Commentary on the Old Testament Volume 2-4, Biblical commentary 1 · 1 Samuel · Chapter 21
CHAP. XXI.
DAvid having taken his leave of Jonathan fled to Nob to Ahimelech, the High-Priest, V. 1.this was the same, saith Lyra, which is before called Ahiah, se 1 Sam. 14. 3. whereas Mark. 2. 26. David is said to have come hither in the dayes of Abithar 1 Sam. 14. 8.the High-Priest, but Abiathar was not yet High-Priest, but the sonne of Ahimelech, the High-Priest, Ch. 22. 20. It is answered, that the father was called both Ahimelech and Abiathar and so was the sonne by both these names: for Ahimelech the sonne of Abiathar is said to bee High-Priest, when David was King, 2 Sam. 8. 17. and Ch. 25. 35. Abiathar is said to bee Priest, and Beza in Marc.hither David came and not to Samuel againe, to avoid danger both to himselfe and Samuel, for hee might more easily have beene pursued, and it would have beene taken more hainously at Samuels hands by Saul, seeing hee had beene once with him before. Touching Nob, where the High-Priest now was, H. B. Patriarks travailes.it was a City of Priests about 12, miles from Gibeah, from whence David fled, and 16. from Ierusalem, and it stood in the Tribe of Benjamin not farre from Anathoth, wherefore they are named together, Nehem. 11. 32. Kimhi therefore D. Kimhi.was wide, who saith, that he learned of his father, that Nob was the same with Ierusalem. Here it seemeth, was the Tabernacle at this time, and the Altar and Table of shew bread, for these were not disjoyned at any time, but the Ark remained 2 Sam. 6. 1, 2.at Kireath-jearim, ever since the bringing of it backe from the Philistims countrey, til the time of Davids reigne. Whereas David is said to be alone, when he came to Ahimelech, but v. 4 other young men with him are spoken of, and Mar. 2. 26. Lyra saith, it is to be understood, that he was not so alone, but that he Lyra.had two or three servants with him, but because he used to goe forth attended P. Martyr.with many men, hee is said, when hee had no more with him, to be alone. Peter Martyr saith, that hee was alone without one servant, for hee had appointed to them such and such places, but he asked bread for himselfe and them, when Iosephus.he should come unto them who were not farre off: so likewise Josephus, nec famulitio stipatus, nec servis comitatus. But by that Mark. 2. 26. it is plaine that some were with him. Answ. They were with him in the journey, as hee pretended, awaiting his comming againe to the place where he had set them not farre off, or now ready to come thither unto him hungry, and in want. To this effect also Abulens. saith, that he came alone to Ahimelech, his servants being lest elsewhere and appointed a place wherein to meete him again. David to excuse himself for being thus alone, fained, that the King had sent him about a very secret busines. Herein V. 2. Lyra. Hugo Card.David cannot be excused, saith Lyra, from telling an officious lye, so likewise Hugo, but yet he excuseth him, because in thus saying he intended no hurt to any man, but onelyonly to get bread for his owne necessity. P. Martyr saith, that neither he nor Ahimelech did any thing unlawful, and that the fault was only Sauls, and Peter Martyr.some, saith Willet, that hee lyed not, because the King of Kings had appointed him to a secret businesse, viz. to bee King. But wee need not thus to seeke to justify the best in all their actions, for there are none but have failed in such cases, and it cannot but be acknowledged a great fault in David thus to bring Gods Priests into danger, as he confesseth he feared, Ch. 22. 22.
