THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST (10)
[p. 186] THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST (10)
1 Samuel 18:6 - 9; 1 Samuel 19:9 - 17; 1 Samuel 23:6 - 12
JT Brethren are aware that in our consideration of the sufferings of Christ in the Old Testament, we have dwelt upon certain men who suffered, beginning with Abel, and following on with Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Caleb, and Joshua. It was thought that in this reading and the subsequent ones, we should consider the prophets, including David, for he was a prophet as Acts 2:30 shows. The Lord calls attention to the fact that the prophets suffered at the hands of Israel, and Stephen says, “Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?” (Acts 7:52). So that they come in for special consideration in the New Testament, as sharers in the sufferings of Christ. David, however, was more than a prophet, he was also king. The first mention of David in the New Testament is in Matthew 1:6; we meet him in the generations from Abraham to Christ as “David the king”; that he is to be considered also in that light, as a type of the Messiah. This affords opportunity to speak for the first time in these meetings on the sufferings of Christ in His relations with Israel as their King.
AP The Lord says in the end of John that He was born King. Do these sufferings date from that time?
JT He suffered peculiarly as King, the representative of the nation. Scripture says the Messiah was to be cut off, and have nothing; (Daniel 9).
JS Is it jealousy of David that we see here on the part of Saul; he being superseded by David?
JT I thought the first verses read would show that. There was no thought on David’s part to eclipse Saul, but he was already recognised as [p. 187] superior. He had slain his ten thousands, whereas Saul is regarded as slaying only thousands.
AFM Going back again to your remark that the Messiah was cut off and had nothing, in what part of David’s life is that exemplified?
JT His attempted murder by Saul would correspond, but Christ actually suffered death. He was smitten by God as the Shepherd of Israel; (Zechariah 13). David represents that side of the sufferings of Christ which culminated in His being cut off — a side that is perhaps little understood by us.
AFM You refer now to the sufferings that David endured through Saul generally?
JT Yes, Saul, and those who joined with him, represent the opposition that arose in Israel against their Messiah. It was envy. Scripture says that Pilate knew that the Jewish leaders delivered Him up because of envy. That was at the root of their opposition to Christ as King.
WM It is striking that persecution of Christ as King began almost at His birth, and then at His crucifixion, over His head was set up the superscription, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews”. (Matthew 27:37).
JT Yes, the magi came up (Matthew 2) from the east to inquire about the King which had been born; this aroused Herod’s jealousy, so that he “slew all the boys ... in Bethlehem, and in all its borders, from two years and under” (verse 16); designing thus to destroy the King.
CAM The sufferings of those who possessed the Spirit of Christ in the Old Testament would prefigure certain sufferings of the Lord Jesus in His pathway before His death, would you say?
JT Yes. The prophets testified beforehand of the sufferings of Christ and the glories that should follow. This testimony would be seen in David, not only in word prophetically, but in actuality. He suffered as exhibiting the spirit of the King. As was [p. 188] remarked, the King was attacked soon after He was born. He is sought out by those who valued Him; but Herod’s animosity was aroused by the inquiry of the magi as to where Christ should be born, and learning through the priests and scribes that it was in Bethlehem, he sent the wise men there and asked them to return and report to him when they found Him; his object being to destroy the King.
AFM Would you tell us just where the opposition of Absalom came in, which called forth so much suffering on the part of David?
JT That would be covered in our subject, but is connected with the government of God, on account of David’s own sin. The sufferings of Christ endured by David as primarily representative of Christ as King are, I think, in the first book of Samuel, and the first verses read here give the clue to what underlie them. Those in the second book are more typical of what has occurred since His exaltation in heaven.
WB-w Do you link the sufferings from Saul with the sufferings from Herod?
JT They have the same character.
ANW In both cases the antipathy is in kings; Saul is mentioned as king, also Herod.
JT They were thus qualified to be tools of the enemy in that particular line of persecution. Displacement of them arouses their hatred.
JHE Herod was an Edomite, was he not?
JT Yes, but he acted as a Jew. Herod built the temple. He represents, I think, the spirit of Saul — that of rivalry. The title and office he held rightly belonged to Christ.
