Deeper Commentary
1Sa 26:1 The Ziphites came to Saul to Gibeah saying, Isn’t David
hiding in the hill of Hachilah, which is before the desert?-
Saul had his spies everywhere, and David also had spies (:4). This complex
game of espionage and subterfuge was so far from the peaceful hills where he
had played his harp and drawn close to God as a youth. But those peaceful
days are used to prepare us for later, more complex tests of our faith.
The first time David spared Saul's life, the Ziphites again had
betrayed David to Saul, and in the same area. His men again wanted to kill
Saul, and again David restrains them with the same argument about the
Lord's anointed. David takes something belonging to Saul and then calls
out to him from a safe distance, and both times Saul enquires "Is this
your voice, my son David?" (:17 = 1 Sam. 24:16). These similarities point up the way that God repeats
situations to test our responses. I've suggested earlier that David's
apparent stellar grace to Saul was in fact nuanced by his transferal of
his anger onto Nabal. In that incident, God restrains David from slaying
Nabal, by grace. And now David has the opportunity to demonstrate that
he's learnt the lessons.
1Sa 26:2 Then Saul went down to the wilderness of Ziph, having three
thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to seek David in the wilderness of
Ziph-
1Sa 26:3 Saul encamped by the road on the hill of Hachilah, which is
before the desert, but David stayed in the wilderness. When he saw that
Saul had come after him into the wilderness-
A group of 3000 men on the move (:2) would have created a fair dust
cloud. But it seems that David "saw" this in that he heard it, and need to
confirm Saul's presence there (:4).
1Sa 26:4 David sent out spies and found that Saul had certainly come to
that place-
The sending out of spies is associated with taking the land of
Canaan; it seems from :5 that David was buoyed up by his marriage to
Abigail and the encouragement taken from the Divine judgment upon Nabal.
Although he will go "down" again by 1 Sam. 27:1, he seems here very
proactive and not on the back foot against Saul.
1Sa 26:5 David set out and came to the place where Saul had encamped. He
saw the place where Saul and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his army
were lying; Saul lay among the wagons and the people were encamped around
him-
As noted on :5, David is not so much on the run from Saul, but
seeking him out. After the assurance received in 1 Sam. 25 that God would
avenge him against Saul, and with Abigail so strongly encouraging him in
this regard, it could be argued [although see later] that David now sets out to demonstrate to Saul that he is not
going to avenge himself. I therefore suggest that he intentionally went
into Saul's camp to take away Saul's private property but not slay him. We
can sense the encouragement of his Godly wife Abigail in this mission. For
a large burden of her message to him in 1 Sam. 25 was that he would not be
slain by Saul, and if he followed the path of not avenging himself, he
would surely become king.
1Sa 26:6 Then David said to Ahimelech the Hittite and to Abishai the son
of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp?
Abishai said, I will go down with you-
As explained on :5, David can be read [but see later] as
proactively seeking to get close to Saul
but not slay him, so fired up is he with the idea of not avenging himself
and inviting God to act against Saul by his own lack of vengeance. But he
still seemed to want some company in this bold mission. It seems Ahimelech
turned down the invitation and only David and Abishai went (:7).
The situation here differs from that in 1 Sam. 24 when David previously spared Saul's life. Here, he intentionally goes out to find Saul. David states in :15 "Someone came to destroy the king". The Hebrew, echad, means one specific person. Who was that person- Abishai, or David? Surely David. For it was he who proposed 'going down to Saul' and invited another warrior to accompany him. My suggestion is that David went down to Saul with the intention of killing / destroying him. He didn't come to just teach Saul another lesson by stealing his spear. He came to destroy him. "Go down" can allude to physical descent into the valley, but the idiom is of attacking. The same word is in :10, "descend into battle". "There came a man to destroy the king" (:15) uses the same word as in :7 when David and Abishai "come" to Saul.
