A Body of Divinity, Vol. 4 (of 4): Wherein the doctrines of the Christian religion are explained and defended, being the substance of several lectures on the Assembly's Larger CatechismRidgley, Thomas
Religion
A Body of Divinity, Vol. 4 (of 4): Wherein the doctrines of the Christian religion are explained and defended, being the substance of several lectures on the Assembly's Larger Catechism
_Answ._ In both these instances he must be allowed to have sinned, and
therefore not proposed as a pattern to us; and all that can be inferred
from it is, that there is a great deal of the corruption of nature
remaining in the best of God’s people. What he told Abimelech was
certainly a lye; and all that he expected to gain by it, was only a
supply of his present necessities; the consequence whereof was, the poor
man’s losing his life, together with all the priests’, except Abiathar,
by Saul’s inhumanity. And David seems to be truly sensible of this sin,
as appears from Psal. xxxiv. which, as is intimated in the title
thereof, was penned on this occasion; in which he arms others against
it, in ver. 13. _Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking
guile_: And in ver. 18. he seems to relate his own experience, when he
says, _The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart, and saveth
such as be of a contrite spirit._
As to his behaviour before the king of Gath, which was a visible lie,
discovered in his actions; it can, by no means, be excused from being a
breach of this Commandment. It is, indeed, alleged by some, to extenuate
his fault; that he was afraid that his having killed Goliah, would have
induced Achish to take away his life; as appears from what is said in
ver. 11, 12. Nevertheless, it may be considered as an aggravation of his
sin,
[1.] That his fear seems to have been altogether groundless; for, why
should he suppose that the king of Gath would break through all the laws
of arms and honour, since Goliah had been killed in a fair duel, the
challenge having first been given by himself? why then should David fear
that he would kill him for that, more than any other hostilities
committed in war? Besides, it is plain from what Achish says, in ver.
15. _Have I need of mad-men, that ye have brought this fellow to play
the mad-man in my presence? should this fellow come into mine house?_
that the king of Gath was so far from designing to revenge Goliah’s
death on him, that he intended to employ him in his service, and take
him into his house; but this mean action of his made him despised by
all; for it seems probable, by Achish’s saying, _Have ye brought this
fellow to play the mad-man?_ that he perceived it to be a feigned, and
not a real distraction. And this was overruled by the providence of God,
to let the Philistines know, that the greatest hero is but a
low-spirited man, if his God be not with him.
[2.] If we suppose that there had been just ground for his fear, the
method taken to secure himself, contained a distrust of providence;
which would, doubtless, have delivered him without his dissembling, or
thus demeaning himself, or using such an indirect method in order
thereunto. Thus concerning the violation of this Commandment, by
speaking that which is contrary to truth.
2. This Commandment is farther broken, by acting that which is contrary
to truth; which is what we call hypocrisy: And this may be considered,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account