Chapter I: Part 1

THE LIFE OF DAVID

OR, THE HISTORY OF THE MAN AFTER GOD'S OWN HEART

Omnia probate, benum tenete.--S. P.

Reprinted From The Edition Op 1766.

London:

Printed And Published By J. Carlile, 55, Fleet-Street.

To the REV. SAM. CHANDLER,

D.D. F.R. and A. SS.

To whom, Sir, could the republication of this little history with more propriety be addressed, than to a gentleman to whom it is under such considerable obligations? When it first appeared, it was honoured with your notice in an especial manner; and is not a little benefited by your _labours_. You, Sir, with a _careful_ hand noted its errors; and what has stood the test of your strictures is certainly established with additional authority. Whatever might be the motives which influenced _so vigorous_ an exertion of your _learned_ and _critical_ powers--powers so universally acknowledged and respected, the author of this piece will not now inquire: it is sufficient to him, that they operated to the extending the knowledge of his tract, among that class of readers who stood most in need of the information it furnished; and he is persuaded you will with pleasure hear his assurances, that the work owes no small share of what approbation it may have gained, to your _elaborate review_ of it. Several worthy pious persons having candidly declared in private conversation, (and unknowingly to the author himself) that the perusal of your book really strengthened the facts advanced in the history. For this, therefore, he considers you as entitled to his thanks; and that his acknowledgments might be as public as the obligation, no method of conveyance seemed more proper, than to prefix them to this new Edition of "_The History of the Man after God's own Heart._"

He scorns, Sir, to follow the practice of Dedicators in common, who, from venal motives, surfeit their patrons with fulsome adulation: he will not, therefore, call the blushes into your countenance, by expressing his private sentiments of your _learned_ Review of this Historical Sketch, farther than by one observation; which is, that had you been totally unknown in the republic of letters before, your apology for the death of Uriah would alone have raised your literary fame beyond the power of envious detraction. However, not to offend your modesty, he desists from farther encomiums; but with a wish that you may long live to enjoy the reputation acquired by so _laudable_ a performance, he concludes with subscribing himself,

Sir, your greatly obliged, and very humble Admirer.

PREFACE.

Some reverend panegyrists* on our late king,** have, a little unfortunately, been fond of comparing him with a monarch in no respect resembling him; except in the length of his reign, thirty and three years: which a lucky text informed them to be the duration of David's sovereignty over the Hebrew nation. Had our good old king died a year sooner, or had we been indulged with him a year longer, the opportunity of applying this text would then have been lost; and in either case we might not have heard of the parallel.

A reverence for the memory of a worthy Prince, has occasioned the world's being troubled with a new history of king David, (which, otherwise might not have appeared) merely to shew how the memory of the British monarch is affected by the comparison.

"Why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?" is the language of Jesus Christ. "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good;" is the language of the apostle Paul. The liberty thus granted is unlimited; but it is more than mere grant of liberty, these are positive injunctions: let no one then be so timid as to resign an inclination to satisfy just doubts: in Britain, thanks to the obstinate heresy of our brave forefathers, no audacious Romish priest dare prescribe limits to the exercise of our reasoning faculties; and Protestant ones surely will not: nay, they cannot, consistently with those principles which justify their dissent from the Romish communion. An honest desire to obtain truth, will sanctify the most rigid scrutiny into every thing. An apostle has told us, that we are not to believe even an angel from Heaven, who should preach any other gospel than that of Christ;* and, no authority can be so sacred, as to set aside the _most valuable distinction of humanity_, with which our Creator has furnished us; or to give the lie to our most self-evident conceptions of right and wrong.

* Dr. Chandler, Mr. Palmer and others.

** George the IId.

If that liberty, of which Britons boast the possession, means any thing, it must primarily include freedom of thought; without which there can be no freedom of action. Thus it must mean an uncontrolled power to examine the validity of every proposition offered to our assent; without which power, and the due exercise of it, our assent cannot be the assent of rational beings. If the reformed religion means any thing, it must mean a religion founded by the authority, not of councils and synods, but of conviction, the result of private judgment. True Protestants do not puzzle themselves about the decisions of Trent, Constance, or Dort; they protest against all authoritative dictates; disciples of the meek, the lowly, the humane Jesus, they seek of themselves to judge of right or wrong. Who is most the Protestant, the friend to human kind, and to truth? Those who appeal to the human understanding, and submit to the public judgment whether things are really so or not; or those who say, they are so, they shall be so, you shall acknowledge them to be so, or else----?

* Galatians i. 8.

Let not weak-minded Christians who think truth not able to maintain its authority without legal enforcements, lament what they call licentious abuses of that liberty on which we are happy to congratulate ourselves: injudicious productions of the pen will always meet the treatment they deserve. Fallacious pretensions to reasoning cannot deceive mankind in these liberal times; nor can truth be obscured, when the attention of honest inquiries after it, is properly exerted. If the little historical sketch which follows, and which in fact, exhibits no more than what we have all daily read, without presuming to decide upon; if it really is that audacious calumny which many roundly affirm it to be; it will doubtless be considered as such: if, on the contrary, it contains undeniable matters of fact, fallaciousness will appear in the angry objections against it; and the writer trusts, the futility of such objections, have already been made sufficiently apparent.