So to summarize. David restrained himself from killing Saul in 1 Sam. 24. But he then takes offence at the drunken words of Nabal about him in 1 Sam. 25, and sets off to murder Nabal, his wife, kids and animals. His apparent restraint from killing Saul now appears not so stellar, because he had only transferred that desire to murder onto his anger with Nabal. But he is restrained from doing that by God's grace through Abigail. He again appears to have earned a "well done" by listening to Abigail. But again, this is nuanced. Because he then sets off to murder Saul. And pulls out of it at the very last minute. His sneaking through the guards and 3000 soldiers encamped around Saul would have been foolhardy without God's help. God empowered him to do this, by making the soldiers fall into a deep sleep. He and Abishai come to Saul and find Saul's spear stuck in the ground by Saul's pillow [AV "bolster"]. This was an obvious psychological invitation to simply take the spear and strike Saul's head with it, killing him in one blow. We recall that earlier David had taken Goliath's weapons and struck his head off with them. All with God's strength and empowerment. We conclude that God was showing David that indeed he could slay Saul. David was confirmed in his death wish concerning Saul. But he chose a higher path. And to his huge credit, David pulls out of it at the very last moment, and also avoids the temptation to take up Abishai's offer of doing the job rather than David's own hands. Although again this act of self control and bringing himself under restraint is nuanced- because he seems to transfer his death wish against Saul onto Abner (see on :16). And so oftentimes it is with man. Our finest moments and deeds and words are often in fact nuanced by a lack of totality in their devotion. Indeed all our righteousness is as filthy rags. Although the conscience can be cleansed, in the Lord Jesus. And we marvel that for all this, David was beloved by God and seen by Him as a man after His own heart.
1Sa 26:7 So David and Abishai came to the army by night and Saul lay
sleeping among the wagons, with his spear stuck in the ground at his head,
and Abner and the soldiers lay around him-
The cameraman of Divine inspiration is zoomed in close up, so that we
can envisage the situation. AV has "within the trench". The idea
is that the wagons were arranged in a circle around Saul, giving him
maximum human protection, and probably reflecting his paranoia of being
slain.
1Sa 26:8 Then Abishai said to David, God has delivered your enemy into
your hand today. Now therefore please let me strike him to the ground with
one stroke of my spear; I will not strike him a second time-
This whispered conversation was absolutely contrary to the entire
spirit of David's mission in visiting Saul (see on :5).
David could have
reasoned that his hand would not be upon Saul if Abishai slew him. But he
realized that we are not to get around God's word. Indeed God had
delivered Saul into David's hand, but that didn't mean that David had to
kill him. GNB suggests Abishai wanted to slay Saul with his own weapon
just as David had done to Goliath: "Now let me plunge his own spear
through him and pin him to the ground with just one blow". This kind of
out of context allusion to Biblical history was used by Saul too, and is a
warning to us.
As David had been restrained from murdering Nabal by Abigail, so now David restrains Abishai. We are to do for others spiritually what God, by grace, has done to us.
1Sa 26:9 David said to Abishai, Don’t destroy him, for who can put forth
his hand against Yahweh’s anointed and be guiltless?-
We are all anointed in that we are in Christ, the anointed (2 Cor. 1:21). The same radical respect which David showed, we should show to each other. David’s attitude seems to have influenced Saul’s men, for his armour bearer refused to slay Saul (1 Chron. 10:4,5). But David's attitude towards Saul was actually an encouragement to himself. For he too was Yahweh's anointed, and no hand could be lifted against him unless Yahweh allowed it. The same phrase "lift up the hand against" in the context of murder is used of how Saul's guards refused to kill the priests of Nob (1 Sam. 22:17). For they too were anointed as priests. Yahweh's anointed referred to His priests as well as His kings.
1Sa 26:10 David said, As Yahweh lives, Yahweh will strike him, or his day
will come to die, or he will go into battle and perish-
This indeed happened. It was the fulfillment of
1 Sam. 12:25: "But if you still do wickedly you will be consumed, both you and
your king". "Perish" is s.w. "consumed"; David seems aware of Samuel's
words and is alluding to them. In the face of so much Divine activity to
save them, they would be destroyed if they continued to work against God's
efforts to save them. And indeed Saul and Israel were "consumed" in the
massacre by the Philistines. It was because despite all God's efforts with
them, they had continued to "do wickedly".
1Sa 26:11 Yahweh forbid that I should put forth my hand against Yahweh’s
anointed; but now please get the spear that is at his head and the jar of
water, and let us go-
Yahweh had indeed restrained David from killing Nabal and his family in 1
Sam. 25, and now David was reflecting that by restraining Abishai from
doing so, and asking Yahweh to continue to forbid or restrain him from
murdering Saul.
David was tested by God in the matter of sparing the life of his enemy Saul- and he came through the test with flying colours (1 Sam. 26). But just before that, he had been tested again in the same area in the matter of Nabal- and he initially failed, intent as he was to take the life of his enemy Nabal (1 Sam. 25). Thus a circumstance can repeat over a matter in which we were previously unsuccessful.
