The Expositor's Bible: The First Book of SamuelBlaikie, William Garden
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The First Book of Samuel
Blaikie, William Garden
Bible. Samuel, 1st -- Commentaries
The use which, as we have seen, he made of his troop was to invade the
Geshurites, the Gezrites, and the Amalekites. In taking this step David
had a sinister purpose. It would not have been so agreeable to the
Philistines to learn that the arms of David had been turned against
these tribes as against his own countrymen. When therefore he was asked
by Achish where he had gone that day, he returned an answer fitted, and
indeed intended, to deceive. Without saying in words, "I have been
fighting against my own people in the south of Judah," he led Achish to
believe that he had, and he was pleased when his words were taken in
that sense. Achish, we are told, believed David, believed that he had
been in arms against his countrymen. "He hath made his people Israel
utterly to abhor him; therefore he shall be my servant for ever." Could
there have been a more lamentable spectacle? one of the noblest of men
stained by the meanness of a false insinuation; David, the anointed of
the God of Israel, ranged with the common herd of liars!
Nor was this the only error into which his crooked policy now led him.
To cover his deceitful course he had recourse to an act of terrible
carnage. It was deemed by him important that no one should be able to
carry to Achish a faithful report of what he had been doing. To prevent
this he made a complete massacre, put to death every man, woman, child
of the Amalekites and other tribes whom he now attacked. Such massacres
were indeed quite common in Eastern warfare. The Bulgarian and other
massacres of which we have heard in our own day show that even yet,
after an interval of nearly three thousand years, they are not foreign
to the practice of Eastern nations. In point of fact, they were not
thought more of, or worse of, than any of the other incidents of war.
War was held to bind up into one bundle the whole lives and property of
the enemy, and give to the conqueror supreme control over it. To destroy
the whole was just the same in principle as to destroy a part. If the
destruction of the whole was necessary in order to carry out the objects
of the campaign, it was not more wicked to perpetrate such destruction
than to destroy a part.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account