1 Samuel 21:5 Komentar

David has now quite taken leave both of Saul's court and of his camp, has bidden farewell to his alter idem - his other self, the beloved Jonathan; and henceforward to the end of this book he is looked upon and treated as an outlaw and proclaimed a traitor. We still find him shifting from place to place for his own safety, and Saul pursuing him. His troubles are very particularly related in this and the following chapters, not only to be a key to the Psalms, but that he might be, as other prophets, an example to the saints in all ages, "of suffering affliction, and of patience," and especially that he might be a type of Christ, who, being anointed to the kingdom, humbled himself, and was therefore highly exalted. But the example of the suffering Jesus was a copy without a blot, that of David was not so; witness the records of this chapter, where we find David in his flight, I. Imposing upon Abimelech the priest, to get from him both victuals and arms (Sa1 21:1-9). II. Imposing upon Achish, king of Gath, by feigning himself mad (Sa1 21:10-15). Justly are troubles called temptations, for many are by them drawn into sin.

INTRODUCTION TO FIRST SAMUEL 21 This chapter relates that David went to Nob, and pretending he was on secret business for the king, got shewbread, and the sword of Goliath, from Ahimelech the priest, Sa1 21:1; and that passing from thence to Gath, where he was known, through fear feigned himself mad, and so escaped from thence, Sa1 21:10.

And David answered the priest, and said unto him,.... In reply to the case of the young men his servants, and of himself too, who also was intended by the priest, though out of reverence to him not mentioned: of a truth women have been kept from us these three days since I came out; reckoning either from the time he fled from Saul at Naioth, or from the time he left Jonathan, during which time both he and his men could have no converse with women, and receive no pollution by them; and this was the time which according to the law was required for the sanctifying of persons in this way, Exo 19:15, and the vessels of the young men are holy; their garments, as Kimchi, not being defiled with any ceremonial uncleanness, as by the touch of any unclean person: or what instruments soever they were provided with for their journey; or rather their bodies; see Co2 4:7; and with respect to the priest's saying that the bread he had was hallowed or sacred, and so not for common use, David replies: and the bread is in a manner common; inasmuch as it was taken off of the shewbread table, and was now common to the priest and his family, though not to others, yet in case of necessity through hunger might be allowed to strangers: yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel; even though it had been set but that day on the shewbread table, and so became holy to the Lord; and yet even in such a case and circumstances as David and his men were in, it might be taken from thence and eaten of; for, as Abendana observes, nothing stands in the way of preservation of life, but idolatry, adultery, and murder; everything else may be done for the sake of that but them: or as in the margin of our Bibles, "especially when there is this day other sanctified bread"; that is, since other bread is this day put upon the shewbread table, in the room of that which has been taken away, whereby it is become holy to the, Lord; then that which is removed may be eaten, and be allowed to us in our circumstances. It seems by this that this was the sabbath day; for on that day the removal of the shewbread loaves was made, Lev 24:8; and R. Isaiah says, that it was at the going out of the sabbath that David came there; and which still makes it a more appropriate case, as produced by our Lord to justify his disciples in plucking ears of corn on the sabbath day, Mat 12:1.

When the disciples had been hungry on the sabbath and had plucked some ears [of grain] and rubbed them in their hands, they violated the holy day by so preparing their food. Yet Christ excuses them and even became their accomplice in breaking the sabbath. … For from the Creator’s Scripture and from the purpose of Christ there is derived a vivid precedent from David’s example when he went into the temple on the sabbath and provided food by boldly breaking up the show bread. Even he remembered that this privilege (the dispensation from fasting) was allowed on the sabbath from the very beginning, from when the sabbath itself was instituted. For although the Creator had forbidden that the manna should be gathered for two days, he permitted it on only one occasion—the day before the sabbath—so that the previous day’s provision of food might free them from fasting on the following sabbath. Therefore the Lord had good reason for pursuing the same principle in the “annulling” of the sabbath (since that is the word which people will use). He had good reason, too, for expressing the Creator’s will, when he bestowed the privilege of not fasting on the sabbath. In short, might he have—right then and there—put an end not only to the sabbath but to the Creator himself if he had commanded his disciples to fast on the sabbath, as this would have been contrary to the intention of the Scripture and of the Creator’s will. But is he alien from the Creator because he did not directly defend his disciples but excuses them? Or because he interposes human need, as if deprecating censure? Or because he maintains the honor of the sabbath as a day which is to be free from gloom rather than from work? Or because he puts David and his companions on a level with his own disciples in their fault and their validation? Or because he is pleased to endorse the Creator’s indulgence? Or because he is himself good according to his example—is he therefore alien from the Creator?

Even if they accuse, yet Christ excuses, and he makes the souls that he wishes, that follow him, similar to David, who ate the loaves of proposition outside of the law—for even then he foresaw in his mind the prophetic mysteries of a new grace.