AFM So in our passage, Saul says, “and what is there more for him but the kingdom?” Does that explain it?
JT Yes, that verse gives the key to the position. Jonathan reminds his father that when David wrought [p. 189] the great victory, he rejoiced, but these acclamations of the women in Israel provoked his envy.
WB-w As David returned from the slaughter of the Philistines this suffering began. Do you fit that in with any part of the Lord’s life and testimony?
JT Well, it would be when He met the devil in the wilderness. Of course, that was not anti-typical of Goliath’s death, but the devil was in principle overthrown then. There is the principle of power against the enemy from the very outset of the Lord’s ministry. What these chapters 17 and 18 bring out is the power of David against the Philistines. However he attacked them, or whatever the circumstances, he always triumphed.
CAM You were going to say something about the fact that the celebration of these women became the occasion of the opposition of Saul.
JT That is how the truth stands. It was hard for the flesh in Saul to endure the people ascribing superiority to David. The women doing it showed that appreciation of the true king was taking root. Presently it is said that all Israel and Judah loved David.
WM Do you not think there was a kind of envy when the Lord’s activity was noticed by the Pharisees, and when the favour of God rested on Him, they said, “This is the heir; come, let us kill him and possess his inheritance”, (Matthew 21:38). Saul had the same in his mind when he said, “and what is there more for him but the kingdom?”
ABP Is not the same thing seen in the chief priests and Pharisees, saying, “If we let him thus alone, all will believe on him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation”, (John 11:48)?
JT Yes, it came out constantly, not only in such a man as Herod, but in the chief priests and Pharisees, who also represent the [p. 190] ruling class.
AFM Are these women here suggestive of a subjective element in Israel? It reminds us of the women who at the Red Sea sang the chorus of the song led by Miriam.
JT Yes. David was already gaining the affection of the people, and that is what the ruling class — those who are already in power — cannot endure. As we were remarking, David suffered from his youth; even when Samuel came to Bethlehem to anoint the king, provided by Jehovah, David was not there. Why was he not there? Surely, it was the enemy that kept him away. His father was not equal to the moment, neither were his brothers. This is often the case today, that a meeting is not equal to Christ; it is wanting in what is needful for His presence. Jehovah said to Samuel, “go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite; for I have provided me a king among his sons ... And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will tell thee what thou shalt do; and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee”, (1 Samuel 16:1 - 3). Samuel went, and instead of waiting for the Lord to tell him, he began at once to select Eliab. He did not wait for Jehovah that is, he was below the standard. He did not wait, and that is, I think, a reminder to us that if Christ is to command our affections, there must be the spirit of waiting with us. Samuel would anoint Eliab; but Jehovah says, “Look not on his countenance” (verse 7); that is to say, we often think of the distinguished men present at a meeting, and are misguided. David in this instance, was not there at all; instead of being there he was suffering. He may not have felt it much, but in looking back upon it, he would surely feel it.
WM He was publicly slighted by his father and his brethren.
JT I think so. Were we to go into the [p. 191] different churches in Christendom we should find that Christ is not there.
AP Do you think Saul allowing the Amalekite to live, as recorded in chapter 15, would represent the general condition preceding this scene in Bethlehem?
JT That is right; that element was not thoroughly judged. David was a very attractive young man, and yet he was not at the sacrifice. You may be sure the devil saw to it that he was not there for as present he would attract Samuel. Moreover whilst you could not attribute hostility to Jesse, yet there must have been that in him which the enemy could act upon so that he did not bring David in. On this account Samuel was at a great disadvantage, and was not equal to the moment. Jesse’s seven elder sons passed before Samuel, but not one of them would Jehovah approve. Samuel says, “Jehovah has not chosen these”, (verse 10). Well, you can understand how exercised Samuel would be about this, being a spiritual man. We too should feel exercised if in a meeting there is no room for Christ. Then Samuel asked, “Are these all the young men?” Jesse says, “There is yet the youngest remaining, and behold, he is feeding the sheep. And Samuel said to Jesse, Send and fetch him; for we will not sit at table till he come hither”, (verse 11). Now they are all standing waiting for this young man to come in.