The name of David has never been mentioned by divines but with the greatest respect, from the time in which he lived to the present day; and he is always quoted as an illustrious example of holiness! so illustrious, that the greatest instance of purity that ever existed on earth, was frequently saluted by way of eminence, in reference to him, _Son of David!_ so illustrious, that on the death of the late king of Great Britain, many sermons were preached and published, in which, parallels are drawn betwixt him and this standard of piety, in order to justify encomiums on the former, by declaring how nearly he resembled the latter.

In what manner David first acquired, and has ever since maintained, this extraordinary reputation, is not difficult to deduce, he was advanced, by an enraged prophet, from obscurity to the Hebrew throne; and taught by the fate of the unhappy monarch who was raised in the same manner, whom he supplanted, and whose family he crushed, he prudently attached himself to the cause of his patrons,* and they were the trumpeters of his fame. The same order of men, true to their common cause, have continued to sound the praise of this church-hero from generation to generation, unto the present time: in like manner the grand violator of the English constitution obtained the epithet of _holy Martyr_.

A new scrutiny being made, however, into David's claim to sanctity, which, notwithstanding a very learned defence of him, turned out so greatly to his dishonour; the scene has been shifted by a few whose sense has overbalanced their bigotry by two or three scruples. Some such, like Sheba of old, blow the trumpet and cry, "We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse!" In this manner have some clerical weather-cocks veered about to an opposite point of the compass; and David, who, till now has been considered as a man who "did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite," has, by one stroke of politics, been resigned to the mercy of his detectors; and the importance of the detection endeavoured to be annihilated, as the easier task; all which appears with rather an ill grace, at a time when it is manifestly extorted.

* The Prophets and Priest.

Thus much being premised relating to the conduct of the champions for orthodoxy, on the occasion of this little squib which has produced so much bustle in the clerical hives, proceed we to say something of the tract itself.

The intention was, without any regard to remote objects, or heed of future consequences, which in fact ought _never_ to be considered in investigating any point; to give a fair undisguised narrative of the life and transactions of David, king of Israel.

This, however, was not so easy to perform, as it was to project; from three difficulties which impeded the execution.

1. It is not easy to conquer the early prejudices of education in favour of the Hebrew nation; which the careful inculcation of their story during our infancy, hinders our seeing in a proper light: so that relations which might shock humanity in what is called prophane history, are read without any emotion but that of reverence, in _this_. This misconception is in great measure assisted.

2. By their History being written _by themselves_: and difficult to be corrected.

3. By the broken unconnected manner in which it is transmitted down to us: which renders it impossible to give a complete narrative of any period in it.

A common share of humanity, which a little attention to common sense enabled the author to extend to every nation under Heaven as the objects of it, relieved him from the first of these difficulties: to overcome the other two, he has assumed the liberty of giving _his_ sense to what appears dark, or misrepresented; which he hopes will not be denied him, so long as it is not found that a forced construction is put upon any thing cited; or, that it is represented in any other light than what it naturally appears in, when considered with the freedom, which it is our duty to use in the examination of every historical record.

And lest it should be imagined that too great liberties are taken with the biblical writers; it may not be amiss to mention once for all, that innumerable instances might be produced, to shew that the authority of _the Lord_, so continually quoted to sanctify every transaction related; constituted for the most part, nothing more than national phrases, which obtained universally among so bigoted a people as on all occasions the Jews appear to have been: one-twelfth part of whom were appropriated to the priesthood! A phraseology in some measure similar obtained in England, at that time, when shunning the cruel talons of papacy, the people rushed into the jaws of wild enthusiasm. That the sense in which the acts of David are here understood, is the most obvious and natural, appears from the amazing pains it has occasioned his champions, to force another upon them. Of this, the Life of David, by Dr. Delany, is a most remarkable instance; but the gross palliations, puerile conjectures, and mean shifts to which he has been driven, prove the difficulty of the task; while they are too frivolous to bias any, but the most _Catholic believers_.

Mr. Stockhouse, in his History of the Bible, has urged arguments against particular passages, under the title of _Objections_; so cogent, that _his answers_ to them, certainly could not be satisfactory even to himself.

Dr. Chandler has lately added his name to the list of David's apologists. Strange! that so holy a king should need the exertion of so much learned and critical dexterity, to establish his fame for goodness of heart! This gentleman's performance, which was published as a reply to the first edition of the present work, is a very extraordinary piece; and shews that, great learning is no security for soundness of judgment. The Doctor's book has been considered in a letter addressed to him, and published separately; to which the reader is referred for an examination into the merits of his arguments. In answering the Doctor, new lights opened on many occurrences, which, as far as they could be detached from that particular controversy, are taken into the present edition.

The best of kings is a title which adulation and servility have always conferred on the most contemptible, as well as the most detestable tyrants; and the frequency of its application to the object is ever in proportion as he is undeserving of it. Had the flattering sycophants of king David been satisfied with applying to him this common-place appellation, rational men, who form their conclusions from the result of general experience, would have inferred only that he had been one of the numerous herd of bad princes who have oppressed mankind, and there would have been nothing peculiar either in the fact or the inference. But when the extremity of adulation conferred on David the title of _The Man after God's own heart_, thinking men, who know the source from which such adulation ever flows, are prepared to expect, in the development of his history, a character pre-eminently wicked, and in this they are not deceived.

