Archive for the ‘1 Samuel 23’ Category
READING THE BOOK OF PSALMS
PART XLI
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Psalms 54 and 55
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Psalms 54 and 55 are individual petitions.
The tacked-on superscription of Psalm 54 links the psalm to 1 Samuel 23, in which David, on the run from King Saul, took refuge in the territory of the Ziphites. 1 Samuel 23 tells us that some Ziphites told Saul where David was hiding (verses 19 and 20). The superscription contradicts Psalm 54:
For strangers have risen up against me,
and ruthless men seek my life.
they are unmindful of God.
–Verse 5, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985, 1999)
Saul and David knew each other well.
The author of Psalm 54, beset by foes, trusts in God to issue a favorable judgment, as in a legal proceeding. The psalmist affirms that God is more powerful than the enemies and will act from hesed–steadfast love. Yet the psalmist is vengeful; he prays that God will exterminate the enemies, literally.
The translation by Father Mitchell J. Dahood, S.J., places that verse in the past tense:
He made the evil recoil on my defamers,
in his fidelity he annihilated them completely.
Revenge fantasies abound in the Book of Psalms. Psalm 54 is not the first text in this series to contain them. Neither is it the last. My comments about the folly of revenge are on the record in this series of posts, so I move along.
Psalm 55 is a challenging text. m Not only does it contain difficult vocabulary, but it also seems to be the product of splicing two poems together. The psalm opens in the midst of a threat by armed enemies. The psalm addresses God then a treacherous former friend then God again. The text concludes with a prayer that God bring “those murderous, treacherous men” down to Sheol, followed by an expression of trust in God.
The text in verses 19-22 (Jewish versification) is difficult, especially in the first half of verse 20. A comparison of translations of verses 19 and 20 demonstrates this point. TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures reads:
He redeems me unharmed
from the battle against me;
it is as though many are on my side.
God who has reigned from the first,
who will have no successor,
hears and humbles those who have no fear of God.
Robert Alter’s translation reads:
He has ransomed my life unharmed from my battle,
for many were against me–
Ishmael and Jalam and the dweller in the east,
who never will change and do not fear God.
Mitchell J. Dahood’s translation reads:
And the Ransomer heard my voice,
making payment for my life.
He drew near to me
when full many were against me.
El heard me and answered,
the Primeval One sent his reply
because in him there is no variation.
But they did not fear God.
What is happening in verse 20a? Based on the three translations I have quoted, we have either “Ishmael and Jalam and the dwellers in the east,” “God who has reigned from the first,/who will have no successor,” or “El heard me and sent me his reply/because in him there is no variation.” A literal translation of the Masoretic Text is gibberish:
God hears and answers them and is seated as of old.
Robert Alter’s translation follows one scholarly approach to verse 20a: listing some enemies by name. Alter’s commentary is the only I have read that refers to this approach in verse 20a.
The concluding petition of Psalm 55 suits the text:
And You, O God, bring them down
to the pit of destruction.
Men of bloodshed and deceit
will not finish half their days.
But I shall trust in you.
–Verse 24, Robert Alter
In contrast, these enemies were attempting to kill the psalmist. Yet I detect revenge again. Yet I cannot dispute that those who live by the sword will also die by it.
One commentary I consult argues that these passages in Psalms 54 and 55 are not prayers for revenge. J. Clinton McCann, Jr., writing in The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 4 (1996), insists that they are petitions for justice instead. So, where is the line that separates justice from revenge? It may be difficult to identify sometimes. May we, by grace, favor justice and eschew revenge.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JANUARY 15, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE SECOND SUNDAY AFTER THE EPIPHANY, YEAR A
THE FEAST OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER AND MARTYR, 1968
THE FEAST OF BERTHA PAULSSEN, GERMAN-AMERICAN SEMINARY PROFESSOR, PSYCHOLOGIST, AND SOCIOLOGIST
THE FEAST OF GUSTAVE WEIGEL, U.S. ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND ECUMENIST
THE FEAST OF JOHN COSIN, ANGLICAN BISHOP OF DURHAM
THE FEAST OF JOHN MARINUS VERSTEEG, U.S. METHODIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF SAINT NIKOLAUS GROSS, GERMAN ROMAN CATHOLIC OPPONENT OF NAZISM, AND MARTYR, 1945
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Icon of Jeremiah
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING JEREMIAH, PART XXVII
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeremiah 47:1-7
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Philistines were descendants of the Sea Peoples.
Interpretations of the Sea Peoples have changed in recent decades. The older version of them was that, starting in the fourteenth century B.C.E., the Sea Peoples moved from Greece to Asia Minor then to the eastern Mediterranean region. They destroyed the Hittite Empire (in Asia Minor). The Sea Peoples attacked Egypt during the twelfth century B.C.E., but the Egyptian forces defeated them. Afterward, the Sea Peoples settled on the coast of Canaan, assimilated with the local population, and became the Philistines.
The Sea Peoples’ defeat at Egyptian hands is a matter of the historical record.