1Sa 26:12 So David took the spear and the jar of water from Saul’s head
and they went away; and no-one saw it or knew about it, neither did anyone
awake, for they were all asleep because a deep sleep from Yahweh had
fallen on them-
It seems God would have given Saul into David’s hand when “a deep
sleep from the Lord” fell upon Saul at the very time David intended to
kill him. Saul himself realized that the Lord had delivered
him into David’s hand to kill him (1 Sam. 24:18). God thus confirmed David
in his intentions- and yet at the last minute, it seems, David chose an
even higher level; of love and deep respect for this spiritually sick man.
The deep sleep from Yahweh recalls that sent upon Adam. Perhaps this was
confirming David's plan of his own volition to try to bring Saul to
repentance; for the hope was that he would awake to new life created from
him.
The cruse or jar of water may have been the jug into which Saul
urinated, in obedience to Mosaic commands to keep military encampments
ritually pure. For water was typically carried in skins not in an open jar
/ cruse. The same word is used of the widow's cruse of oil. And the Hebrew
for "water" also refers to urine, translated elsewhere "piss" in the AV.
Perhaps this was to bring Saul's mind back to how David had earlier chosen
not to slay him in the cave whilst Saul was going to the toilet. David
took away the spear, the symbol of Saul's kingship, and took it to
himself. He invites Saul to send a man to get it back. But surely Saul
ought to have responded "No, keep it. I'm not worthy to be king, I've been
rejected from the kingship, you're to be the next king, you keep it". But
he doesn't. We perceive that David, in love for Saul, was seeking to give
him opportunities to repent. And this is how we should act to even our
worst enemies.
1Sa 26:13 Then David went over to the other side and stood on the top of
the hill far off, a great space being between them-
All this was carefully planned. Saul was at the foot of "the hill of
Hachilah" (:3), and this presumably was where David stood.
1Sa 26:14 and David called to the army and to Abner the son of Ner, Don’t
you answer, Abner? Then Abner answered, Who are you who calls to the king?-
Abner, father of Ner, had a son and a father also called Ner, meaning
"light" or "lamp". But darkness had been sent upon him. We get the
impression that David was particularly hostile to Abner. Ner was Saul's
uncle (1 Sam. 14:50). Abner had been captain of the army at the time of
David's victory over Goliath (1 Sam. 17:55); perhaps he was the logical
one to have fought Goliath, but he lacked David's faith. He therefore had
a particular jealousy complex against David.
1Sa 26:15 David said to Abner, Aren’t you a man? Who is like you in
Israel? Why then have you not kept watch over your lord, the king? Someone
came to destroy the king your lord-
The criticism of Abner seems rather extreme seeing God had made Abner
fall asleep; see on :16. But perhaps Abner was guilty because the falling
asleep was in confirmation of his own attitude. "Someone",
echad, is specifically one
person; see on :6.
1Sa 26:16 What you have done is not good. As Yahweh lives, you are worthy
to die because you have not kept watch over your lord, Yahweh’s anointed.
Where are the king’s spear and the jar of water that was at his head?-
"You are worthy to die" means "You will surely die"; the same phrase in 1 Sam. 30:31; 2 Sam. 12:5. This is a death threat to Abner. We enquire why David maxes out on Abner- who after all had been given a deep sleep by Yahweh so that he was unable to protect Saul. I suggest again that David is transferring his desire to kill Saul onto Abner, just as he had transferred it on to Nabal earlier. It seems David learnt only a little from each of the incidents in the previous chapters, and was still transferring his anger with Saul onto others- rather than forgiving Saul from the heart and meaning what he meant when he spoke of not touching Yahweh's anointed. Abner later goes over to David's side, and when he is tragically stabbed to death by one of David's own men [Joab], David gives a eulogy in which he presents Abner as truly having top bloke status with him. Abner therefore presents as not a bad man in the end. But here, David is seething with anger against him; we feel that anger seething through these recorded words. But it was illegitimate anger, anger wrongly placed- because David had simply transferred his anger with Saul onto Abner.