All historians of credit agree in describing _God's chosen people_, the _Jews_, as the most vicious and detestable of mankind;* their own historians confirm this character of them, and the whole series of facts which constitute their history, prove it beyond a possibility of doubt.

* Tacitus describes the Jewish people as formed of the worst
outcasts of the surrounding nations, collected together by
Moses, and kept for ever separated from the rest of mankind,
by an opposition of manners, and hostility of sentiment. Nam
passimus quisque, spretis religionibus patriis, tributa et
stipes illuc congerebant; unde auctæ Judeorum res--ad versus
omnes alios hostile odium--transgressi in morem eorum, idem
usurpent; nec quidquam prius imbuuntur quam contemnere Deos,
exuere patriam; arentes, liberos, fratres, vilia habere.--
Ticiti Hist. Lib. v.

Among _the chosen people of God_--the most depraved of all nations--it is pretty certain that the worst and wickedest man of that nation was David, _The Man after God's own heart_. The truth of this proposition will be abundantly proved in the following short history.

A question will here naturally present itself, how the Jews became so much more vicious and depraved than their neighbours? And to resolve that question, it will be necessary to consider in what respects their laws and customs differed from those of others. It will be found that they differed most essentially from all other nations in the world in two particulars: 1st. They had more religion than any other nation; and, 2dly. They had more priests. Other nations among whom superstitious rites and ceremonies prevailed, were satisfied with practising them on solemn festivals, and occasionally on particular or important events; but the Jews practised their superstition incessantly: none of the common duties, or ordinary functions of life, could be performed by them, without a reference to the rules of their superstition; they were bound to a strict observance of them whenever they ate, drank, or performed any other of the natural functions.* **

* Moses quo sibi in posterum gentem firmaret, novos ritus
coutrariosque ceteris mortalibus indidit; profana illic
omnia, quae apud nos sacra; rursum concessa apud illos, quæ
nobis incesta.--Seperati epulis, discreti cubilibus,
projectissima ad libidinem gens, aliena rum cubitu
abstinent, inter se nihil illicitum, circumcidere genitalia
instituere, ut diversitate noscanttir.--Taciti Hist. Lib. v.
It is impossible to draw a more disgusting picture of a
nation than this elegant and correct historian, in
describing the Jews.

** The Romans, though so numerous and powerful a nation, had
but very few priests, compared to the Jews. The Augurs were
at first only 3, and in process of time were increased to
15. The Arnspices were 12. The Pontifices were at first but
4, and were afterwards increased to 10. The Flamines were
but 3. The Sàlit 12. The Feciales, who were 20 in number,
though classed by authors among the priesthood, were merely
civil officers employed as heralds. And the Vestals, or Nuns
of Rome, were only 4; altogether between 50 and 60. Vide
Kennett's Roman Antiq. And yet Saint Austin, De Cevitate
Dei, Lib. iv. cap. 15, admits that the Romans were so
virtuous, that God gave them the empire of the world because
they were more virtuous than other nations, vet, with true
Christian charity, he says, that they must nevertheless he
damned as heathens. We do not find that the priests of other
enlightened nations of antiquity were proportionality much
more numerous than amoung the Romans. In England at present
the number of the priesthood cannot be much less than
20,000; there are near 10,000 parishes, each having one
priest at least, several two, and some three or more,
exclusive of Deans and Chapters, Prebends, &c. &c. and all
these in the established church, as it is called, exclusive
of a great variety of other sectaries of different
denominations.

Other nations had a few priests dedicated to their gods or idols, seldom exceeding a few dozen in a whole nation but the Jewish priesthood constituted a twelfth part of the whole people, and claimed and exercised the privilege of devouring a tenth part of the produce of the country, without contributing any thing to its productive labour.* And it is probable that the Jewish nation alone, though but a miserable handful of semi-barbarous savages, had more priests than the rest of the then known world collectively, and were consequently more vicious and more enslaved than any other people.

* The Jewish priesthood being one tribe, or twelfth part of
the nation, do not appear to have assumed to themselves much
more than an equal proportion, compared to their numbers, in
taking the tithe or tenth part of the produce of the land,
however unjust it may appear that they should be supported
in idleness at the expence of the industry of the rest: but
the English priesthood, though abundantly numerous, do not
form above one five-hundredth part of the whole nation, yet
they have the conscience to take also the tenth of the whole
produce, which is near fifty times more than their just
share, according to the proportion of their romish models,
from whose example they pretend to derive them.

Mankind have been too long duped by that universal _cant_ of priests, who, in their language, have ever affected to couple _religion and morality_ together, and to represent them as _inseparably united_, though the slightest attention must show that they are perfectly _distinct_, and a full and mature consideration of the subject must prove that they are even extremely _opposite_. They well knew that man, in the most abject state of mental degradation to which superstition could reduce him, must still acknowledge the force and excellence of virtue and morality, and must perceive their necessary tendency to promote his welfare and happiness. They well knew how useful to their own views and interests it would be to persuade him that religion, virtue, and morality, were one and the same, or, at least, intimately and inseparably connected; the credulity of man gave credit to the imposture without examination, and the uniform experience of above 2,000 years has not hitherto been sufficient to undeceive him.