WM That would arouse the jealousy of his brothers.
JT Surely it would.
JS In such circumstances the prophet shines. He makes definite room for Christ.
JT Yes; that is where Samuel shines; he is able to recover himself. He is not going to smooth the thing over and make the best of it, which often happens in a meeting, without the true David. He says, in effect, we will just wait; we will do nothing; we will not sit down until he comes. Jesse has to [p. 192] send for David, and when he comes in the Spirit of God tells us how beautiful he is. And so in chapter 18 David is attractive as a type of Christ.
WM Do you not think the celebration of the women was rather mixed? They attributed much to Saul, but yet a great deal more to David.
JT That is right. Later on, however, Saul is omitted altogether; all Israel and Judah loved David. That is what we all need to come to.
AP Psalm 78:70 would emphasise what you are saying; it says, “he chose David his servant, and took him from the sheepfolds”.
JT You can understand how Satan had kept David out, and now he is keeping Christ out of hundreds of gatherings for the professed worship of God. The state and principles of the people are not such as to admit Him.
CAM Satan always seeks to have something to displace the Lord.
JT Jesse no doubt made things look as good as possible on that occasion, from Eliab down. I have no doubt they were all at their best, which meant that David was not wanted or needed. But God intended to bring His choice forward.
WM It is imposing men that shut Christ out.
AFM What gatherings do you refer to in which Christ is kept out?
JT I am speaking generally of Christendom. They make big men in colleges and seminaries, and regard that as enough. Of course, there are exceptions, but generally speaking a man head and shoulders above others is desired and secured, and Christ is left out as not being needed.
AP That might also mark such occasions as fellowship meetings where there is too much made of human ability and arrangements.
NMcC The kind of man you mention does not slay many [p. 193] Philistines!
JT Big men flatter one another. The Philistines represent the big men of today in Christendom. David slew the Philistine and cut off his head. Bigness in the sense implied is in the head — mental ability. Eliab was of that kind, and even Samuel for the moment was a little on that line, but Jehovah saved him from anointing the wrong man. In fact Eliab, a little later, became a persecutor of David; he says, “with whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness? I know thy pride and the naughtiness of thy heart; for thou art come down that thou mightest see the battle”, (1 Samuel 17:28). In his persecution he would turn David aside from delivering Israel.
WM “For neither did his brethren believe on him”, (John 7:5). Eliab would represent that principle in the sufferings of Christ.
JT What is said about David is that “he was ruddy, and besides of a lovely countenance and beautiful appearance”. Ruddiness suggests that he was living spiritually, and that is the test in such circumstances whether we are living; whether those in authority amongst the saints are living. Christ was thus marked. “The words which I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life”, (John 6:63). So you get David’s name immediately, meaning, “beloved”. God had found much pleasure in David before this, he had already slain the lion and the bear by his power, but at Bethlehem they were endeavouring to have a good time without him. As brought in and anointed, “the Spirit of Jehovah came upon David from that day forward”. His name is now formally given: David or “Beloved”, designating the person already known and loved of God. How vivid is the type of Christ here?
AFM The chapter goes on to show that not only do we have the Spirit’s description of David, but there are others besides who took notice of these [p. 194] attractive qualities in him. Verse 18 reads, “Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skilled in playing, and he is a valiant man and a man of war, and skilled in speech, and of good presence, and Jehovah is with him”.
JT Do we not see in all this how the Spirit of God is bringing the attractiveness of Christ before us? That is largely the testimony; the ministry of the Spirit is to present to us the attractiveness of Christ personally. Now David gives us in the form of Psalms how he felt in his sufferings. You find Psalms written on salient occasions of suffering; so that we get his own point of view, which is very important in this matter. There are about thirteen such Psalms: Psalm 3, Psalm 7, Psalm 18, Psalm 34, Psalm 51, Psalm 52, Psalm 54, Psalm 56, Psalm 57, Psalm 59, Psalm 60, Psalm 63, and Psalm 142. These Psalms greatly help us as to David’s feelings and sufferings.