Ahimelech said, that hee had no common bread, but hallowed, if the young V. 4.men had kept themselves from women. David asked 5. loaves, happily, saith Hugo, according to the number of men, that hee had with him. And seeing hee asked onelyonly bread, hee sheweth, that Prelates, when they came to Priests Hugo Cardin.houses, should not looke for dainty fare, but be content with any thing for their necessity. The hallowed bread, which as our Lord saith, the Priests onelyonly might eate, was the shew-bread, of which see Levit. 24. 7, 8, 9. there was also other holy bread, which was offered in peace-offerings, which was the Priests, Levit. 7. 9, 10. 14. Of which both they and their families might eate, or any person being cleane. And touching the shew bread, any of the people might eate of it in case of necessity, that is, being hungry and having no common bread to seed upon, and therefore this fact of Ahimelech is justified by our Lord. For to feed the hungry is a morall duty, it being a point of love, to which ceremonies must give place, as is shewed by that saying, I will have mercy and not sacrifice. And of this kinde was healing the sicke upon the Sabbath day, the ceremony of resting gave place to this worke of charity. But whereas some make eating Willet.swines flesh under the Law to bee a like lawfull for a Jew in case of necessity, if he hath nothing else to eate, I cannot subscribe to this, because to do thus were to commit an abomination with the heathen Canaanites, & the 7. brethren in the Booke of Maccabees, are commended for that they would rather dye, then eate swines flesh. Yet Peter Martyr saith, that they were required to eate in testimony of their forsaking of Gods Lawes, and not as being put to it through necessity, in which case it is not unlawfull. For the condition put by the Priest, if the young men have kept themselves from women, that is, from their wives. For of the bread or meat consecrated unto God none might eate, but the clean, and who so lay with his owne wife by the Law of Moses was uncleane all the Levit. 7. 19. Levit. 15 18. Exod. 19. 15.day after, untill Even, wherefore when the people were prepared to receive the Law, they were forbidden to come at their wives. Peter Martyr contendeth, that that Law should bee understood of such, as had a fluxe, or issue, but it is plainly meant of any companying of man and woman together for generation, compare Levit. 18. 20. Yet this proveth not, that now there is any uncleannesse in the Matrimoniall Act, for the bed of the marryed is said to bee Heb. 12. 4.undefiled, but there was onelyonly a Legall uncleannesse, as by an issue or fluxe, Caus. 33. qu. 4. c. Sciatis (fratres) quad quicunque uxori d…bitum …eddit non potest …acare orationi nec de carnibus agni comedere. 1 Cor. 7. 5.or touching any dead th…ng, &c. which, as all other ceremonies, ceased long agoe. Wherefore the Popish are in an error, who teach that the Matrimonial Act doth so defile, that it is unlawfull the day following to partake of the holy Communion, or to pray, and that by reason of this defilement it is unlawfull for Priests under the New Testament to marry, because they daily celebrate the Communion. For touching the first, although the Apostle saith, Defraud not one another, except it be by consent for a season, that you may give your selves to fasting and prayer, yet it followeth not hereupon, that in the companying together of man and wife there is uncleannesse, hindering, and making unfit for those duties, but because of the pleasure that is herein, which agreeth not with the sorrow, that should be at such extraordinary times, the Apostle spake so. For if prayer could not stand with matrimoniall duties, then matrimony were altogether unlawfull, seeing wee must pray continually. And for eating the holy bread of the Communion, the Aaronicall Priests themselves were not made Thes. 5. 17.unfit by companying with their wives, for they were marryed men, and attended daily upon the Altar, before that their number being much increased they were in Davids time distinguisht into courses, and ate of the holy bread and offerings. And if not immediately after such matrimonicall acts, but they refrained because of the law in force then, yet now there is no such uncleannesse herein to hinder the people from receiving, or the Priest from administring. Yet for better preparation, and that the minde may not bee drawn away from divine meditations, allare to be advised, rather to refraine against the times of communicating, then to take their liberty herein. Yet Gergory saith, no necessity is to bee imposed upon any man herein, but hee is to bee Gregor. Siquis sua conjuge non voluptate cupidinis, sed procreationi… cuasa utitur, de sumendo corporis et sangu. Domini mysterio suo relinquendus est arbitrio, quia a n…bi… proliberi non debet, qui in igne post… nescit ardere.left to his owne discretion, and