The Pulpit Commentary — 2 Samuel — Section 258

written by David, but they might have been with truth. It doea not appear that he deBired war with the ne~hbouring peoplea; but for a time he wu oontlnua\ly at war ~th one or other of them. Jealous of the growing greatness and power of Israel under his rule, they BOugbt to bumble them, but only to their own discomfiture and subju- gation. And as the kingdom extended, more distant nations feared for themselves, and were ready to combine against what seemed the common fue, This is probably th& real explanation of the transactions reoorded in this chapter, including the most serious struggle which the rising kingdom bad bad to maintain. Nahash, "the king of the children of Ammon," having died, David, to whom Nahash had in some way shown kindness, aent ambassadors to Hanun, his son and successor, with a message of condo- lence. But the young king, induoed by the princes to regard the ambassiidors as spies, who had been sent to obtn.in such knowledge of the city as might facilitate its over- throw, treated them with the gros988t contumely and indecency, and so dismissed them, Hence sprang a deadly war, in which the Ammonites were aided by other and more powerful peoples-a war which tR.xed to the utmost the strength of Israel, and issued in the complete overthrow of their enemies. The first step in all this commotion and destruction was the false interpretation put upon the kind act of David; and, regardin~ it as an illustration of a too-common evil, we take occasion to remark upon the evil itself-misinterpretation of good deeds. • L Tm: CAUSES OF IT. 1. Knowledge of the world. There is so much evil in iti 80 much evil which conceals itself under the pretence of good; the actions which at first appear good are so often, on closer acquaintance, discovered to be· evil; that experience of the world tends to produce a suspicious spirit, which is slow to believe in the reality of goodness in any particular instance, quick to think the worst of the conduct of others, especially of strangers. 2. Evil in 011e's self. Which may be conscious or unconscious. We are indisposed to believe others to be better than we know olll'!lelves to be; and prone to suspect others of motives we are conscious of indulging ourselves. And, without distinct consciousness, we are influenced in our jndgments of others by our own character; and may be so far under the influence of evil as to be blind to the good in others. The cold, selfish, illiberal, cannot credit others with the opposite virtues ; but suspect the appearance of them to• be only u. semblance adopted for BOme nnworthy pnrpose. 3. Enmity. If on any account we cherish ill will towards another, we are ever ready to think evil rather than good of him ; and specially slow to think he can intend good to us. If another has failed to show as high an esteem for ourselves as we think we deserve, our mortified pride is apt to vent itself in depreciation of him. Prejudice is one kind of enmity, more or less virulent. It commonly exists in those of one party in religion or politics towards those of the opposite party, and predisposes them to misinterpret whatever they do. 4. Fear. Which was one of the motives that prompted Hanun and his advisers, 6. Conceit of sagacity. A cheap and easy way of appearing very wise, and of obtain- ing from some a reputation for wisdom, is to affect to discover unworthy motives in good actions. 6. Bad adviser,. Such as thoae of Hamm. Those who might be otherwise <lieposed to a just estimate of good deeds will seldom want advisers to poison their minds, if they will listen to them. IL THE EVIL OF IT. 1. In usilf. It is inherently base. It is contrary to: (1) Charity, which" believeth all things, hopeth all things" (1 Cor. xiii. 7), whenever it is not manifestly impossible. (2) Justice. Judgments which seem to be only charitable will often be simply just. (3) Gratitude, in the case of actions kind to oureelvea. Better to waste a little gratitude than indu4!e needless suspicion. (4) The plain com- mands of our Lord. Such as " Judge not; " " Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them" (Matt. vii. 1, 12). It involves, further, an assump- tion of knowledge such as men do not possess, and a usurpation of the office of him who alone searches the heart (1 Cor. iv. 6). We are not, however, required to cheriBh a blind credulity, nor to trust men with important interests without positive knowledge of their moral worth, still less against plain evidence of the contrary. Prudence is a virtue 8.6 well 88 charity. The Ammonites might have rightly exercise.d such caution towards David's meBBengers as would have prevented their obtaining so much know- ledge of the city 88 would facilitate hostile measures agai11Bt it, if these were really contemplated. They did wrong in eoncludi.Dg that the seeming kindness we.a covort OH. X. 1-10.] THE SECOND BOOK OF SAMUEL. 263