'I'HE
PULPIT CO~IMENT ARY, EDITED BT T1IB
VERY REV. H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D., DEAN OJ' GLOUOUTEB;
AND BY TRI
REV. JOSEPH S. EXELL, U.A.
WlTB
INTRODUCTIONS BY TBB
VERY REV. F. W. FARRAR, D.D., F.R.S., DEAN OF CANTERBURY. RIGHT REV. H. COTTERILL, D.D., F.R.S.E. VERY REV. PRINCIPAL J. TULLOCH, D.D. BEV. CANON G. RAWLINSON, M.A. REV. A. PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.
NEW EDITION,
'.l!.011i)011:
l•'UNK AND WAGNALLS CO)IPANY. JllllN'HD av wrLLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,. LONDON AND BECCLES,
(TM rights o/t,,,z,.slati11t1 and o/n/mJtluetio,. an nse1'11ed.) THE
PULPIT COMMENTARY, EDITED BY TBB
VERY REV. H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D., DEAN OJ' GLOUOBSTD;
ill> BY THB
REV. JOSEPH S. EXELL, M.A.
I. SAMUEL. ~!position BY THE LATE VERY REV. R. PAYNE SMITH, D.D., DEAN OF CANTERBUBT,
ll1omflrtics BY REV. PROF. C. CHAPMAN, M.A., LL.D., 'WESTEBN OOLLEGl!I, l'LYllOUTL
Jomiltes hg ~arious iutgors: REV. D. FRASER, D.D. REV. B. DALE, M.A.
NEW EDlTION.
'.l!.,.:, llllvll :
l<'U.NK AND WAGNALLS C01IPANY. THE
BOOKS OF SAMUEL.
INTRODUCTION.
Tm: Books of Samuel are so called not because they were written by Samuel, though possibly some of the materials may claim him as their author, but because they describe his work for Israel; and it is not too much to say of him, that as Moses was the founder, so it was Samuel who reorganised and developed the political constitution of the Jewish nation, and enriched it with institutions which made it capable of taking the high place among the families of mankind to which the providence of God was calling it. Its training was in every way remarkable. It had spent its childhood in Egypt, and owed a great deal to that progress in mental culture in which Egypt had outstripped the world. But it was in the wilderness, surrounded by the bracing desert, and under the command of one who had mastered all Egyptian learning, that Israel was formed into a high-souled people. And there Moses endowed it with a law, which, if valuable to us chiefly in its typical aspect, con- tains nevertheless so perfect a re-enactment of the fundamental principles of morality that its " Ten Words" still hold their place as the best summary of the rules that should guide and control human life. In its civil and adminis_ trative aspect confessedly there was much in the Mosaic law conceded because of "the hardness of the people's hearts," or, in other words, because of their imperfect state of civilisation; but even this was intended to lead them onwards. Confessedly preparatory and educational, the institutions of Moses were but as a l'tage or scaffolding to aid in the erection of a more perfect building. But they pointed out what that building was to be, and can equitably be judged only in their relation to it. For we must not suppose that the mass of the people had attained to that high level on which Moses stood. Great as was the impress made upon them by his master mind, and noble as were the qualities of the Israelites themselves, yet as soon as the generation had passed away which had personally known Moses, the nation hurried back into barbarism. Instead of developing and realising the grand id,!al which their lawgiver had sketched for 1 BAM. a ii l'NTRODUCTION 'l'O
1hem, they perpetually sank lower and lower. In the narratives contained in the Book of Judges we find them wild, rough, lawless, generous often, but oftener cruel ; disgraced by fearful crimes, and punishing them with atrocious barbarity. The priests and Levites appear powerless and apathetic; the judges are brave soldiers, but with little administrative capacity. Even with them Gideon, an early judge, is far superior in character to Samson. Whn would have thought that a nation, which seemed fast degenerating into a loose aggregate of Bedouin tribes, contained in •it the germ of all that is best and noblest in modem culture, and of that pure and spiritual religion which alone bas been found capable of satisfying the wants and longings of the human heart! And it was Samuel who arrested Israel's decay, and placed it upon the pathway which led it, though by an uphill and tangled route, to its high destiny of being the teacher of religion to mankind. Never did time seem more hopeless than when Samuel arose. The Philis- tines, strengthened not merely by a constant influx of immigrants, but by the importation of arms from Greece, were fast reducing Israel to the condition of a subject race. It might contend on equal terms with Moab and Ammon, but the same superiority of weapons which had given Greece the victory at Marathonand Plat ma made the Philistines more than a match for the rude levies of Israel. Samson with a bone might slay of the enemy heaps upon heaps, but the nation which had helmets and shields, and coats of mail, and swords and spears, must in the long run prevail. When the .A.ssyrians had broken up Egypt into a number of petty districts, Psammetichus united them together again by means of his "brazen men;" for the cuirass made its wearer practically invulnerable. And so the loss of the sea-coast, or the neglect to conquer and secure it in the days of Judah's strength (Judges i. 18, 19), nearly lost Israel her independence, and made her forfeit her noble calling. Content with those rolling downs on which they found abundant pasture for their cattle, the princes of Judah forgot, or had never learned, that the empire of the sea carries with it the mastery of the land. But just when it seemed that Israel must be crushed out fr.1m among the nations Samuel arose. There had been a gleam of comfort under his predecessor Eli Of the early life of this remarkable man we know nothing. He was the bead of the inferior house of Ithamar, the younger of Aaron's sons; but as the chiefs of both the priestly houses held a high place in the commonwealth of Israel, it may not after all be so extraordinary that we should find him at the commencement of the Books of Samuel poBBeesed not only of the supreme civil power, but also of the high priesthood. We so carry back our modern notions into ar.cient times that any deviation from succession by right of primogeniture seems to us to require explanation. In ancient times it was the family, and not the individual, to whom the succession belonged. The more powerful of the kin, or the father's favourite, a Solomon, and not an Adonijah, took the father's place. It was this probably which led to that wholesale slaughter of relatives nu: HOOKS 01'' SAMUEL. iii