not for this to bee kept from the Communion by us, that knoweth not to burn, when he is put in the fire. St. Augustine speaketh of some, that received the Communion every day, which hee doth neither praise nor dispraise, but to receive every Lords Day he perswadeth. De Dogmat. eccles. c. 53. but from hence we may gather, that in the matrimonial duty it was then held, that there was no uncleannesse, for if so, what Christian could have marryed? and if there were no uncleannesse to hinder receiving, there is none to hinder the administring of the holy Communion. To come now to the condition required by the Priest, If the young men have kept themselves from women: Herein Ierom saith, Ahimelech spake foolishly, for although they had not kept themselves from women, he must not rather have suffered them to starve, then to have given them holy bread. But happily he thought them not to be in so great necessity, and therefore he spake accordingly, that hee might not give them of this bread, except they were cleane, unlesse in the case of extreame want to save their lives, in which case a ceremony must give place to charity. Moreover Iunius saith, he consulted with God about giving him victuals, and by him was directed to question this, see Ch. 22. 10. Wherefore the Popish in forbidding a Carthusian to eate flesh in what necessity soever, and a sonne to come out of his monastery to labour for the reliefe of his aged Parents, although ready to perish through want, doe grossely erre, as the Pharisees overthrowing Gods Commandement by their traditions.
And the vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in a manner common; yea though it were sanctifi…d this day in the vessell; the Vulgar Latin, moreover this way is polluted, but it shall bee sanctified to day in the vessels, Junius, it is in a manner common with the Priests, especially seeing other bread is sanctified this day in the vessell. The Vulgar Latin agreeth best with the Hebrew, foreign which is word for word, and the way it selfe is common or uncleane, &c. but because foreign signifieth also modum, manner, it is so rendred by some: the next words, penes sacerdotes, with or in the power of the Priests, is added by Junius, for further expression; and in the next, other bread, is added, and of the whole sentence hee giveth this exposition, the vessels of the young men, that is, their bagges or Junius.sackes, as the word is taken, Ch. 9. 7. and in the end of this verse, the word vessel is put for that, wherein the bread was put: David meaneth then, that the vessels wherein they would carry the bread, were fit to put holy bread into, because they were not uncleane: so likewise Hugo having expounded it another Hugo Cardin.way, of their bodies, mentioneth this of vessels or baskets to carry victuals in, saying, either it may so be understood. And Willet reasoneth against that of bodies Willet.understood by vessels, because enough had been spoken of the cleannesse of their bodies before, in that they had not come at women in three dayes before, wherefore it is not likely, that David being in haste would stand to iterate the same againe in other words more obscure. And of the next words Iunius giveth this sense; the time being now come to put other shewbread before the Lord, this is not now so holy, because the Priests did eate commonly of it, but hee saith, these words are added by the author from Levit. 24. 9. And for expounding foreign in a manner, Willet argueth both from other places, where it is used in this sense, as Esa. 10. 26. and to prove, that it cannot be taken here for a way, he saith, that it is of the feminine gender and the word foreign of the masculine. But Comestor, Lyra, Peter Martyr, Borrhaeus, Pellican, by vessels understand Schol. Hist. Lyra. Pellican. &c.bodies, as the word is taken, 1 Thes. 4. 4. 2 Cor. 4. 7. and women are called the weaker vessels, 1. Pet. 3. 7. and so the meaning is, wee are not onelyonly free from uncleannesse in respect of women, but in respect of any thing else, that might make us uncleane: and being thus expounded here is no repetition of the same thing, as was before objected, but a securing of the Priest touching any manner of uncleannesse, about which hee might make scruple. As for vessels to put the bread in, I cannot see, how they should bee meant here, because it is not likely, that Davids comming away being in hast, he would goe or send home for bagges or baskets to put victuals in, but rather, that he was furnished with such things where he had this bread. I assent, therefore to the most for this first clause. For the next, Lyra expoundeth it thus, in coming by the way, indeed happily wee may be some occurrence have contracted uncleannesse, but forsomuch as the vessels of our bodies are cleane from women, wee shall have a sanctified use of this bread: or thus, this way or proceeding, to give to lay-persons holy bread is