David has a clear belief that the man anointed by God is not to be slain. But he himself was God's anointed king. His respect of Saul's anointing was therefore the guarantee that he himself would not be slain, as God's anointed. We could wonder whether David's extreme emphasis upon not killing or harming Yahweh' anointed was because he hoped that this would be a guarantee that he too, as Yahweh's anointed, would not be harmed or slain. We are left to ponder such motives in Biblical characters, because we must likewise ponder our own motives. In 1 Sam. 26, David mocks Abner for not guarding Saul, Yahweh's anointed, and proclaims him worthy of death; but Abner had been struck by a deep sleep from Yahweh so he was innocent really of this. Likewise when the Amalekite comes to David with the news that he had slain Saul in his death throes, David has the man killed because he had killed Yahweh's anointed. This appears extreme. David certainly had no value for human life by behaving like this. So... we ponder whether his extreme position about "Yahweh's anointed" was purely motivated. As suggested above, he may possibly have been thinking that if he displayed respect for Yahweh's anointed, then Yahweh would not allow him to be slain- as he too was Yahweh's anointed. And possibly he was seeking to inculcate in Israel a respect for Yahweh's anointed, in order to safeguard himself [as also Yahweh's anointed] from ever being murdered by his own people.
Often David calls Saul his master, describing himself as Saul's servant (1 Sam. 17:32,34,36; 20:8; 24:6; 26:16,19; 29:3,4; 30:15). This was no formal "Sincerely your brother and fellow-servant". This was a real conscious putting of himself down, as the Lord Jesus felt he was a worm rather than a man (Ps. 22:6). If only we would concentrate upon our own status and show some true respect for others on account of their being in the ecclesia, having even been anointed spiritually at their baptism (2 Cor. 1:21) as Saul was.
David says that the servants of Saul are “worthy to die” because they fell asleep as a result of “a deep sleep from the Lord” which fell on them, and therefore didn’t protect Saul (1 Sam. 26:12,16). Were they really that guilty of death for this? There doesn’t appear to be any Biblical command David was quoting. We get the impression this was another example of his wrong attitude to the shedding of blood (1 Chron. 22:8).
1Sa 26:17 Saul knew David’s voice and said, Is that your voice, my son
David? David said, It is my voice, my lord, O king-
This was precisely the situation in the previous such incident in 1 Sam.
24:16. The lesson was being repeated. We wonder why Saul queries whether
this is really David's voice. Perhaps there was a considerable distance
between them; or David's voice was strained by emotion; or Saul so wished
this was all a dream and this hadn't really happened. Again, each of these
options has absolute credibility and reflects that this record is true and
accurate as to what really happened and was said. It is no cunningly
devised fable.
1Sa 26:18 Why does my lord pursue his servant? What have I done? What evil
am I guilty of?-
The "why" was a deep rhetorical question, and was still aimed at
eliciting repentance in Saul; as was this whole escapade to steal Saul's
spear. We marvel at the unceasing desire of God through David for Saul's
repentance, even at very late stages. In the type of the Lord Jesus, this
looks forward to the Lord's question "Which of you convicts Me of sin?"
(Jn. 8:46).
1Sa 26:19 Now therefore, please let my lord the king hear the words of his
servant. If Yahweh has stirred you up against me, let Him accept an
offering-
David simplistically speaks as if "an offering" can resolve any issue
with God; he was to mature through the Bathsheba crisis to understand that
God wants broken hearts rather than an offering (Ps. 51:18,19). "Stirred
up" is the word used for 'entice', 'persuade' etc., and is used of God
stirring up or psychologically stimulating David to number Israel (2 Sam.
24:1). This is how His Spirit works. And we know that His evil Spirit
worked upon Saul. But David knows this is not an irresistible influence
from God upon those He just decides to destroy; through repentance and
sacrifice, things would be different. Hence GNB: "If it is the LORD who
has turned you against me, an offering to him will make him change his
mind".
But if it is men who have done it-
We get the impression from the record that it was Saul who was
creating this false accusation, as part of his paranoid mindset that had
jumped from one conspiracy theory to another. It was Saul who was
influencing men to think like that. But David had clearly chosen his words
carefully for this brief speech. He seeks to give Saul the benefit of the
doubt, as grace does (see on 1 Sam. 24:8), and to make it as easy as
possible for Saul to repent. He sets us a stellar example for behaviour in
interpersonal conflict.
May they be cursed by Yahweh,
for they have driven me out so that I can’t have a part in Yahweh’s
inheritance; they have said ‘Go and serve other gods!’-
This remains an abiding lesson; for this is the result of driving people
away from the visible sanctuaries and meetings of God's people.
David seems to have held the idea that Yahweh could only be worshipped in
the land of Israel- hence he blames Saul for driving him out of the land and
thus making acceptable worship impossible for him. This was
the same misunderstanding as held by the exiles in Babylon and also Jonah;
and yet for all that misunderstanding, David was still a man after God's own
heart.
