STUDIES IN SAMUEL No. 34

1 Sam. 25:1-44

December 10, 2000

Now we come to the middle scene in this set of three scenes in which David is given opportunity to take vengeance on his enemies. We said last week that there is a progression here. In the first instance, when Saul comes alone into the cave where David and his men are hiding, David does take a certain measure of vengeance. In a highly symbolic act he cuts off the corner of the hem of Saul's robe, the robe being the sign of Saul's kingship and cutting it a sign of rebellion. After doing that, however, David was conscience stricken. He exposed himself to great risk by calling after Saul, but Saul, most remarkably was conscience stricken himself and withdrew and permitted David safe retreat.

In this next scene, David, overcome by wrath, a sense of offended righteousness, intends to wreck terrible vengeance on Nabal and his household, but is dissuaded by the argument of Nabal's wife, Abigail. We see here what David would be capable of if left to himself.

In the final scene, in chapter 26, David once again has the opportunity to kill Saul, who once more is threatening his life, but shows no inclination to exact vengeance himself, readily leaving the matter to God. Clearly there has been a development in David's character and in his faith through the three scenes. [R.P. Gordon, "David's Rise and Saul's Demise: Narrative Analogy in 1 Samuel 24-26," Tyndale Bulletin 31 (1980) 37-64]

Here, in the middle scene - our chapter tonight -, in Abigail's speech in v. 26-31 (a long speech and clearly a way for the narrator to signal his interpretation of these events), I think we find the clue to the interpretation of these three chapters, or, at least, to the main point that is being made by the narrator. The question is whether David will rise to the throne of Israel free from blood-guilt, whether he will become king as a worthy man, or, like most other monarchs, rise to the throne over the dead bodies of his rivals.

Remember, always remember, that David is a Christ-figure in the Bible. He does not perfectly prefigure the Lord Jesus, of course; no sinful man ever could. But, in many ways, he is the Bible's image of the messianic king who would come. We treated the last chapter as a study in guidance, and we were right to do so. These narratives are thick and have much to teach us. They are, in that way, just like the Gospels. They record the saving life and work of the Lord Jesus. But we also know that they preserve for us the example of the Lord Jesus which we are to emulate ourselves, as Peter tells us. They give us a great deal of the Lord's teaching about the kingdom of God and the Christian life and so much more. It is only to be faithful to the richness of the Bible that we take many lessons from the same text. But, I don't want us ever to lose sight of the revelation of the Lord Jesus himself in this narrative of David's rise to the throne.

Our Savior was a sinless man. We do not think nearly long or hard enough about how remarkable a thing that was, that he should have made his way from Bethlehem to Calvary without a single stumble. But it was the absolute prerequisite of his being our Redeemer, that he be a lamb without spot or blemish. It was David's righteousness in chapter 24, his refusal to take vengeance that led to his deliverance from Saul. After all, as soon as David showed himself Saul knew where his enemy could be found. He could have summoned his men and that would have been that. But, in the most amazing way, David's words sunk into Saul's befuddled mind and brought him to confess the righteousness of David's life and his claim upon the throne. God was rewarding David for his righteousness, a righteousness that seemed to David's men entirely above and beyond what was called for. Remember when the disciples of the Lord asked him to call down fire and judgment upon the Samaritan villages because they did not welcome the Lord and he rebuked his disciples (Luke 9:51-56)? It would be the Lord's righteousness by which he would triumph and accomplish all his father's will and be the most faithful messianic king. And especially his righteousness in the face of great temptations of the kind that reasonable men would have justified had he fallen short of the strictest demands of God's law. We are being given that lesson already here in 1 Samuel.

