The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Samuel — Section 444

Da ,·id: tlH' moral causes of disregard for the_ si~ns of the times; the tendency to cove up_ d_c<'ds of wrong under the plea of patnotism and loyalty; the degree to whicl n'.hgions ~orms of speech and. professions of sanctity may survive tho utter decay 01 ntal_ godliness ; and the moral uses of protracted trouble to the children of God. Bn leaYrng these, we may generalise the most prominent teaching in the followinf way:- 1. THERE IS AN IMPORTANT UNOBSERVED SIDE OF LIFE WHICH MUST BE TAKEN !NT( ACC0FXT IN F0RMIXG A PROPER ESTIMATE OF CONDUCT. In this section we have ! record of facts as they appeared to an observer. The acts of the Ziphites ar( recorded, and not_ the reasons from wl_1ich they proceeded. Our knowledge of mer compels us to beheYe that there were intellectual and moral causes of the active zea against DaYid which they alone of all Israel manifested; but, so far as the narra- ti~·e itself informs us, their conduct may have been inspired by loyalty to a recog- msed king. Thus, also, Saul's conduct as here described is only that which appeari to the casual observer. There is nothing wrong in a monarch endeavouring tc capture a subject who holds a strong position by the aid of armed men; nor is then anything but an appearance of piety in imploring the Divine blessing on men whc <'Xpr_ess in tangible form their sympathy with his troubles. .Again, the conduct oJ David as here recorded embraces only that side of life on which men can gaze, fo1 11e here appears as one acting as though his entire safety depended alone on his ex- ertions, and not on any other power. The inner, religious side of his life is no1 noticed. And, finally, the acts of the Philistines are narrated as they would appea1 to a historian-simply as the movements of men bent on some of the ends common to the warlike and restless, no reference being made to the over-ruling power whic~ silently worked on the inner side of life, causing their action to synchrqnise with the perilous position of David. What is thus true of the Ziphites, Saul, David, and the Philistines, as their acts are set forth in the history, is also true of all men whose deeds are recorded in history, and of every individual in the prosecution of his daily course. The main purpose of history is to state fact in such a connection as tc sbow the dependence of one on the other. There is always presupposed a vas1 area of life, which furnishes the immedinte moral causes of what appears in the field of human observation. In so far as historians profess to trace actions back to thei1 governing principles, and thus reveal the other and inner side of life, they become pl1ilosophers, and must not expect the same deference for their conclusions as for their statements of fact. The Ziphites would have Saul think that their zeal was the offspring of a cherished patriotism and loyalty, whereas there is reason for believing that otber causes were chiefly in operation. It is the characteristic of sacred history that sometimes it gives an authoritative record of the inner life, assigning the true -causes of the actions described. The practical use of the fact that there is an unob- sen·ed side of life is-1. To induce more care with respect to our unobserved life. When we believe that there is more real life lived within than without, that the -causes and germs of things are all nurtured beyond human observation, that the moral Yalue of what is observed is determined by the quality of what is unobserved, and that though, like the Ziphites, we may seem to do only what may possibly pro- ceed from worthy motives, God looks at the actual spring of conduct-then shall we be more earnest in seeking a pure heart, an unobserved life which shall be accept- 11ble to God. 2. To regulate our judgment of hum'!n actions.. T_he know)edge that there is an unobserved side of conduct cannot but mduce cautwn m our estimate -0f character. The apparent loyalty of a Ziphite and the pious language of a Saul may be the expression of a good or of an evil condition of the unobserved life. Our own deceitful hearts tell us how possible it is to appropriate virtues to ourselves before others when in our deepest consciousness we know that no just claim can be made to tbem. On the other hand, as it would be unjust to infer that because in this his- torical section there is simply a record of David's exertions to escape Saul, therefore lie was destitute of the pious trust which seeks refuge in God (Ps. liv.), so, in view- ing the outward life of men, we must not conclude that that is all; for in the unob- served life, spent concurrently with the observed, there may be a devout, holy trust in God which, beyond all human view, sustains and strengthens the entire man. There is a vast demaud on our pity and sympathy in the life which underlies mnny ,Oll. XXIII 14-29.] TUE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. 