AP In 2 Samuel 22:6, he sums it up by saying: “The bands of Sheol surrounded me; the cords of death encountered me”.
JT That is one in the list of Psalms just mentioned: it is the longest of those Psalms. You will observe that it is called a “song” in 2 Samuel, but it is a “psalm” in the book of Psalms, and in the latter it begins with the statement, “I will love ... Jehovah”; that is, David is a gainer in all his suffering. He does not say that in 2 Samuel 22. That helps us as to this great matter, showing how David grew, because that Psalm was written at the end of his life when he was delivered from all his enemies and from the hand of Saul; it is very comprehensive. Those Psalms that speak of his experiences show how he progressed. Psalm 18, I think, is last historically — not the last in the book. It is in the first book of Psalms, which is David’s book peculiarly depicting his sufferings, and it shows us the consummation of his exercises, that is, that he loved Jehovah. He had not lost ground in [p. 195] all his exercises and sufferings, but had gained through them.
WFK Is there a feature of Christ in His suffering, that He suffered without cause?
JT That is what comes out. “They hated me without a cause” is quoted by the Lord, from Psalm 69. Returning to 1 Samuel 16, why should David, a beautiful young man, the eighth and youngest of Jesse’s sons, be kept out of this great occasion? What was the cause?
NMcC I would like to ask about Samuel’s failure in distinguishing God’s chosen one; what was the reason for that?
JT It shows that a most spiritual man may miss the mind of God in a given circumstance. Samuel missed it at a most important juncture; and so did Joseph when his father would bless Ephraim instead of Manasseh. All this is to remind us of the need for dependence on God under all circumstances.
AFM Do you think Samuel needed yet to be weaned from the spirit and manner of Saul? The features of Eliab that came before him were similar to those of Saul.
JT I think so. He had been mourning for Saul unduly. Evidently there was something there that had not been judged in his apprehension of Saul. God says to him, “How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel?” (1 Samuel 16:1). He was slow to get on to the divine line, to change over to another order of man.
ANW Something similar to Abraham’s feelings as to Ishmael.
JT Just so; and Isaac’s as to Esau.
JS There had been some movement in the testimony that Samuel missed. God was, so to speak, ahead of him.
JT That is what we should learn — the need for dependence at all times; otherwise I may be right today and out of line tomorrow.
RWS [p. 196] The outstanding head and shoulders are likely to pervert our judgment. The Spirit seems to exhaust adjectives to describe David’s beauty; but of Saul He speaks only of “his shoulders and upward”, (1 Samuel 9:2).
NP You get in this verse that Saul was afraid of David.
JT That is the most solemn thing, that in envying and hating David he became afraid of him, for he knew that the Lord was with him.
CAM You were referring to the fact that his ruddy countenance showed that life marked David; and being able to play skilfully with the hands he foreshadows further glories of Christ.
JT It points to the chief musician. He is not only a warrior, he is also a refined and skilled man. His musical ability was in view of the service of God; it would work out in the service of God as seen in 1 Chronicles.
CAM For that the Psalms were necessary.
JT The Psalms are even a greater tribute to David personally than his military triumphs. He is not only king, he is head and leader in God’s service.
CAM So in chapter 16:18, skilled in playing is mentioned before the fact that he is a valiant man, and a man of war.
FHL Is there not a background to this, in that he was “with the sheep”? Even Saul’s message to Jesse refers to that fact.
JT Quite so. He was “with the sheep”. That is testimony to Christ as caring for the saints.
FHL I was thinking of how the Spirit of God in magnifying what David was personally, bears witness to his service in humility.
JT In that service he delivered the lamb from the lion and the bear. All that was in secret.
ARS Although the enemy may do everything he can to keep David, that is Christ, out of sight, the [p. 197] moment is coming when He will be manifested in glory as supreme, and the enemy will be defeated.