uncleane, or unlawfull indeed, but our necessity, we being now ready to starve, if we have it not, maketh it lawfull. Comestor, thy question is prophane, for although we were cleane, we might not being no Priests eate of this bread, but necessity hath no law, and therefore we eating it in our necessity, it shall not be polluted, or any thing unlawfull be done, but this eating, and feeding the vessels of our bodies with it, shall before God be counted an holy and lawfull using of it. Hugo followeth Comestor, but onelyonly that he hath these words more. David by saying it is sanctified in the vessels, meant that he was sanctified in his minde, for that with an holy minde and not willing to offend the law of God, he would use this bread being urged by necessity, otherwise he would not presume to eate of it. Peter Martyr, I am in the manner of a prophane man, for whom it is not lawfull to eate it, but taking it for my necessity, and using it holily, it shall not be polluted. Osiander, by Osiander.prophane way understandeth their businesse, which was not religious, but worldly and common. Genevens: it shall be sanctified in the vessels, that is, having Genevens. Vatablus.taken this bread, we will be more carefull to keepe our bodies holy. Vatablus, we will keepe it holily in the vessels, wherein we carry it. To me the meaning seemeth to be plainely this, the vessels or bodies of the young men are cleane, and so holy, and thus fit to receive this bread, because the Priest had spoken of his holy bread, although the way, which they have come, be common or uncleane, because many in travell doe sinne, being carryed by fleshly lusts, neverthelesse it shall be sanctified, that is, holily used, being received into their vessels or bodies, because they are none of that sort of young men, but chast and fearing God, so foreign answereth to foreign holy bread mentioned by the Priest before, and foreign common or prophane to foreign common bread likewise before mentioned by him.
So the Priest him ballowed bread, for there was no bread there, but the shewbread, V. 6.which was taken from before the Lord, to put hot bread in the day that it was taken away. Of this shew-bread there were 12 cakes, two tenth deales to a cake, and they were changed every Sabbath day, the old being taken off, and new being set on the Table of shew-bread, as is shewed, Lev: 24. 8. Hence it is gathered, that it was the Sabbath day, when David came to Ahimelech, but this doth not necessarily follow, forsomuch as it is not said, it was that day taken from before the Lord, but in the day that it was taken, hot bread was set there, so that it might be taken before the time of Davids comming, but not yet spent. And although the bread set on upon the Sabbath was hot, yet as Martyr saith, it was not baked that day, but the day before, and left in the Peter Martyr.Oven all night. Of the mystery of this bread, see Lev: 24. and Exod: 25. 30. Martyr will have not onelyonly the spirituall food of the word and sacraments set forth hereby, and the number of 12. to set forth the 12 Apostles, but also how that we have all our corporall food from God, by the meanes of the heavenly planets, whose influences make the earth fruitfull.
Now there was a certaine man of the servants of Soul, there detained that day before V. 7.the Lord, and his name was Doeg an Edomite, This of Doeg is here inserted, because of the history following ch: 22. of his accusing Ahimelech unto Saul. This Doeg, saith Lyra, was not in the Tabernacle, but in the Court, for into the Tabernacle none but the Priests might enter, and he was detained by reason of some Lyra.offerings and prayers that he came to make upon a vow, which could not be finished, but in more dayes then one, and he saith, he is held by the Hebrewes to have beene a judge, and the chiefe of Sauls judges, for judges are shepheards of the people, and he saith, it is not likely, that he was a keeper of Cattell, because he is said ch: 22. 9. to be the chiefe of Sauls servants. Hugo saith according to Hugo Cardin.Josephus, that he kept the Mules of Saul, and likewise the interlinear glosse, and that he was detained here by some vow, which he had made to continue at the Tabernacle in prayer certaine dayes; and that he was not a judge but a shepheard, or heard-man, (for foreign signifieth either) doe I thinke, for he was a servant of Sauls, as judges be not called. Doeg is said to be an Edomite, as some thinke, because descended of an Edomite, but by religion an Israelite; but Hebr: it is Adomite, and Junius thinketh, that he might be so called from the Iunius.City Adamah in the Tribe of Nephtali, Josh: 19. 36. or the prickes being changed, Adomite might be put for Edomite. In him was figured Judas, that betrayed our Saviour, and all such, as pretend piety, but are full of malice and wickednesse The Mystery.in their hearts, such are damnable hypocrites.