Text Comment

v.3 Because of the similarity between the clan name and the Hebrew word for dog, some scholars think his identification as a Calebite is a pejorative reference: i.e. "he was a real dog." Abigail, intelligent and beautiful, was a woman fit for a king.

v.8 The fact that he sent ten young men indicates that David was looking for a substantial gift of food. He had many mouths to feed. And he was counting on the festivity of the sheep-shearing time of year and the care he had shown to Nabal's shepherds to induce a large gift from Nabal. Sheep-shearing time was a time for giving gifts, Christmas, if you will.

v.10 With his mention of runaway servants Nabal clearly is taking Saul's side against David. That is his greater sin in all of this, the refusal to recognize who David is. That his wise wife, Abigail, knows precisely who David is - as we will see (v. 28) - shows us that Nabal's ignorance was inexcusable.

v.13 A wildly exaggerated response to Nabal's rebuff. Meanwhile, back at the farm...

v.17 We are seeing, of course, another Saul in Nabal. A fool who has lost all reason, whose servants find him contemptible and who is bringing disaster down upon his house. And the fundamental problem: a lack of faith, a failure to reckon with what God has said and done.

v.19 Like Jacob coming to meet Esau, she sent the substantial present on ahead.

v.21 David says the same thing about Nabal - that he paid back evil for good - that Saul said about himself in 24:17. There is clearly an effort to identify Nabal's behavior with Saul's by this narrator. He wants to tie the three episodes together in our mind.

v.22 We saw this interesting feature already in 20:16 where "enemies of David" served as a circumlocution for David himself. The Hebrew here literally reads "enemies of David" not David. "May God deal with the enemies of David..." which clearly is not what David means. It is possible this manner of speaking was chosen precisely because, as events unfold, David did not keep his oath.  "[M]ale" is literally, as in the KJV, one "who pisses against a wall." The phrase is rough and uncouth and occurs in the OT only in curses.

v.24 A wise woman! She asks for the blame to fall on her making it difficult for David to carry out his intention to kill every male in Nabal's household.

v.25 Saul will call himself a fool in 26:21. The name Nabal is the same as the word "fool" or "churl." It must have meant other things as well, for it is not likely that parents would name their baby boy "fool." David's avoidance of sin in executing vengeance, in avoiding "blood-guilt" is the key thought here. It reminds us, sadly, that David would not always avoid this. Commentators imagine that Abigail may have seen an opportunity for herself to escape a marriage to a boorish, unpleasant, and probably older man.

v.26 Abigail by this time either assumes or has some indication from David that he will desist from his plan.

v.29 The metaphors are not obvious and there are many suggestions as to the best translation, but you get the point. And there seems to be the indication that Abigail would have known of David's triumph with his sling.

v.31 What is clear, of course, is that an ordinary Israelite at some distance from court, could know that the Lord had anointed David to succeed Saul and recognize him as the one upon whom God's favor now rested.

v.32 As "the messenger" in 23:27 Abigail was God's instrument.

v.33 David himself acknowledges that the avoidance of bloodguilt is the great issue here.

v.36 "like that of a king": another link between Nabal and Saul.

v.39 Commentators sometimes say that this attitude on David's part, expressed in his praise to God for Nabal's judgment, would be unworthy of Christians in the new epoch. But, clearly, that is not the teaching of the Bible. 2 Timothy 4:14; Rev. 6:10. Abigail's combination of intelligence and beauty has captivated David.

v.43 As events would prove, humanly speaking, David would have been better off with only Abigail as his wife. In this entire scene, she really looks better than David does. Because of the hardness of heart, God permitted this, but it was not the ideal.

From this episode and the one before it in chapter 24, David learns that that if he, for righteousness sake, withholds his own vengeance, the Lord will act on his behalf. You will notice the direct connection the narrator makes between the event in chapter 25 and David's trust in the Lord's disposing of the matter in chapter 26. Compare 25:38 where we read that "the Lord struck Nabal and he died" with 26:10, where David says of Saul that "the Lord himself will strike him" and so David did not need to take matters into his own hands. This was a lesson David had to learn if he were to ascend Israel's throne without having incurred the Lord's displeasure. And he did learn it. The progression of these three scenes in chapters 24, 25, and 26 show David learning it.

And what a magnificent picture of our Lord's approach to his own life and work as our King and Savior this is! It is always interesting to me, when preaching from the NT and the OT at the same time - as I am now, the Gospel of John in the morning and the Book of Samuel in the evening of the Lord's Day - how often the texts that are before me on the same day dovetail in some way.