JT God takes the matter in hand, and Saul sees that Jehovah is with David, and Jonathan is with David, and all Israel loved David. Triumph is in view, but suffering also; so that in the next chapter Saul’s hatred is becoming more energetic. Chapter 19 is very remarkable as to the agencies by which David in his sufferings was preserved from destruction. First of all, Jonathan is an agent in this. “Jonathan spoke good of David to Saul his father, and said ... Let not the king sin against his servant, against David”, (verse 4) “And Saul hearkened to the voice of Jonathan” (verse 6), that is, Jonathan becomes the means in Jehovah’s hand of saving David. Then it says, “And there was war again; and David went forth and fought with the Philistines, and smote them with a great slaughter; and they fled before him”, (verse 8). David is coming into greater prominence. Then it says, “And an evil spirit from Jehovah was upon Saul”. A terrible character of opposition is seen in this. It says, “And he sat in his house with his spear in his hand; and David played with his hand. And Saul sought to smite David and the wall with the spear”.
JTJr The slaying of the Philistines by David seems to bring out the hatred of Saul.
JT The evil spirit is from Jehovah. It is governmental, but Satan is active. As sitting in his house where David, his son-in-law, was playing there should have been the very best feelings. But Saul sought to smite him and the wall.
AFM David here is playing with his hand in order to soothe Saul, and yet it seems to be of no avail.
ABP Is that not a warning to us in our local settings? Is there not a tendency oft-times to jealousy, and even refreshing ministry is not valued,
[p. 198] for Satan comes in to disturb and uproot what is of God?
ANW Would you say a little more why the Philistine character of the enemy goes along with this?
JT Applying it to modern circumstances in Christendom, I think it is an age of big men. The Philistines refer typically to big men in the history of the assembly. That principle started early and developed rapidly after apostolic days. Philosophy and learning generally acquired a great place in the nominal service of God.
AP Would you say even before the Reformation there were men who stood against the Philistines, and that there were Jonathans to protect and support them?
JT Yes; there were many like Jonathan. He never left Saul’s system, but he was a lover of David.
WM It is very beautiful to see that while there was murder in Saul’s heart, there was music in David’s heart.
AFM How would you apply Michal’s support of David in this deception?
JT Michal is the next instrumentality for his preservation, and we have to understand what these instrumentalities mean. Jonathan never left Saul’s system, and Michal never left it until Saul’s death, and yet each saved David.
JS Do you not think that such are the only preservative elements in the “systems” today — those that love Christ?
JT Yes; they have influence. During the Reformation and the centuries following they are very noticeable. I think Michal may be illustrative of the Anglican system. There has been a certain protection of Christ there, even up to the present [p. 199] time. Merab is seen more as Rome, she was given to another; she never helped David at all whereas Michal loved David.
AP Michal stays with “the image”, whereas David had left.
JT There is a great deal in that as to the Anglican system, but she let David down through the window. Indeed, it was through Michal’s advice he left the house so that he might escape Saul’s messengers, so that she was used to save him.
WM Why was there any necessity for the image, when she let David down and he had escaped?
JT It was part of the effort to save David, but there is in it undoubtedly an allusion to what takes the place of Christ in the system we have referred to. We must not discard any consideration for Christ in Christendom. We should recognise and be thankful for anyone that would protect His Person.
WM Even if He is absent, they have a kind of image, would you say?
JT Well, He is protected anyway. I recall quite a flurry here some years ago, in relation to a discussion in Kentucky, when a certain well-known politician publicly defended the Bible against modernism. That was not to be despised. While the image was intended by Michal to save David, the manner of the Spirit’s account of it indicates a hidden, prophetic meaning.
GMacP Was Nicodemus like Jonathan and Michal?
JT Yes; Nicodemus would represent that side in John’s gospel. John is the only one that mentions Nicodemus. He spoke on Christ’s behalf in the Council. Like Michal, he sought to protect Christ at a critical time. The fact that Michal let David down through a window so that he escaped, puts her in the line of Rahab, and the saints at Damascus — she [p. 200] belongs to that class. But she despised David later, which is a solemn thing.