Then David desired of Ahimelech a speare or sword, and he told him that he had none there but the sword of Goliah, which lay wrapt in a cloth behinde the Ephod: V. 8, 9.How the head and armour of Goliah was disposed of, see ch: 17. 54. where it was shewed, that his sword was placed in the Tabernacle for a monument of that victory, and not dedicated to God, as Lyra saith some doe hold, for if so, then it had beene unlawfull for David to take it, and to put it to any common Lyra.use againe. Yet Peter Martyr saith, that it was dedicated, and therefore not to be taken, but in the case of necessity, wherein David now was. Whereas it is said to have lyen behinde the Ephod; Junius rendreth the words thus, after that he had applyed the Ephod, he said, behold the sword of Goliah &c. lyeth wrapped Junius.up in a linnen cloth, approving this reading both from Jonathan the Chald: paraphrast and Jeshaiah an Hebr: interpreter, and from that which followeth, ch: 22. 10, 11. where Doeg saith, that the Priest asked counsell of God for him, of which no mention is made here, unlesse it be meant by these words after the Ephod, as it is in Hebrew, that is, after the Ephod applyed for consultation. And it is not likely, saith Willet, that the rich Ephod, which was for the High-priest, did lye open for any man to come to it, so as that if Goliahs sword lay behinde that, David could not have come to take it, as the Priest bade him, because none but the Priests come into the Tabernacle, but onelyonly to the doore thereof, and he referreth for the like use of the word foreign to Deut: 24. 21. But although he bade David take it, it followeth not, that he meant he should goe to the place, where it lay, to take it, for David by and by saith, Give it me, and ch: 21. 10. he gave it unto him. In bidding him take it then, he onelyonly made him the offer of it, so that this is no argument against the laying of it behinde the Ephod. Wherefore I subscribe rather to the first and most received translation, and for omitting his consulting with God for David in this place, it is not a thing unusuall Vatabl. P. Martyr, Osiand.in other places, for every thing done is not alwayes related at the first, but afterwards. When David heard of the sword of Goliah, he said, there was none to it, because as Martyr hath it, he counted it, as it were a sacrament, whereby P. Martyr.Gods benefits past were brought to his minde, and his hope was further confirmed. Pellican thinketh, that David sinned in taking this sword, because dedicated to God, and that he did unwisely, being to goe amongst the Philistims, who could not but know it.
