The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Samuel — Section 454

upon the indications of Providence as then working out in favour of David's cause, we have the question of the proneness of men to view passing events in the light of their own tendencies, and, therefore, to make Providence mean what it was never -designed to suggest. Apart from controversy on the fore-mentioned points, it is possible to generalise the teaching of the passage by saying that there is a prevailing tendency in men to prejudice the interpretation both of Divine words and providen- ·tinl events by undue regard to their own wishes. It is clear that these men wanted David to slay Saul. Being less spiritual and generous than he, not having risen to his lofty conception of the kingdom of God, and restive under the restraints which kept them from positions of power under the coming king, they easily believed it was God's will that David should force on the issue by the death of his enemy. Passing event or spoken word in the past would haYe no other meaning for them. 1. This fact should be remembered in relation to controversies and diversities oJ -opinion on matters of sacred history, doctrine, and worship. The existence of such diversities is no evidence against a revealed religion, as some suppose, but just the reverse; for in the nature of the case men view the truth through the medium created by their own cherished moral condition. The final supremacy of truth is not to be attained in·violation cif laws which govern the operations of the human mind, but by means of them. That men so diverse in opinion and in worship should nevertheless have so much in common that is fundamental, and should be under the mighty influence of it, is a sign that the truth is one and of God, while the error is of man and is manifold. No student of human nature can be surprised that men should seek to eliminate the supernatural from Scripture history; for only let a desire be cherished to see a revelation harmonise with what a man thinks would be a proper way of giving it to the world,-namely, by just such an absence of super- natural manifestations as characterises an era when no new revelation is longer needed,-and it will be as easy for him to see only naturalism in Scripture events as for David's men to see in words and events an authorisation to slay Saul. It is a suggestive circumstance that men of diverse temperaments and emotional or :resthetic tendencies gravitate towards certain ecclesiastical organisations ; nor can we overlook the fact that it is rare for men to pass over from a system in which their tastes have been formed to another, the advocates of which claim to represent the truth. 2. Tlie fact should variously affect our conduct in relation to 01.tr fellow- men aiid to tlie trutli. It should induce a distrust of our ownJudgment in so far as, on severe self-examination, it is seen to be associated with our wishes. Every one is bound to "search the Scriptures," to "see whether these things are so," and to " hold fast .what is true." No surrender of this great duty and privilege to an order uf men can be pleaded on the ground that possibly feeling may distort the vision of trut.h in the private individual; for men acting for others are men still, and cannot escape the conditions of human nature, while the aid of the Holy Spirit is as avail- able for one sincere heart as for another. Our duty is to bring the most vigorous powers we can command to bear on our understanding of the will of God, and in so far as we do so in dependence on the Holy Spirit we may calmly rest in our con- clusions, with the proviso that they, however good, are not coextensive with truth, and that we have purged our hearts of all human preferP.nce and prejudice. It t1lioitld induce charity towards others. The exercise of charity in matters of opinion is not identical with a surrender of our own judgment to a superior, nor a denial of the importance of fundamental truth and the possibility of its attainment, nor a blind- ness to the serious consequence~ resulting from error, but an exercise of kindly con- sideration for those who differ from us, proceeding from the consciousness that our own views may be in some degree affected by our subjective moral condition, and that our superiority to others depends on the belief we have in the comparative free- dom of our judgment from personal bias. It is a characteristic of the interaction of feeling with thought that in so far as feeling has become habitual we are, by a well- known psycl1oloo·ical law, less conscious of its presence as an element in the f0rma- tion of judgment; and consequently we may, as may others, be very sincere though in error. This by no means justifies error, or renders men safe from its consequences ; but it does demand mutual consideration, 1md imposes on every man the solemn rtspimsibility of so guarding the beginnings of his life that no unholy feeling or form  THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. [cu. x:nv. 1-22.