451 ,,, a calm nnd brave endurance of toil and care; and beneath many a fair exterior thern is a secret second life deserving scorn and indignation. II. ANTAGONISM TO RELIGION JS USUALLY TRACEABLE TO MORAL CAUSES. Although the record does not state the reasons for the conduct of the Ziphites, we, taking it in -connection with tl1e entire history of the period, may approximately arrive at their real nature. Uemembering that these men belonged to a nation whose very exist- ence was due to the predominance in public affairs of religious considerations, tl,at government with them was a question of allegiance to God as well as to man, that. the nittional life of their own period bad been one in which religious principles had become increasingly prominent in public affairs, that they were well aware of Saul's recognition as king on the understanding that he acted in subordination to the higl:.t>: principles of which Smnuel was the assertor, that it was within their knowledge that 13amuel and the high priest Abiathar had disowned Saul and favoured David, and that David's prowess had been distinctly approved of God ancl beneficial to the nation, while his holy, beautiful life was in striking contrast with the life which had secured the slaughter of the priestR at Nob, alienated the head men of his own tribe, and become an occasion of sorrow to the land - it follows from all this that these men could not have set themselves against the most renowned :and honoured man of their own tribe unless they were under the influence of motives sufficiently strong to overbear the evidence, on the one side, of David's integrity and recognition by God, and, on the other, of Saul's debasement and rejection. That they did not reason and act in harmony with facts admitted nrose from two circumstances. 1. That David was now, and for some time had been, an outlaw, isolated and sorrowful, a fact seemingly inconsistent with the previous honours conferred upon him by God, and with the continued sanction of 'Samuel and Abiathar. 2. That lack of sympathy with the holy aspirations of Davi~ and jealousy against one of their own tribe induced them to take his present unfor- tunate position as disproof of any value to be attached to the earlier evidences of his 'being a chosen servant of God. We have in this case an illustration of the an- -tagonism of men towards Clirist while he was on earth, and towards Christianity in the present age. In the case of our Saviour there was the most clear and con• vincing evidence that he was the Anointed, resembling that of David's call. Only resort to the absurd supposition that he was influenced by Beelzebub could afford an appearance of logical consistency in disputing his Messiahship. But a further point -0f resemblance arises; for the Pharisees construed the lowly life, the unostentatious bearing, the manifest sorrows, in fact, the strange delay in rising to complete dominion, as inconsistent with their idea of what became an Anointed of the Lord. Moreover, as with the Ziphites, so with the Pharisees; there was a moral offence because of Christ's insistence on internal holiness, and they were averse to the kind of government over men which he alone cared to establish. But as aversion to holiness and jealousy of distinction are strong principles of action, the Pharisees, like the Ziphites, could not await the development of events; they must needs take actin measures to capture and destroy One who had proved by his deeds of power the greatest benefactor of the age. In the case of modern antagonism to Christian if!! we find the same causes at work und!lr analogous conditions. Given the existence of a Supreme Being, interested in the spiritual condition of his creatun'\S and free to act for their welfare, and given, also, as can be well estt1b\ished to every mi1~d free from preconceived ideas on the impossibility of the supernatural, the veracity of the evangelical records, we have then a body of evidence concerning the supernatural origin and character of Christianity as clear as, and much fuller than, the eyidence to the Hebrews of David's selection through Sarriuel nnd distinct approval by God ; and this becomes overwhelming when taken in conjunction with that wondrous life which no other hypothesis can possibly explain. Yet men seek to set aside this evidence because, forsooth, it does not fall in with their conception of what a revela- tion from God to man should be ; much after the model of the Ziphites, who could not believe a wandering, sorrowful outlaw to be the coming king, notwithstanding that some earlier events seemed to point in that direction. No doubt in many theoretical objectors to Christianity there is a positive aversion more or less pronounced to the inward holiness and entire submission of heart and intellect and will which G G 2 452 THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. [CH. XXIII. 14--29,