Unhappy man! destined for ever to be the dupe of his own credulity, in opposition to the testimony of his experience, and the evidence of his senses. Does not the history of all ages show, that the most religious nations have always been, and still are, the most vicious and immoral!

Another most formidable evil necessarily results from such a system of superstition, that is, a state of civil slavery, which is always found its universal concomitant. Whenever the human mind is debased and degraded by a system of gross superstition, it becomes incapable of any one manly, liberal, or independent sentiment; every energy of the mind is lost, reason is surrendered, virtue, the chief support, if not the sole foundation of freedom, is banished, and man is fitted to receive the abject yoke of slavery; tyranny and despotism make an easy conquest of him, and the priest is ever ready to rivet his chains, and perpetuate his bondage, by the pretended sanction of Heaven. The power and influence of the priest and the tyrant is ever in proportion to the debasement of man; they have a common interest, have ever made a common cause against him, and have constantly erected their common throne on the ruins of his freedom, his welfare, and his happiness.

Let us not, therefore, be deterred from unmasking to the view of mankind that immense mass of vice and depravity which constitute the foundation of the Jewish superstition; let no blind veneration for that hideous idol deter us from exposing its deformity; let us cultivate that which is truly good and useful; let reason assume her just empire over the mind of man, and credulity, ignorance, and folly, abdicate their usurped dominion: then shall we soon behold the galling fetters of vice and superstition broken by the irresistible power of virtue, morality, and truth.

THE LIFE OF DAVID.

The first establishment of regal government among the Hebrews, was occasioned by the corrupt administration of Joel and Abiah, the two sons of Samuel, whom he had deputed to judge Israel in the decline of his life.* The people, exasperated at the oppression they laboured under, applied to Samuel for redress, testifying a desire to experience a different mode of government, by peremptorily demanding a king.** At this, however, Samuel was greatly displeased: not that his sons had tyrannized over the people, for of that he takes no manner of notice, neither exculpating them, nor promising the people redress; his chagrin arose from this violent resumption of the supreme magistracy out of the hands of his family; a circumstance for which he expresses great resentment.*** He consults the Lord, and not knowing else how the insurrection might terminate, in his name yields to their desires; promising them a king with vengeance to them.**** "For,"(5) says the Lord, "they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them."(6) The people, nevertheless, resolving to free themselves from present oppression, at the hazard of the threatened judgments, obstinately persisted in their demand, and dispersed not without a promise of compliance.

* 1 Sam. viii. 3.

** Ver. 5.

*** Ver. 6, &c.

**** Ver. 11, &c.

(5) Ver 7, compared with chap. ix.

(6) Chap. x. 1.

Samuel, to all outward appearance, chose the most impartial method of choosing a king, which was by lot, from among the people assembled by tribes; but prudently pitches upon his man, previous to the election; the whole tenor of his conduct manifesting, that he intended to give them a king in name, but still to retain the supreme authority in his own hands, by choosing one who should continue subordinate to his dictates. Opportunely for his purpose, a young countryman, named Saul, having rambled about to seek his fathers asses, which had strayed, and finding all search after them vain, applied to Samuel as a prophet,* with a fee in his hand, to gain intelligence of his beasts.

We gather from several passages in Jewish history, that there were seminaries of prophets, i.e. the universities of the times, where youth were trained up to the mystery of prophesying. We find there were false prophets, nonconformists, not of the establishment; we find that even the true ones were liable to be imposed on by their brethren;** and we find moreover, by this instance, that prophets did not disdain to give assistance in their prophetical character, concerning domestic matters, for reasonable gratuities. A chief among the prophets, one who had been a judge over Israel, is applied to in a pecuniary way, for intelligence concerning lost cattle.***

* 1 Sam. ix. 7, 8.

** 1 Kings, xiii. 18., Josephus in loco.

*** Pretensions to divinations continue to this day, though,
in the opinion of reformed churches, all prophesying and
miracles have long since ceased. These modern prophets are
drolly ridiculed by our facetious countryman, Butler, in the
person of Sydrophel, a dealer,

"In Destiny's dark counsel?,
Who sage opinions of the moon sells;
To whom all people, far and near,
On deep importances repair.
When brass or pewter hap to stray,
Or linen slinks out of the way;
When geese and pullen are seduc'd,
And sows of sucking pigs are chous'd:
When cattle feel indisposition,
And need th' opinion of physician;
When murrain reigns in hogs or sheep,
And chickens languish of the pip;
When yeast and outward means do fail,
And have no power to work on ale;
When butter does refuse to come.
And love proves cross and humoursome;
To him with questions and with urine,
They for discov'ry flock, or curing.

It has been said, that this is the only instance recorded of a prophet being applied to for purposes of this nature; but it appears that it was usual for men to have recourse to prophets, and that the phrase was, "Come, and let us go to the seer;"* and that prophetical intelligence was paid for, is evident from the inquiry between Saul and his servant, concerning their ability to gratify him.**

But, to proceed: Saul not only found his asses, but a kingdom into the bargain; and had the spirit of the Lord given;*** to him which we find taken away**** again, when he proved untractable: though it seems somewhat odd, how he could possibly prove disobedient, while he acted under the influence of this Divine Spirit! For, the possibility being admitted, the advantage of inspiration is difficult to be conceived.