David's men represent the followers of the Lord Jesus (cp. Heb. 13:13). David's motley crew were idolaters and bitter men, "them that are set on fire... whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword" (Ps. 57:4). So rough were they that David says that having to live with them almost destroyed him spiritually. This typology would explain why the body of Christ seems [at times] full of mixed up men and women with hard words and a tendency to idolatry- who eventually will be the rulers in Messiah's Kingdom, after the pattern of David's men.
This is another example of thoughts and attitudes being understood as effectively spoken words. David argues that being driven out of Israel led to worshipping idols, and yet he had taken his parents to Moab. Perhaps they had turned away from Yahweh as a result.
David's reasoning is that if he has sinned and Saul is judging
him for it, then the matter could be resolved by Saul saying what the sin
was, and then all David needed to do was to offer a sacrifice and the
matter should end. David reveals a very shallow transactional view of
atonement for sin. Just offer a sacrifice and all must be good. And there
should be no further consequence nor judgement. Although his sin with
Bathsheba wasn't God's will, God used it to educate David in these areas.
He learned that sin may be forgiven but still has consequences. And he
learnt God's grace, in that he was brought to realize that there was no
sacrifice that could deal with his sin.
This second option was clearly that which David liked to assume was the
case, as he insists the first option couldn't be true, in that he has no
unforgiven sin that Saul may judge him for. David's position here is like
he had when he spared Saul's life before. He says that Saul is just
believing slander about him. But he is in this case whitewashing Saul's
persecution of him. Saul was not a victim of misinformation. He had been
informed by God through Samuel that he was not to be king, and was to be
replaced by David. Saul cannot be justified on the basis that he was
merely misinformed about David. Likewise at Saul's death, David appears to
whitewash him and his behaviour. I suggest David was doing something often
observed. The abused whitewash their abuser but then transfer their
feelings onto another person, who is often a minor player in the scene.
And so David transfers his anger onto Abner. We don't need to read
psychology but rather just slowly and carefully read these Bible accounts,
as they reveal human psychology to us. And in this case, total forgiveness
would have removed the anger and broken the circles.
1Sa 26:20 Now therefore, don’t let my blood fall to the earth far from the
presence of Yahweh-
See on 1 Sam. 27:1. GNB "Don't let me be killed on foreign soil, away from the LORD".
David seems to be saying that Saul's persecution was driving him out of
the land of Israel to Gentile lands such as Achish in Gath where he had a
strong chance of death. But he was wavering in believing the promise that
he would indeed become king, a promise so firmly believed in by those
close to him like Jonathan and Abigail. He also, like the exiles, seems to
mistakenly think that Yahweh's presence is only in the land of Israel.
For the king of Israel has come out to seek a flea, as
when one hunts a partridge in the mountains-
Saul "sought" David, implying a great level of mental effort (1 Sam.
19:10; 23:14,15,25; 24:2; 25:26,29; 26:2,20; 27:1,4; 2 Sam. 4:8). In the
type of Christ, the Jews sought to kill the Lord (Mt. 21:46; Mk. 11:18;
12:12; 14:1,11,55; Lk. 19:47; 20:19; 22:2,6; Jn.5:16,18; 7:1,11,25,30;
8:37,40; 10:39; 11:8,56; 18:4,7,8). This reflects the broken down
psychological state of David. He felt himself as good as dead, powerless,
tiny and insignificant as a flea. He had a low self image.
Partridges can easily be caught as they tend to gather in groups [coveys] in fields. It was a disproportionate expenditure of effort to go hunting just one of them in mountains. Partridges were hunted by repeatedly making them rise up in flight until they were too exhausted to mount up again- and then they could be captured and killed. This is how David felt, and it leads to his collapse of faith in 1 Sam. 27:1, where he concludes that Saul is going to capture and kill him. The outlaw life had finally exhausted him in every way.
1Sa 26:21 Then Saul said, I have sinned-
The very words of Judas (Mt.27:4). Again, we see clearly David as a
type of Christ.
David alludes to Saul's words in Ps. 49:8 "life is costly", s.w. "My soul was precious". David is alluding to this; Saul's human life had been precious or costly to him, but he was unable to redeem Saul eternally. Only God could do that, if Saul by faith accepted God's grace. The death and life of Saul had been precious in David's eyes, and so David's life was precious in Yahweh's eyes (s.w. Ps. 116:15). Again we are taught that God's attitude to our salvation and our life is directly related to our attitude to the life and salvation of others; and this is why we are to perceive the value, the preciousness, of human life and salvation. It is why making others stumble from the path to eternal life is so serious to God.