Now as we read down the chapter we see how David was preserved by the Spirit of God, which is the final thought. It comes out in the end of the days, that Christ is preserved where the Spirit of God is recognised. In the end of chapter 19, we read, “it was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is at Naioth by Ramah. Then Saul sent messengers to take David; and they saw a company of prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as president over them; and the Spirit of God came upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied. And it was told Saul, and he sent other messengers, and they also prophesied. And Saul sent messengers again the third time, and they also prophesied. Then went he also to Ramah, and came to the great well that is in Sechu; and he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And one said, Behold, at Naioth by Ramah. And he went thither to Naioth by Ramah; and the Spirit of God came upon him also, and he went on, and prophesied, until he came to Naioth by Ramah. And he himself also stripped off his clothes, and prophesied, himself also, before Samuel, and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?”(verses 19 - 24). I think that is a most remarkable paragraph: it may be applied to the present time, as showing how Christ is protected where the Spirit of God is. David comes to Samuel, and Samuel is with a company of prophets who are prophesying, and he is presiding over them, and these messengers come, one after another, and they prophesy, and Saul comes and he prophesies, but he is exposed. That is the point, I think, in these last days, that there is some room for the Spirit of God, whose presence is marked by prophecy, and what Saul represents is exposed there. We see him now just as he is, but the Spirit is in such [p. 201] power that even he prophesies, and David is preserved.
WM What do you mean by saying Saul was exposed?
JT He lay naked. The Spirit of God exposes everything. The spirit of prophecy exposes the thoughts of men’s hearts.
JEH Caiaphas prophesied in relation to the death of Christ, and he was exposed as falsely judging Him later.
JT The fact that he prophesied did not prove that he was a lover of Christ. He was an opposer, but he prophesied.
CAM I suppose God allows what seems to come under the power of the Spirit in this way to be shown up in its proper character before it comes to an end.
JT I think that is most important. As positive ministry in the power of the Spirit is maintained, current opposition will be exposed. “Their folly shall be completely manifest to all”, (2 Timothy 3:9). That indicates what God is doing, I think.
WGT Would modernism be a form of opposition?
JT Yes; and opposition by imitation. I think one of the greatest services that can be rendered in the testimony is to expose what is current in Christendom — what Satan is doing.
JS You mean for the deliverance of the people of God that are already in bondage through it?
JT Quite so.
WB-w If the flesh is active in any one of us, it is better to have it exposed than to cover it up.
JT I think it is more important that the evil should be exposed. As it says in 1 Timothy 5:20 “Those that sin convict before all”. That is, what one is guilty of is manifest.
WM I think J.N.D.’s writings are a great exposure of Christendom.
JT I am sure that is what they are intended [p. 202] be. They are of such a character as to expose current evil.
APT John’s epistle helps us: “prove the spirits, if they are of God”, (1 John 4:1). Your reference in prayer to 1 Corinthians 12:3 “no one can say, Lord Jesus, unless in the power of the Holy Spirit”, makes one wonder whether that would not be a test with regard to those in system, as to how far they could go in that direction.
JT The Holy Spirit is the test; whether they can say “Lord Jesus” not merely in word, but in the power of the Spirit.
RDG The exposure is brought about by going on with what is positive, they were prophesying.
JT Quite; so you are struck with the greatness of the Spirit of God in this section. There is nothing said about Him with regard to Michal and Jonathan. They did a certain service but no service such as this. There is complete exposure here, and in the exposure Saul is weakened. What could he do? He could not slay David there.
FHL It is the head of the whole system that is exposed, as with the Philistines. It was the greatest man among them that was slain.
JT So that you find in 2 Corinthians 10:10 that the apostle approaches the root of the matter. He says, “because his letters, he says, are weighty and strong, but his presence in the body weak, and his speech naught”. The one referred to was; a minister of Satan. Satan himself was working at Corinth, and he was exposed. That is what, under God, is going on today, I believe.
NMcC Giving full credit to such service as Michal and Jonathan rendered David, it was not normal service.
JT It was not. God uses what is available; but we see that Jonathan and Michal could have had no power at Ramah. Ramah means “moral elevation”.