After Samuel had in private(5) anointed Saul king, and told him his asses were already found, he dismissed him for the present. He then assembled the people for the election of a king: at which assembly, behold, the lot fell on the tribe of Benjamin; and in that, on the family of Matri; and finally, on Saul, the son of Kish.(6) An election somewhat resembling consistories for the appointment of bishops; where the person being previously fixed on, God is solemnly prayed to for a direction of their choice.

* 1 Sam. ix. 9.

** Ver. 7, 8.

*** Ch.x. 6.

**** Ch. xvi. 19.

(5) Ch. x. 1.

(6) Ch. x. 20, 21.

It is not intended here to give a detail of the reign of king Saul; the notice hitherto taken of him being merely because the life of David could not be properly introduced without mentioning the alteration of government, and the manner in which monarchy was established in Israel: since Samuel's disappointment in Saul, naturally leads to his similar choice of David.

The disobedience of Saul, in daring to sacrifice without his patron the prophet,* who failed of coming according to his appointment; and his lenity and prudence, in sparing the king, and some cattle, from a nation which Samuel, in the name of the Lord, had commanded him utterly to extirpate,** irrevocably lost him the favour of this imperious inexorable prophet: and, in the end, produced the miserable destruction not only of himself, but of his family: which will occasion no surprise, when we consider the absolute dominion and ascendency which the Jewish priests maintained over this ignorant superstitious people. A dominion which every article in the Levitical law enlarged and strengthened.

We are not to imagine that the sparing Agag, king of the Amalekites, was the only cause of this rupture between him and Samuel. For we may gather from other parts of his history, that Saul was not over-well affected towards his patrons the Levites;*** in subjection to whom he had too much spirit to continue. Samuel quickly perceived he had mistaken his man, he haughtily avowed his intention of deposing him;**** and ordering Agag to be brought into his presence, he hewed him in pieces--"before the Lord."(5)

* 1 Sam. xiii. 8-14.

** Ch. xv. 3.

*** Ch. 22.18,19. and Ch. xxviii. 9.

**** Ch. xiii. 14. xv. 26. 28.

(5) Ver. 33., Ch. xvi. 13.

We now come to the hero of the history.

In pursuance of his intention to make another king, Samuel went under the pretence of a sacrifice, and anointed another country youth, which was David, the youngest son of Jesse, the Bethlehemite; and gave him the spirit of the Lord, which he had just taken from poor Saul. The king, in the mean time, reflecting on the precariousness of his situation, now that the priests, on the part of Samuel, were incensed against him; and well knowing their influence among his subjects, fell into a melancholy disorder of mind,* which his physicians were unable to remove.**

This was artfully made the occasion of introducing David to court. The king was advised to divert himself with music; and David was contrived to be recommended to him for his skill on the harp.*** Saul accordingly sent to Jesse, to request his son; which was immediately complied with: and David was detained at court, in the capacity of the king's armour-bearer.**** Here the story begins to grow confused, beyond _lay_-skill to reconcile. A war with the Philistines is abruptly introduced; in the midst of the relation of which, we are abruptly informed that David returned from Saul to feed his father's sheep(5) again; from whence his father sent him with provisions for his brothers, who were in the army.(6) What can be thought of this? Jesse hardly recalled his son from the honourable post of armour-bearer to the king; it is not likely that he was turned off, since we afterwards find him playing on the harp to the king, as before;(7) neither was it proper employment for the king's armour-bearer to be feeding sheep, when the army was in the field, and his majesty with them in person! Why--the most easy method is to take it as we find it; to suppose it to be right, and go quietly on with the story.

In the Philistine army was a man of extraordinary size, named Goliah, who came out of their camp, day by day, challenging and defying any one among the Hebrews to single combat, and to rest the decision of their quarrel upon the event; an offer which no one among the Israelites was hitherto found hardy enough to accept.(8)

*1 Sam. xvi. 14.

** Josephus.

*** 1 Sam. xvi. 18.

**** Ver. 21.

(5) Ch. xvii. 15.

(6) Ch. xvii. 17.

(7) Ch. xviii. 10.

(8) Ch. xvii. 4, &c.

David is said to have arrived at the army just as it was forming for engagement; at which time the giant advanced as before, with reproachful menaces; and, after having enquired carefully concerning what reward would be given to the conquerer of this giant, and learning that great riches and the king's daughter were to be the prizes of conquest, David courageously declared before Saul his acceptance of the challenge,* notwithstanding the contempt with which his offer had been treated.

Saul, relying on the youth's ardour and assurance of victory, girded his own armour on him:** but David put it off again, trusting entirely to a pouch of stones, and his own skill in slinging.*** The success answered his hopes, and stamped, what would otherwise have been deemed a rash undertaking, with a more respectable name; he knocked Goliath down with a stone; then ran in upon him, cut his head off with his own sword, and brought it triumphantly to the king of Israel.**** The consequence was the defeat of the 'Philistines.