I have played the fool, and have erred very seriously-
Saul "erred" or 'wandered' out of the way; this is s.w. Ps. 119:10 "let me now wander". David seems to have initially written Ps. 119 in his wilderness years; he is asking to be stopped from going the path of Saul. We recall that Samuel had rebuked Saul as a "fool" when Saul is first told that the kingship had been removed from him and would be given to David (1 Sam. 13:13). Saul understood very clearly what was happening. His personal spiritual salvation was still possible if he had just accepted that he could not be king. But his last words, in his death throes, reflected a concern that he would be dishonoured by the Philistines. Appearance became all important to him, once he had tasted power and kingship.
1Sa 26:22 David answered, Here is the spear, O king! Let one of the young
men come over and get it-
David clearly distrusts Saul and will not even walk over to him to
return his spear. He had earlier refused that spear at the time of the
Goliath battle, and he does so again now. Forgiveness and grace must be
shown even to the likes of Saul, but this is not the same thing as
trusting the person again; at least not until they have acted in such a
way as to rebuild trust.
"With his spear in his hand" is the image we are repeatedly given of Saul in the records. It was the symbol of his kingship, and he was desperately gripping hold of it rather than giving it up as he should have done. Whether at home, sitting under a tree (1 Sam. 22:6)... he is pictured as madly gripping on to it. He even sleeps with the spear in the ground next to him (1 Sam. 26:7). In this lies the significance of David taking the spear from Saul but then returning it to him. What should Saul's response have been? To tell David to keep the spear and be king, whilst he retired and walked quietly with his God (1 Sam. 26:21,22). And it was that gripping on to power that was his death. If the Amalekite is to be believed, he said that Saul at his last end "was leaning on his spear" (2 Sam. 1:6), presumably before falling upon his own sword in suicide (1 Sam. 31:4). David by contrast had learnt from his victory over Goliath "that Yahweh can give victory without sword or spear” (1 Sam. 17:47).
1Sa 26:23 Yahweh will reward every man for his righteousness and his
faithfulness, because Yahweh delivered you into my hand today and I
wouldn’t put forth my hand against Yahweh’s anointed-
This sounds rather self righteous and legalistic,
as if David is
saying that he has consciously gone up to Saul that night and refused to
take his life, in order to get a reward for his righteousness. He comes
over as self congratulatory in the extreme. We can also muse as to whether
"Yahweh delivered you into my hand" suggests David was given the option of
killing Saul; but he chose a higher level.
David's logic here seems to be saying that he only spared Saul so he would be spared, and that nuances his apparent grace to him. To have in the hand means to have power over. And throughout 1 Samuel, when Yahweh delivered enemies into the hand of His people, it meant that the enemies were to be slain (1 Sam. 14:10,12,37; 17:46,27; 23:4,14; 24:10; 28:19; 30:23). David had Saul in his hand. Possibly God gave him the chance to kill Saul. David could have legitimately killed him. The soldiers were made to sleep by God, and Saul's spear [which he had earlier thrown at David] was there right by Saul's head. And Abishai was offering to do the job. David's refusal to kill Saul was therefore highly commendable. David went out to kill him, he could have killed him, God set up the opportunity to do so, but at the last moment David chose a higher path.
1Sa 26:24 As your life was respected this day in my eyes, so let my life
be respected in the eyes of Yahweh and let Him deliver me out of all
oppression-
David was soon disbelieving this logic in 27:1. Heb. "save me from all distress". David later reflects in Ps.
34:6 that he, the poor lowly man, has indeed been saved from all his
distress. But Ps. 34 is titled as having been written after David escaped
from Gath the first time, in 1 Sam. 21. It seems David rewrote his Psalms,
tweaking them as new experiences occurred which confirmed his earlier
deliverances. And so he now makes this edit to Ps. 34 after his
deliverance from Saul and his realization that his prayer of 1 Sam. 26:24
"Save me from all distress" had been answered.
As suggested on :23, David appears to have consciously pulled off this feat of sneaking up on Saul as he slept in order that his life should be respected and valued. This could reflect a very low self image and a craving for respect and being valued; his self image seems very low to describe himself as a flea (:20).
1Sa 26:25 Then Saul said to David, May you be blessed, my son David. You
will do great things and will surely triumph. So David went on his way,
and Saul returned home-
Previous Chapter