However, the former historical consensus regarding the Sea Peoples may have been wrong. The Bronze Age Collapse (circa 1177 B.C.E.) affected the Mediterranean region. The powers were interdependent. Then a combination of climate change and natural disasters, followed by social and economic collapse, may have driven a diverse group of refugees from one land to another, then to another. Some of the ancient empires may have collapsed from within, not due to the Sea Peoples. Nevertheless, the Sea Peoples may still have proven disruptive. Certainly, they were not welcome.
The Philistines were one of the oldest enemies of the Hebrews. The Philistines oppressed the tribes of Israel for an undefined period of time (Judges 3:31) and again for about 40 years (Judges 13-16). Hostilities between the Philistines and the Israelites continued into the twilight of the age of the judges and into the time of the Israelite monarchy (1 Samuel 4-31; 2 Samuel 1-5, 8). In fact, the Philistine military threat was the main justification for creating the Israelite monarchy.
I have already read prophetic oracles against Philistia during this project of reading the Hebrew prophetic books, roughly in historical order. I have read the oracles in Amos 1:6-8 and Isaiah 14:28-32.
The oracle in Ezekiel 25:15-17 awaits my attention, in due time.
Jeremiah 47:1 establishes a temporal setting for the oracle against Philistia:
before Pharaoh attacked Gaza.
—The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
Pharaoh Neco II (r. 610-595 B.C.E.) attacked Gaza in 609 B.C.E.
The Septuagint copy of the Book of Jeremiah lacks 47:1. The rest of the germane text of Chapter 47 refers to the Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian conquest of Philistia circa 604 B.C.E., followed by mass deportations. The juxtaposition of these facts indicates editing subsequent to the time of Jeremiah the prophet.
Jeremiah 47 depicts God as destroying Philistia. The prophet pleads:
Ah! Sword of the LORD!
When will you find rest?
Return to your scabbard;
stop, be still!
–Verse 6, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
The answer in verse 7 is that the sword of the LORD cannot rest until God commands it to do so.
Walter Brueggemann writes:
Yahweh is not dominated by any of our conventionalities, but acts in sheer freedom, owing no one anything. Listeners to this poem are invited to face this undomesticated God who may violate our sensitivities, this God who maybe the only hope for the Philistines as for Israel.
—A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (1998), 441-442
God refuses to fit into human categories and metaphorical theological boxes. God does not issue trigger warnings. God remains undomesticated, despite human discomfort. So be it. If we object, we have the problem; God does not.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 14, 2021 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT METHODIUS I OF CONSTANTINOPLE, DEFENDER OF ICONS AND ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE; AND SAINT JOSEPH THE HYMNOGRAPHER, DEFENDER OF ICONS AND THE “SWEET-VOICED NIGHTINGALE OF THE CHURCH”
THE FEAST OF DAVID LOW DODGE, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN BUSINESSMAN AND PACIFIST
THE FEAST OF FRANCIS J. UPLEGGER, GERMAN-AMERICAN LUTHERAN MINISTER AND MISSIONARY; “OLD MAN MISSIONARY”
THE FEAST OF FRANK LAUBACH, U.S. CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER AND MISSIONARY
THE FEAST OF MARK HOPKINS, U.S. CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER, THEOLOGIAN, EDUCATOR, AND PHYSICIAN
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Jeremiah
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING JEREMIAH, PART I
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jeremiah 1:1-3
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The first three verses of the Book of Jeremiah identify the prophet, his father, the prophet’s hometown, and the timeframe of his prophetic ministry.
Jeremiah (“YHWH will exalt”) ben Hilkiah hailed from Anathoth, about three and a half miles northeast of Jerusalem. The father, Hilkiah, was a priest. Hilkiah and Jeremiah were outside of the priestly establishment in Jerusalem. Therefore, this Hilkiah was not the high priest Hilkiah (2 Kings 22:3-23:37) who found the scroll of Deuteronomy in the Temple, brought that scroll to King Josiah (r. 640-609 B.C.E.), and participated in Josiah’s religious reformation.
Hailing from Anathoth was significant. Anathoth was one of the cities assigned to Levitical priests in Joshua 21:18. After the death of King David, King Solomon had exiled the priest Abiathar (1 Samuel 22:20-22; 1 Samuel 23:6, 9; 1 Samuel 30:7; 2 Samuel 8:17; 2 Samuel 15:24, 27, 29, 35; 2 Samuel 17:15; 2 Samuel 19:11; 2 Samuel 20:25; 1 Kings 1:7, 19, 25, 42; 1 Kings 2:35; 1 Kings 4:4; 1 Chronicles 15:11; 1 Chronicles 18:16; 1 Chronicles 24:6; 1 Chronicles 27:34; Mark 2:26) to Anathoth for supporting Adonijah in the struggle for succession (1 Kings 2:26-27). Jeremiah, therefore, was also a member of a priestly family. He understood the ancient traditions of Israel, as well as the foundational character of the covenant in the life of Israel.