Then David fled to Achish, the King of Gath, but when he heard it spoken amongst his servants, that he was David King of the Land, he was afraid, and V. 10.faigned himselfe mad, &c. They called him King, saith Lyra, because they had heard that he was anointed by Samuel, but that being so secretly done, saith Lyra.Martyr, could not be knowne amongst the Philistims, and therefore they called him so from the superlative praise given unto him, when he returned in triumph Peter Martyr.from the slaughter of Goliah. Now David hearing this beginneth to see that he had done unwisely in fleeing into the Philistims country, and to escape this danger, because the report of his wisedome and valour brought him into danger, he faigned himselfe mad, and let the spittle fall upon his beard, and scrabled upon the dores of the Gate: thus some have acted the greatest part of wisedome, Stul…itiam simulare loco prudentia summa est.as Brutus, who likewise fained himselfe mad, when he set himselfe most seriously to meditate upon the good of the common wealth, and Ʋlyssos, when he would not goe forth to Warre with the Grecians, like a mad man sowing his ground, that was tilled, with salt. For these words, he scrabled, Martyr hath he described upon the doores, that is, saith he, some ridiculous and foolish things, and so the word foreign signifieth, he scribled or made markes, for thus lunatickes and mad men used to doe. And this is said to have come from a great feare, that was in David, and yet it is by many justified in him. For in dissimulation it is to be considered; 1. with what minde it is done; 2. about what Willet.subiect or matter; 3. for what end. For if it be not from a distrustfull minde, but used as a meane to save a mans selfe, a confidence being still in God to make this meanes effectuall, it is no sinne; 2. if the matter which, be not religious, but civill; 3. if the end be not uncharitable, but to doe good to himselfe or others without hurt to any. And these three were in David at this time, for 1. although he feared, yet he cast not away his confidence in God, see Ps. 34. 6. 2. it was in a civill matter; 3. his end was to save himselfe without hurt to any. But contrariwise he that dissembleth, not having any confidence in God, in the time of danger, or in matter of religion for gaine or honour, as Simon Magus and other hypocrites, or lastly with a malicious minde, the more closely to doe hurt unto his brother, as Cain to Abel, he sinneth greatly against God, and therefore such dissimulation is by all men to be abhorred. Thus Willet, who also maketh a difference between dissimulation in the carriage and gesture and lying, which is alwayes with a minde to deceive: for a man may tell an untruth August. Euchir. 22. Qui dicit falsum quod putat verum, non fallit, sed sallitur: non itaque mendacii sed temeritatis arguendus est. Nec ullo modo liber est a mendacio, qui ore nesciens verum loquitur, sciens autem voluntate mentitur.and yet not lie, if he himselfe thought it to be true, and in spaking the truth be a lye…, if he thought it false, as Augustine saith. Hee that telleth a thing false thinking it true, doth not deceive, but is deceived, and therefore is not to be reproved for lying, but for rashnesse. And againe, he that unwittingly speaketh the truth with his mouth, but wittingly lyeth in his will, is not free from lying. Now although some dissimulation be lawfull, yet no lying is lawfull, no not so much as the jeasting or officious lye. For although there be no great fault herein, as August: noteth, yet they are not without fault. The first of these is not pernicious, because it deceiveth not, and the second lesse, because it retaineth some good will, but if any man thinketh, that there is any kinde of lye that is nor a sinne, he deceiveth himselfe. Reasons against the most tolerable kinde of lying, is 1. because the truth is hereby corrupted, 2. to lye is simply evill, as being contrary to God, and evill may not be done, that good may come of it, &c. so Peter Martyr: yet it is not lying to conceale part of the Peter Martyr.truth, as Samuel did, 1 Sam. 16. when he came to Bethlehem, nor alwayes when a man doth not, what he saith he will doe, as if a man taking a sword of a man promising to give it him againe, if he proveth mad, although he now giveth him it not, doth not lye, as August: saith, and other like cases may be put of parents, saying they will beate their children to terrifie them for their amendment, as God said he would doe by Nineveh, but yet they doe it not.
Some to excuse Davids fact here, say that he was taken with a fit of madnesse, Pellican.and some that he did it by a divine instinct; but what neede such devices? Hee did thus to save himselfe, and as some thinke, not without a mystery, the account that Christ was had in being figured out hereby, for he was counted mad, and to Paul it was said, Much learning hath made thee mad. Lyra saith, that Christ, according to this type, changed his countenance and gesture, when Lyra.he taught the contempt of worldly things, which in the Law were promised as blessings, for which they counted him mad. Now this policy of David V. 14, 15.tooke so, as that Achish put him away, as a mad man, and he escaped.