[p. 203] It was Samuel and a company of prophets, and Samuel was presiding over them, and the Holy Spirit speaking there. I think it would be well to see in chapter 23, that those who were specially benefited by David, the inhabitants of Keilah turn against him. He delivered them from the Philistines, but they failed him. It seems to me a very sorrowful thing that persons specially delivered, specially indebted to Christ, should fail Him. David finds this out by prayer, and through service of the ephod. This city is indebted to David in a particular way, yet was ready to deliver him up to Saul.
AFM How would you apply that to ourselves?
JT I think it would apply; it is a question of the secret state of our souls. It says, “And when David knew that Saul devised mischief against him, he said to Abiathar the priest, Bring the ephod. Then said David, Jehovah, God of Israel, thy servant hath heard for certain that Saul seeketh to come to Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake. Will the citizens of Keilah deliver me up into his hand? will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard? Jehovah, God of Israel, I beseech thee, tell thy servant. And Jehovah said, He will come down. And David said, Will the citizens of Keilah deliver up me and my men into the hand of Saul? And Jehovah said, They will deliver thee up”. It seems to me that is very touching; that David learned from God that these men would be faithless and deliver him up.
CAM Would it be like Paul appealing to the saints to pray for him that he might be delivered from men. “That we may be delivered from bad and evil men, for faith is not the portion of all”, (2 Thessalonians 3:2). I wondered whether in that way our prayer meetings would indicate how we regard what is precious to Christ, and the preservation of it.
JT I think they do. You are comforted at a [p. 204] meeting for prayer to discern that the prayers express intelligent loyalty to Christ. Here is a city that has just been delivered by David, and yet the inhabitants would deliver him up to Saul. It is a challenge to our hearts, as those who have been so benefited by the Lord in these last days.
ARS Is this not like the poor wise man that delivered the city, yet no one remembered the poor wise man?
JT Yes, very much like it; those of Keilah are going to deliver him up.
RDG Is it not beautiful that David should be so dependent immediately following a victory?
JT Yes; he is priest as well as king. He prays in confidence, “Jehovah, God of Israel”.
WB-w What about Doeg, the Edomite?
JT He is specially referred to in Psalm 52.
AFM Would you speak of the citizens of Keilah going as far as betrayal?
JT Yes; it was the state of their hearts. I think the Lord would speak to us as to where we are in our hearts, as to where circumstances might arise and we betray Him, in spite of our indebtedness to Him. Doeg would be different from a citizen of Keilah; as an Edomite, he was an hereditary enemy of Israel. The Lord’s supper is the test of our hearts, which He reads, as to where we are. Jehovah tells David where the hearts of those of Keilah were.
WB-w Psalm 52 is written about Doeg, the Edomite. David says, “I am like a green olive-tree in the house of God”. Does that not show how superior David was to the suffering, in his spirit?
JT Quite so. He had been to the house, to Ahimelech, and asked him what he had under his hand. He was ready to use what there was. He was a green olive-tree there. That is very beautiful, corresponding to what he always was, full of life and [p. 205] freshness.
JS Here you see the place that prayer has with David. His lines of communication with heaven are kept open.
JT Quite so; who can overcome a man like David? God tells him what the enemy will do. It was said later of Elisha that he told the king of Israel the words that the king of Syria spoke in his bed-chamber; (2 Kings 6:12).
WM It is striking that Jehovah did not tell him any more than his question required. This left him in dependence.
JS David then goes into the wilderness and abides in the strongholds. I suppose there is some feature of help in that for us?
JT That opens up a lot of history; the wilderness, the caves, being like a partridge on the mountains — what the experience implied is covered in special Psalms already referred to. I would encourage the brethren to look up these Psalms to get David’s own thoughts in these circumstances.
GMacP He did not go alone; he departed with about six hundred men.
JT Which showed he was not losing ground nor influence. Psalm 18 shows that he lost no ground spiritually either.
CAM It is one thing to see these things in history and another thing to see that the emotional side has been preserved — really for ever.
JT His experiences are almost entirely in the second book of the Psalms. Three of them are in the first book, and most of the others are in the second, so that we might know the sufferer’s own feelings.