Here we meet with another stumbling-block. For, though Saul, as has already been observed, had sent to Jesse expressly for his son David; though David had played to him on the harp; though Saul had again sent to Jesse, to desire that David might be permitted to stay with him; and in consequence of this had given him a military appointment about his person; though he had now a fresh conference with him; had just placed his own suit of armour on him; and though all the occurrences must have happened within a small space of time, yet his memory is made so to fail him on a sudden, that he knew nothing either of David, or his parentage! but while David went to meet the giant, he enquired of others, who proved as ignorant as himself, whose son(5) the stripling was? This stumbling-block must likewise be stepped over, for it is not removeable.

*1 Sam. xvii. 32.

** Ver. 38.

*** Ver. 40.

****Ver. 49.

(5) Ver. 55., Ch. xviii. 3.

The reputation which this gallant action procured to David, soon gained him advancement in the army, and a warm friendship with Saul's son, Jonathan. But the inordinate acclamations of the people, on account of the death of the Philistine giant, "Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands;"* a rhodomontade out of measure extravagant, when we compare the two subjects of the contrast, justly occasioned Saul to view David with a jealous eye. We have all the reason in the world to believe that Samuel and the priests made every possible advantage of an adventure so fortunate for their intended king, to improve his growing popularity, which even at its outset had so far exceeded all bounds of decency: "What," said Saul, "can he have more but the kingdom?"** and we may therefore conclude that the king saw enough to alarm him; for we are told, that "Saul eyed David from that day and forward,"***Thus we find that on the following day, while David played as usual on his harp before Saul, the king cast a javelin at him,**** which David avoided. Saul then made him captain over a thousand, saying, "Let not mine hand be upon him, but let the hand of the Philistines be upon him," an expression however which is evidently put into Saul's mouth, since it is impossible he could have made use of it openly. He made him the offer of his daughter Merab for his wife, in consequence of the defeat of Goliah; but she, we know not why, was given to another;(5) afterwards he gave him Michal: and David's modesty (6) on this occasion was incomparably well acted; he knowing himself, at the same time, to be secretly intended for the kingdom by Samuel.

Saul, upon reflection, concluding it dangerous to execute any open act of violence against this young hero, politically hoped to ensnare him, by exalting him high in favour, or to get rid of him by putting him upon his mettle, in performing feats of valour; for a deficiency of valour is not to be numbered among David's faults. It was with this view that the king yet required of him an hundred Philistine foreskins(7) as the condition of becoming his son-in-law. He produced double the number "in full tale."(8)

* 1 Sam. xxii. 7.

** Ch. xviii. 8.

*** Ver. 9.

**** Ver. 11.

(5) Ver. 17.

(6) Ver. 10.

(7) Ver. 23., Ver. 25. (according to Josephus 600 heads).

(8) 1 Sam. xviii. 27.

This demand, after David appeals to have fulfilled the prescribed conditions, seems not only unjust, but also, even making allowance for Hebrew customs, very ridiculously expressed. It must have been a glorious sight to have seen David bring the foreskins to king Saul, strung perhaps on a piece of pack-thread, and dangling in his hand, or thrown across his shoulders like a sash: and if Miss Michal was present, how must her pretty little heart exult when the required number being told off, as many more were gallantly presented at her feet!

David still advanced in his military** reputation, and met with a powerful advocate in the person of Jonathan, his brother-in-law and faithful friend, who effected a temporary reconciliation between him and Saul;*** at which time Saul swore he would no more attempt his life. Nevertheless, whether it was that he could not get the better of his jealousy, or that he discovered more than is transmitted down to us, we know not; consequences incline us to the last conjecture: Saul made two more attempts to kill him;**** from one of which he was protected by his wife Michal; and finding it not safe to stay at court, he fled to Samuel, in Ramah.(5) Hither Saul sent messengers to apprehend him;(6) but these, it seems, seeing Samuel presiding over a company of prophets, and prophesying, were seized with a spirit of prophesying also; and not only so, but it is related that Saul finding this, went at last himself, to just the same purpose; for he likewise prophesied,(7) stripping off his cloaths, in which ridiculous condition he continued for a day and a night.

** Ver. 30. xix. 8.

*** Ver. 4.

**** Ver. 10, 11.

(5) Ver. 18.

(6) Ver. 20.

(7) Ver. 23.

This is an extreme odd relation! That the solemn appearance of an assembly of prophets, presided over by a person so respectable, and heretofore of such great authority in Judea, might influence, in an extraordinary manner, persons entrusted with a commission to apprehend or kill a man patronized by these prophets, exhibits nothing wonderful; they might easily perhaps, be prophesied out of their errand; and might then prophesy in concert. Prophesy is a vague term, not always limited to the prediction of future events; the extempore preaching of many dissenters, and the discourses of the Quakers, who profess to speak as the Spirit gives them utterance, seem to come under the term prophesy. These persons can work themselves and others into such fits of enthusiastic intoxication, that they believe themselves agitated by supernatural influence. Such might be the prophesying here mentioned. But Saul prophesied! so it is said. Had the subject of Saul's prophesying, been transmitted down to us, it might have greatly illustrated this passage in the history; but no, he is barely said to have _prophesied_; and we are prudently left to guess what. Being thus at liberty, we, among other expositors, may easily surmise what he might take for his text, and was the general tenor of his discourse, on this particular occasion.

