The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Kings — Section 34

we forget the character of the Old Testa- mentary is mistaken when it says that ment dispensation (as one of temporal re- " Chimhe.i:n is mentioned as present." He wards and punishments. See the "Exposi- was present at the return of David (2 Sam. tor," vol. iii. p.114), the position of David as xix. 81, 38, but not necessarily before] king (as the authorized dispenser of punish- when I fled because of [lit. , " from the face ments, and as responsible to God for of"] Absalom thy brother. dispensing them without fear or favour), and the principles of the Mosaic code (as a The mention of Absalom, and those lex talionis, demanding blood for blood, and terrible days of revolt o.nd anarchy, when requiring the magistrates and people to purge themselves of the guilt of blood by he was constrained to flee for his life, seems demanding" the blood of him that shed it"). to have reminded the dying king of one of Let these considerations be borne in mind, the bitterest ingredients of that bitter cup and there is absolutely no warrant for of sha.me and suffering-the cruel curses of charging David with malevolence. Words- Shimei. He remembers that the sin of worth lavs stress on the fact that Joab bad not repented of his crimes. But we need Shimei, which was nothing else than treason have recourse to no such suppositions. The and blasphemy, has so far escaped punish- Jewish law afforded no place of repentance ment. In a moment of generous enthusiasm, to the murderer. No amount of contrition he had included Shimei in the general would cleanse the land of blood. The amnesty which he proclaimed on his return temporal penalty must be paid. In the (2 Sam. xix. 23). He had thought, no case of David himseli, it was only commuted by special re,elation (2 Sam xii 10, 13, doubt, at the time only of the offence 14), not remitted. against himseli; he had forgotten his Ver. 7.-And to the sons of Ba.rzilla.l sacred and representative character as "the [the " Beni-Ba.rzille.i" would inclnde son, Lord's anointed; " or if he had remem- or sons, and a.11 other descendants. It is bered it (ver. 21) the emotions of that highly probable, though it is .not expressly stated, that Chimbam was the son of Bar- memorable day had obscured or perverted zille.i (2 Sam. xix. 37). Rawlinson says, his sense of justice and duty. But he hi.s "Who the other sons were is not known." since realized-and the thought weighs It would be more correct to say that we do upon his conscience in the chamber of not know whether there were any other death-that he then pardoned what he had sons. The family was still existing temp. Ezra (Ezra ii. 61), where, it is worth notic- no power to pardon, viz., a sin to which ing, we rea:l of the daughters of Barzillai the Mosaic law attached the penalty of (et Nehem. vii. 63). In Jeremiah xii. 17, death. For blasphemy, as for murder, we read of the " habitation (n~il, cara- there was no expiation short of the death vansere.i, khan) of Chemoham," where the of the blasphemer (Lev. xxiv. 14-16; cf. Keri has Chimham. • It has been argued 1 Kings xxi. 10, 13); and blasphemy, like from the mention of this name, and the murder, though not perhaps to the same fact that their khan was near Bethlehem, that David or Solomon gave the family land extent, involved those who heard it in its there], and let them be of those that eat at guilt, until they had discharged themselves thy table [i.e., of those who have their sus- of their sin upon the head of the guilty (Lev. tenance from the royal table, not necessarily xiv. 14; cf. Lev. v. 1). But Shimei, so far e.t it (Keil) ; et Dan. i. 5 ; 2 Kings xxv. 29. from having suffered the penalty of the Presence at the table is expressed by law, had been twice protected against it ; tn~;& ~p (2 Sam. ix. 11,· 12). It was es- twice preserved alive, in defiance of law, by t;e~ed an essential part of royal munifi- the supreme magistrate, the executor of cence throughout the East that the king should feed a large number of retainera and faw. And David, who has been charging dependant.;. Cf. the account of Solomon's his son to keep the law, now realizes that daily provision in 1 Kings iv. 22, 23 ; also he himseli has been a law-breaker. He has 2 Sam. xix. 28; Judges i. 7] ; for so [i.e., kept his oath, sworn to his own or his in like manner, with foo<IJ ; they came to people's hurt, and he will keep it to the me [lit., "came w,ar." The Hebrew J'}i? end. But Solomon is under no snob obli- often includes, as here, the idea of succour. gation. He can demand the long arrears Cf. Ps. lxix. 19; Lam. iii. 67. Barzillai certainly came (2 Sam. xvii. 27), and pro- of justice, none the less due because of the ba.bly C ~ , but tile Bpea.ker's Com- time that he.11 elapsed and tho royal lac/~• tll. u. 1-11.) THE FIRST BOOK O:lr KINGS. 27