extraordinary Providence, at a time when they could not support themselves without it. He therefore gave them a king; but such a one as was only his VICEROY or DEPUTY; and who, on that account, was not left to the people's election, but chosen by himself, and chosen for life, which it does not appear that all the judges were. 2." This king had an unlimited executive power, as God's viceroy must needs have;" for which he was amenable, not to the people but to God alone, whom David therefore repeatedly calls his own King as well as the King of Israel. |