Afterward David had a private interview* with Jonathan; for he durst not venture to appear at court. At this meeting, Jonathan, who had conceived too great an affection for this man, and was at length seduced by him from the duty and allegiance which he owed to his father and king, solemnly promised** that he would sound his father's intentions on the next day, which being the festival of the new moon, David's attendance was expected at the king's table; and that he would warn him of any danger intended him.

* 1 Sam. x. 1.

** Ver. 12.

David lay hid in the field until Jonathan brought him the required intelligence; and when the king inquired, concerning him, Jonathan as had been before concerted, said that he had requested leave to go and perform a family sacrifice at Bethlehem. Saul's reply on this occasion is very pertinent, and shows his antipathy to David not to have been the causeless inveteracy of a disordered mind. "Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness? For as long as the son of Jesse liveth upon the ground, thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom: wherefore now send and fetch him unto me; for he shall surely die."* Jonathan expostulated with his father, and had a javelin hurled at him for his reward.**

David being advertised, according to agreement, of the king's disposition toward him, retired to Ahimelech, the high priest, at the city of Nob who treated him with shew-bread, and armed him with the sword of Goliah, which had been hung up and consecrated to God.***

We may consider David's resuming this sword, after its dedication as a religious trophy, whatever gloss may be put on his interview with Ahimelech, to be a clear manifestation of hostile intentions, or a declaration of war against his father-in-law, for which he now took the first opportunity to prepare. Thus accoutred, he fled out of Judea, to Achish, king of Gath;**** intending, as we have good reason to believe, to enter into a treaty of alliance with him against the Hebrews; but the popular cry was against him before he accomplished any thing, or at least any thing that has reached our times.

* Ver. 30, 81. Josephus in loco.

** Ver. 33.

*** 1 Sam. xxi. 1.

**** Ver. 9. Josephus.

Here David appears to disadvantage in point of policy: for though his carrying with him the sword of Goliah was artful enough, and likely to collect followers in Judea, since it was a continual witness of that prowess which had gained him such extraordinary reputation; yet, for him, under this circumstance, to throw himself into the power of the Philistines, among those very people from whose champion he had ravished _that sword_, was the highest imprudence! and we perceive he might have suffered for it, had not he made use of a stratagem to procure his release, which he effected by acting the madman.* Mankind seems to have been very easily imposed on in those days.

David, now thinking it time openly to avow his design of disputing the crown with Saul, went to a cave called Adullam, which he appointed the place of rendezvous for his partizans. Here we are told he collected together a company of debtors, vagrants, and disaffected persons, to the number of four hundred; and opened his rebellion, by putting himself at the head of this body of men:** men, whose desperate situations under the government in being, rendered them fit agents to disturb it, and proved the surest bond to connect them to a partizan thus embarked in an enterprize against it. Hither also came to him his father and all his brethren; and the first movement that he made was to go to the king of Moab, to obtain a retreat for his father and mother, until he knew the event of his enterprise.***

By the advice of the prophet Gad, David next marched into the land of Judah:**** Gad, no doubt hoped, that as the young adventurer was of that tribe, he would there meet with considerable reinforcement. When Saul heard of this insurrection, he pathetically laments his misfortune to those about him, that they, and even his son Jonathan, should conspire against him.(5)

* 1 Sam. xxi. 13.

** Ch. xxii. 2.

*** Ver. 2.

**** Ver. 6.

(5) Ver. 7, 8, 9.

Then started up one Doeg, an Edomite, who informed Saul, that he had seen David harboured by the priests in Nob. Upon this, Saul summoned all those belonging to that city before him, with Ahimelech their chief, who began to excuse himself as well as he could; but Saul remembering, without doubt, the threatening of Samuel, concerning the affair of king Agag;* and considering these priests as traitors, from this corroborating evidence against them, he commanded them all to be slain, to the number of eighty-five persons.** Moreover, agreeable to the barbarous usage of that nation, the massacre included the whole city of Nob, man and beast, young and old, without exception.

Though the king's rage in this instance exceeded not only the bounds of humanity, but also of good policy, it nevertheless serves to show how deeply the priests were concerned in the rebellion of David; since he could not be mad enough to commit so flagrant an act, without some colourable pretence;*** and shows also that Saul had not so great an opinion of their holiness as we, at this distance of time, are, by their own annals, instructed to have. Had Saul been more implicit, he might have enjoyed the name of king, have continued the dupe of the priests, have died in peace, and his children have succeeded quietly to the inheritance. But,

"Ye gods! what havoc does ambition make
Among your works!"

During this time, David rescued the city of Keilah from the Philistines,(5) who were besieging it, hoping to make it a garrison for himself.

* 1 Sam. xiii. 14, xv. 26, 28.

** Ch. xxii. 16-18.

*** Ver. 19.

**** In so small a territory as Judea, the difference
between the king and his son-in-law, so popular a man, could
not be unknown to persons in any measure removed from the
vulgar. Therefore, Ahmeleoh's pleas of ignorance did not
deserve credit.

(5) 1 Sam. xxiii. 3.