This morning we read of the attempt of the religious leadership to apprehend the Lord Jesus, for the umpteenth time, but now with a new finality, following upon the raising of Lazarus. We are reminded of how similar, in a certain way, David's life and Jesus' life were, as they prepared to be exalted to the throne. Each had to live under the shadow of the hatred of others and their open hostility, each had to go into hiding on a number of occasions, each had to forestall the plans of his enemies to kill him, and each had to do so without sin, without blood-guilt. Jesus, of course, did that more perfectly than David, but one cannot help but notice the striking similarity of situation. And, in each case, the Lord protected his son, his servant, intervening to prevent his enemies accomplishing their will.

But do you remember, as I far too often do not, that the Lord told us that this would be our fate as well. "If they hated me, they will hate you also." "A servant is not above his master." And then all those specific warnings he gave us about the hatred of the world, being hauled up before kings and courts, having to flee, and all the rest. And how much of this there is in the Bible. Think of Hebrews 11: 35-38:

"...they were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated - the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground."

And surely, no one can read the history of the church without being immediately impressed with what one writer calls "faith's grim heredity." We have lived through a long period in the West where the church's influence has been such that it has not cost us anything like what it cost many in former days or others in our own day in other places to be a Christian. But that day may be swiftly coming to an end.

And if and when it does, will we be found faithful to the Lord? Will we be righteous even in the face of the cruelty and persecution of others? Will we consider it our glory and privilege to suffer for the sake of the Name and our highest calling to endure mistreatment while all the time giving back blessing for cursing, and good for evil?

A young man in his daydreams imagines that he will be brave in battle and do his duty in the face of fearsome odds, that he will play the man and become the hero. That is good and right. Such dreams may indeed help a young man to prove himself faithful when the time of testing comes. But what of a Christian young man or woman. What will we do if we must endure persecution or suffering for the sake of our faith and our calling as Christians? Can we see clearly how we will remain steadfast and at the same time pray for the salvation of our enemies. "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Can we Christians believe that if we leave our cause to God he will vindicate his truth and those who believed it as he did here for David? Not always so swiftly, not always even in this life - think of the martyrs. But can we trust ourselves to this program, simply to be righteous, to take no vengeance on our enemies, and leave the issue to God, as David did and as our Savior did? Can we be sure that vindication will come some day and the enemies of God will not prosper in their warfare against the kingdom of God?

In the 18th century, a century of terrible persecution for the French Protestant church, Voltaire predicted that his generation would see the end of the Christian church. "Wipe out that infamous thing!" he cried. His home is now the office of the French Bible Society.

At one time Nikita Krushchev stated that he expected to be able to show the last Soviet Christian on television. The Soviet Union is no more and it may be harder to find a Marxist than a Christian in Russia.

The Australian Presbyterian church in the 1930s was shaken with the teachings of a minister by the name of Samuel Angus who denied the deity of Christ, his virgin birth, his atoning death and his resurrection from the dead. Angus died a few years later of cancer of the mouth.

No, the world rings with the vindication of the people of God. Paul once stood before the great Caesar's governor, Felix. But now we call our sons Paul, our dogs Caesar, and our cats Felix.

"Sire," said Theodore Beza to the King of France, "it belongs in truth to the church of God, in the name of which I speak, to receive blows and to give them, but it will please your Majesty to take notice that it is an anvil that has worn out many hammers."

I guarantee you that as the chasm widens between this world and the believing Christian church, as the hostility of the world toward the church deepens, as its antagonism toward the church come more and more into the open, there were be more and more occasions to ask whether we should do - in one way or another - what David proposed to do in the first place, exact vengeance of his own, or rather what David eventually was persuaded to do, to maintain his own righteousness and leave his vindication to God. These are not, my friends, simply stories from some by-gone era. They are the Word of God to be believed and obeyed. And we may soon be discovering that we have more cause to read them again and again and to take both our marching orders and our comfort from them.

I expect the Lord Jesus knew this history well. And more than once thought about what David did and why when he was so cruelly and unjustly put upon by his own enemies. I want to be like David here and like Christ Jesus. I want to be a man who puts his entire might into seeking first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and then cheerfully leaves the issue, leaves everything else to the Lord to order as he will. I know he will keep his promises to me.