And David answered the priest, and said to him: Indeed, if it concerns women, etc. He answered those sending forth the apostles to teach the nations: What God has purified, do not call common (Acts X). For the Church restrained itself with my present help from idolatry and other crimes, from the time when it emerged through confession from the hiding place of ancient blindness, until it came to the light of knowing the holy Trinity, which is God; and the hearts of the humble were holy through the renunciation of Satan. Moreover, this manner of life, which is lived among the nations, is polluted, not yet purified, sanctified, and justified by those being catechized through the fountain of regeneration and the grace of the Spirit; but the very light of present reconciliation will sanctify it in those who receive baptism with a devout heart. It should truly be noted, according to the letter, how cautiously and wisely David either questioned the priest, or responded to the priest about his own and his followers' purity. For he not only inquired if the boys could receive the holy bread if they were clean from women, but also examined if they were clean from all pollution, which typically happens to mortals, especially concerning the contamination of womanly coupling, as if investigating matters greater than others. For indeed, this is the greatest of those things which, though they do not make people guilty by fault, yet deter them from the touch of the saints through the impurity of any kind, for example, the touch of a dead body, or of a reptile. But David, not without discernment, examining himself and his followers, asserts that they abstained from the embrace of a wife, carefully explaining the duration of the same abstinence. He testifies that all the utensils of the boys are holy, that is, their weapons, clothes, and even the small vessels they carried for likely provisions were clean from the contamination of any filth. And because he knew that what was consecrated to divine ministries was not to be transferred to common use without great discernment, so that he would hide nothing of his state from the priest who was a steward of these things, he says only that the road by which they had come was polluted, evidently with some funerary object lying on it, or by being unclean itself. But he also says that today it will be sanctified in the vessels; that is, I do not believe that we could be defiled by the fact that we traveled a path containing something unclean, since we carefully preserved all our utensils and bodies from the touch of the same contamination.

David comes to Ahimelech at Nob, receives provisions from him, and the sword of Goliath; and is noticed by Doeg, one of the servants of Saul, Sa1 21:1-9. He leaves Nob, and goes to Achish, king of Gath, Sa1 21:10. But on being recognised as the vanquisher of Goliath by the servants of Achish, he feigns himself deranged, and Achish sends him away, Sa1 21:11-15.

DAVID, AT NOB, OBTAINS OF AHIMELECH HALLOWED BREAD. (Sa1 21:1-7) Then came David to Nob to Ahimelech--Nob, a city of the priests (Sa1 22:19), was in the neighborhood of Jerusalem, on the Mount of Olives--a little north of the top, and on the northeast of the city. It is computed to have been about five miles distant from Gibeah. Ahimelech, the same as Ahiah, or perhaps his brother, both being sons of Ahitub (compare Sa1 14:3, with Sa1 22:4-11, Sa1 22:20). His object in fleeing to this place was partly for the supply of his necessities, and partly for comfort and counsel, in the prospect of leaving the kingdom. Ahimelech was afraid at the meeting of David--suspecting some extraordinary occurrence by his appearing so suddenly, and in such a style, for his attendants were left at a little distance.

these three days--as required by law (Exo 19:15). David and his attendants seem to have been lurking in some of the adjoining caves, to elude pursuit, and to have been, consequently, reduced to great extremities of hunger. the bread is in a manner common--that is, now that it is no longer standing on the Lord's table. It is eaten by the priests, and may also, in our circumstances, be eaten by us. yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel--that is, though the hallowed bread had been but newly placed on the vessel, the ritual ordinance would have to yield to the great law of necessity and mercy (see on Mat 12:3; also see Mar 2:25; Luk 6:3).

David's Flight to Nob, and Thence to Gath - Sa1 21:1-15 After the information which David had received from Jonathan, nothing remained for him in order to save his life but immediate flight. He could not return to the prophets at Ramah, where he had been miraculously preserved from the first outbreak of Saul's wrath, because they could not ensure him permanent protection against the death with which he was threatened. He therefore fled first of all to Nob, to Ahimelech the high priest, to inquire the will of God through him concerning his future course (Sa1 22:10, Sa1 22:15), and induced him to give him bread and the sword of Goliath, also, under the pretext of having to perform a secret commission from the king with the greatest speed; for which Saul afterwards took fearful vengeance upon the priests at Nob when he was made acquainted with the affair through the treachery of Doeg (Sa1 21:1-9). David then fled to Gath to the Philistian king Achish; but here he was quickly recognised as the conqueror of Goliath, and obliged to feign insanity in order to save his life, and then to flee still farther (Sa1 21:10-15). The state of his mind at this time he poured out before God in the words of Psa 56:1-13; Psa 52:1-9, and 34.