But upon the approach of Saul, not thinking himself able to maintain it, being as yet but six hundred strong, and not choosing to confide in the inhabitants, whose loyalty even his recent kindness to them could not corrupt, he therefore abandoned it, and retired to the wilderness.* This passage alone is amply sufficient to confirm the reality of David's rebellious intentions; it is, therefore, worth analyzing. That he delivered this city from the depredations of the Philistines, and that by this action he hoped to purchase the friendship of the inhabitants, are acknowledged: the use to which he intended to convert this friendship, is the point to be ascertained. Saul was advancing to suppress him. Had he seduced them from their allegiance, and obtained the expected protection, he would have deprived Saul of this city, which city might have been considered as a garrison. The old plea, of his providing only for his personal safety, against his malignant persecutor, has often been urged; but his intended retention of a city, to secure that safety, was a flagrant rebellious intention. Had he gained this one city, as his strength increased, he would have concluded as many more as he could have procured, necessary for his preservation, until he had monopolized the whole country, agreeable to the grant of Samuel, which would then have justified the usurpation; but disappointed in the first step, by the loyalty, miscalled treachery, of the Keilites, he evacuated the town, having lost the recompence of his labour, and with his men "went whithersoever they could go."** In the wilderness Jonathan came privately to see him, and piously engages in the cause against his own father, by covenant; in which it was agreed, that if David succeeded, of which Jonathan is very confident, _he_ was to be a partaker of his good fortune but as Jonathan was not to join him openly, he went home again.

Saul, having received intelligence of David's retreats, pursued him from place to place, until he was called off by news of an invasion of the land by the Philistines;*** whether of David's procuring or not, we are uncertain: thus much is certain, and does not discredit the supposition, that he quickly after took refuge among those Philistines.

* 1 Sam. xxiii. 13.

** Ib.

*** Ver. 16-18, 27.

After repelling the invaders, Saul, however, returned to the wilderness of Engedi, in pursuit of David, with three thousand chosen men. At this place we are told of an odd adventure, which put the life of Saul strangely into the power of David. He turned in to repose himself* alone in a cave, wherein at that time, David and his myrmidons were secreted.**

* The words are, "to cover his feet:" which Josephus and
others, mistake to mean, that he retired into the cave to
ease nature. But in Judges, iii. 21. we find that expression
to imply, that the servants of Eulon, king of Moab, supposed
their master to have locked himself in, to repose himself
with sleep, in his summer-chamber. This is farther
corroborated, in Ruth, iii. 7. where, when Boaz had eaten
his supper, he laid down on a heap of corn, doubtless to
take his rest. Ruth, by her mother's instruction, went,
uncovered his feet, and lay down by him--to have some
refreshment likewise. For, in the middle of the night, when
the man awaked, surprised at finding an unexpected
bedfellow, and demanded who she was, the kind wench replied--
"I am Ruth, thine hand-maid; spread therefore thy skirt
over thine hand-maid, for thou art a near kinsman." In the
present instance, it is evident, Saul slept in the cave; as
he discovered not the operation that had been performed on
his robe, till David called after him, to apprize him
thereof.

** 1 Sam. xxiv. 3.

This, one would imagine to have been a fine opportunity for him to have given a finishing stroke to his fortune, by killing Saul, and jumping into, the throne at once: but David knew better what he was about, than to act so rashly. He could entertain no hopes that the Jews would receive for their king a man who, with such great seeming holiness, should imbrue his hands in the blood of the Lord's anointed. Beside, what evidently destroys the boasted merit of David's forbearance toward Saul, in this instance, is an obvious, though overlooked consideration, that, compared with David, Saul had a strong army with, him; and had the king been missing, had he been observed to enter the cave without coming out again; and upon search, had he been there found murdered, there would not have escaped, of all that pertained to David, any that _pissed against this wall_. Of this David could not be insensible; and therefore, only privately cut off the skirt of Saul's robe,* and suffered him to depart in peace. When the king was gone out from the cave, David calls after him, and artfully makes a merit of his forbearance, protesting an innocency, to which his being in arms was, however, a flat** contradiction. Saul freely and gratefully acknowledges himself indebted to him for his life, and seems so well convinced of his own precarious situation, that he candidly confesses it; only tying him down with an oath,*** not to destroy his children after him--an obligation which, in due time, we shall see in what manner remembered and fulfilled by David.

*1 Sam. xxiv. 4.

** Ver. 8-15.

*** Ver. 21.

Saul must certainly have been greatly fatigued, or strangely overseen, to have let David catch him at so great a disadvantage--a conduct not usual with good generals. Yet, while we credit the relation, the meanness of his reply to David's harangue, can be no otherwise accounted for. Saul does not appear to have wanted resolution on other occasions; but to acknowledge his assurance that David would obtain the sovereignty, and poorly to entreat a fugitive rebel in behalf of his family! is a conduct not even to be palliated, but upon the foregoing supposition. We must either condemn the general or the king, neither of which characters appear with extraordinary lustre upon this occasion. David, on the other hand, dissembles admirably here, pretending to Saul a _great reverence_ for the Lord's anointed, though conscious, at the same time, that _he was also_ the Lord's anointed, and anointed purposely to supersede the other Lord's anointed; and, moreover, was at this very time aiming to put his election in force! But, as the people were not of his council, and he knew their great regard for religious sanctions, it was certainly prudent in him to set an example of piety, in an instance of which he hoped, in time, to reap the benefit himself: About this time Samuel died.*

We next find our young adventurer acting the chief character in a tragi-comedy, which will farther display his title to the appellation of being a Man after God's own heart.