David was introduced to Saul, the first king of Israel, as “a man that could play well upon the harp.” Saul was seeking such, an one. David was a musician, and much more. Indeed the description given of him by one of Saul's servants seems to have been almost prophetic, viewed in the light of his subsequent history. May we not say that the Spirit of God was prompting that servant to the utterance of thoughts beyond his own?
“But the Spirit of Jehovah departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from Jehovah troubled him. And Saul's servants said unto him, Behold now, an evil spirit from God troubleth thee. Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, a cunning player on the harp; and it shall come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well. And Saul said unto his servants, Provide me now a man that can play well, and bring him to me. Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty man of valor, and a man of war, and prudent in speech, and a comely person, and Jehovah is with him. Wherefore Saul sent messengers unto Jesse, and said, Send me David thy son, which is with the sheep. And Jesse took an ass laden with bread, and a bottle of wine, and a kid, and sent them by David his son unto Saul. And David came to Saul, and stood before him: and he loved him greatly; and he became his armor-bearer. And Saul sent to Jesse, saying, Let David, I pray thee, stand before me; for he hath found favor in my sight. And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took the harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him” (1 Samuel 16:14-23).
The desire of Saul, the rejected king, was not a godly one; he should have sought in his own conduct for the cause of his trouble. But in his own sad condition we have only too truly a prophetic picture of the nation in the last days of the kingdom. Judgment had already set in. Divided, disorganized, and ruined, they nevertheless turned a deaf ear to all God's solemn warnings by the prophets. Especially was this the case when, the first captivity having taken place, God continued to plead with His people by His servant Ezekiel. Would He not have been to them, as He said, “as a little sanctuary” amongst the heathen whose captives they were? But they refused to take it seriously, or to allow their consciences to be exercised by what God had to say to them.
“Also, thou son of man, the children of thy people still are talking against thee by the walls and in the doors of the houses, and speak one to another, every one to his brother, saying, Come, I pray you, and hear what is the word that cometh forth from Jehovah. And they come unto thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and they hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness. And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument; for they hear thy words, but they do them not. And when this cometh to pass (lo, it will come), then shall they know that a prophet hath been among them” (Ezekiel 33:30-33).
Judah in the days of Ezekiel, and Saul in the days of Samuel, were alike in this—they refused to own their sin before God and to bow to His righteous judgment. Had they done so, Saul, as well as Judah, would have been healed. God had other work for His servant David than playing upon the harp to relieve the king's malady, as later He had a serious and solemn message for the Judean captives by Ezekiel the prophet. The necessary preparation of David for the kingdom comes before us in 1 Samuel 17 Saul had had no such disciplinary exercises, and he showed himself to be morally unsuited for the position to which he had been exalted. David must be a prepared servant—a vessel sanctified, and meet for the Master's use. No doubt those who knew of the anointing of David to be king over Israel would regard the circumstance of the shepherd boy's introduction to the royal palace as most providential. For would it not in the most favorable manner accustom him to the responsibilities and surroundings of royalty? So the adoption of Moses by Pharaoh's daughter, with his subsequent education in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, might have been considered a providential preparation for the part he was to take in relation to Israel. But God's direct preparation of Moses was not carried on in Pharaoh's palace, but in the backside of the desert. So it is written of him, “By faith he forsook Egypt.”
And now, we see how God had similarly prepared David, whom He Himself had chosen for the kingdom-not in the palace of Saul, but in the wilderness, and the valley of Elah. It is not that preparation is unnecessary, but that the preparation must be divine if we are to have divine suitability. Though David's ministry and music might be used of God to the relief of Saul and (it may be) to his own profit also, yet it did not advance things at all. David leaves Saul's house and is forgotten by those whom he had benefited. He went back simply and naturally enough to keep his father's sheep. There had been a false start, and so there must needs be a beginning afresh. Not that blame attaches to David in this matter. But we are given to see the worthlessness of Saul's character, and the incompatibility of human cooperation with divine purpose. It was particularly important that from the very beginning David should owe nothing to the reigning monarch, for God had rejected Saul; and the two houses must be kept distinct and separate.
We find, then (chap. 17.), that God begins with David by calling him from the comparatively humble occupation of a tender of sheep into the very midst of Israel's difficulties that He might see how he regarded them and in what way they would affect him. “Now the Philistines gathered together their armies to battle, and were gathered together at Shochoh, which belongeth to Judah, and were pitched between Shochoh and Azekah, in Ephes-dammin. And Saul and the men of Israel were gathered together, and pitched in the valley of Elah, and set the battle in array against the Philistines. And the Philistines stood on the mountain on the one side, and Israel stood on the mountain on the other side; and there was a valley between them. And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. And he had a helmet of brass upon his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail; and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of brass. And he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass between his shoulders. And the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before him. And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me. If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants; but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us. And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together. When Saul and all Israel heard those words of the Philistine, they were dismayed, and greatly afraid” (1 Samuel 17:1-11).
The incompetence and helplessness of Saul is made manifest—personally and officially. As king, he should have been the one to take up the challenge of Goliath. Faith in God would have more than compensated for the physical inequality, of which he was painfully conscious; for faith is the only safe principle on which to act. The reasoning of nature is always at fault, but faith has a line of reasoning all its own (Romans 8:31-39), and David is the one to employ it here. Let us trace his way. In the first place, we have to discern and test the motives by which we are governed. Are they according to God, or for the gratification of self? Is my object Christ's glory or my own? In what way does David come upon the scene? Was it not in obedience to his father, and in love to his brethren? As far as we know, he was entirely in ignorance of the state of affairs as between Israel and the Philistines, except, of course, that there was war. Could we have more excellent natural motives than these? Filial obedience and brotherly love are surely calculated to comfort the heart and to strengthen for action. Yet it may be that even these excellencies may arouse jealousies and even unjust accusations against their possessor. A keen sense of injustice rendered me may prompt me to wash my hands of the particular business, and so, by relinquishment, fail in one's duty. Or, if vindicating oneself from a false charge, we need to guard against conduct in oneself that may be equally reprehensible, only in another form. May we not say that Paul himself—apostle as he was—on a memorable occasion, in his resentment of injustice, exposed himself to the just rebuke of a bystander, from which God would surely have preserved His servant had he been more watchful? How different the lowly Jesus, when He was reviled! But only One is perfect (John 18:22; Acts 23:3).
[G. S. B.]
(To be continued)