The superscription also defines the period during which Jeremiah prophesied: from the thirteenth year (627 B.C.E.) of the reign (640-609 B.C.E.) of King Josiah of Judah through “the eleventh year of King Zedekiah,” “when Jerusalem went into exile in the fifth month” (586 B.C.E.). We read in Chapters 39-44 that Jeremiah prophesied after the Fall of Jerusalem, too. The list of kings names Josiah, Jehoiakim, and Zedekiah. That list omits Jehoahaz/Jeconiah/Shallum and Jehoiachin/Jeconiah/Coniah. Yet, as the germane note in The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014), points out, few of the prophecies in the Book of Jeremiah date to the reign of King Josiah.
Jeremiah prophesied during a turbulent and difficult period of decline–mostly after the fall of the Assyrian Empire (612 B.C.E. and before the Fall of Jerusalem (586 B.C.E.). In the wake of King Josiah’s death, Judah had become a vassal state of Egypt. Pharaoh Neco II had chosen the next two Kings of Judah. Jehoahaz/Jeconiah/Shallum (2 Kings 23:31-35; 2 Chronicles 36:1-4; 1 Esdras 1:34-38) had reigned for about three months before becoming a prisoner in Egypt. Then Neco II had appointed Eliakim and renamed him Jehoiakim (r. 608-598 B.C.E.; 2 Kings 23:36-24:7; 2 Chronicles 36:5-8; 1 Esdras 1:39-42). Jehoiakim was always a vassal while King of Judah. After being the vassal of Neco II of Egypt for about three years, he became a vassal of the Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian Empire in 605 B.C.E. He died a prisoner in that empire.
Two more Kings of Judah reigned; both were vassals of the Chaldean/Neo-Babylonian Empire. Jehoiachin/Jeconiah/Coniah (2 Kings 24:8-17; 2 Kings 25:27-30; 2 Chronicles 36:9-10; 1 Esdras 1:43-46) reigned for about three months before going into exile in that empire. The last King of Judah was Zedekiah, born Mattaniah (2 Kings 24:18-25:26; 2 Chronicles 36:11-21; 1 Esdras 1:47-58). He reigned from 597 to 586 B.C.E. The last events he saw before Chaldean soldiers blinded him were the executions of his sons.
The Book of Jeremiah is one of the longest books in the Hebrew Bible; it contains 52 chapters. The final draft is the product of augmentation and editing subsequent to the time of Jeremiah himself. In fact, Jeremiah 52 is mostly verbatim from 2 Kings 24:18-25:30. Also Jeremiah 52:4-16 occur also in Jeremiah 39:1-2, 4-10. Chronology is not the organizing principle of material in the Book of Jeremiah; jumping around the timeline is commonplace. For example, the Fall of Jerusalem (586 B.C.E.) occurs between Chapters 32 and 33, as well as in Chapters 39 and 52. Some ancient copies are longer than other ancient copies. None of the subsequent augmentation and editing, complete with some material being absent from certain ancient copies of the book surprises me, based on my reading about the development of certain Biblical texts. I do not pretend that divinely-inspired authors were mere secretaries for God.
Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel made a germane and wonderful point in The Prophets, Volume I (1962), viii:
The prophet is a person, not a microphone. He is endowed with a mission, with the power of a word not his own that accounts for his greatness–but also with temperament, concern, character, and individuality. As there was no resisting the impact of divine inspiration, so at times there was no resisting the vortex of his own temperament. The word of God reverberated in the voice of man.
The prophet’s task is to convey a divine view, yet as a person he is a point of view. He speaks from the perspective of God as perceived from the perspective of his own situation. We must seek to understand not only the views he expounded but also the attitudes he embodied: his own position, feeling response–not only what he said but also what he lived; the private, the intimate dimension of the word, the subjective side of the message.
Those paragraphs applied to all the Hebrew prophets. They applied to Jeremiah with greater poignancy than to the others, though.
I invite you, O reader, to remain with me as I blog my way through the book of the “weeping prophet.”
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 6, 2021 COMMON ERA
PROPER 5: THE SECOND SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST, YEAR B
THE FEAST OF FRANKLIN CLARK FRY, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA AND THE LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA
THE FEAST OF SAINT CLAUDE OF BESANÇON, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST, MONK, ABBOT, AND BISHOP
THE FEAST OF HENRY JAMES BUCKOLL, AUTHOR AND TRANSLATOR OF HYMNS
THE FEAST OF JOHANN FRIEDRICH HERTZOG, GERMAN LUTHERAN HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF WILLIAM KETHE, PRESBYTERIAN HYMN WRITER
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Mephibosheth Kneels Before King David
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING 1-2 SAMUEL, 1 KINGS, 2 KINGS 1-21, 1 CHRONICLES, AND 2 CHRONICLES 1-33
PART XXXVI
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 Samuel 21:1-14
2 Samuel 9:1-13
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
David asked, “Is there anyone belonging to Saul’s family left, to whom I might show faithful love for Jonathan’s sake?”
–2 Samuel 9:1, The New Jerusalem Bible (1985)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Consistent chronology is not the organizing principle in the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles. Neither is it the organizing principle in this blogging project. Thematic considerations override chronology sometimes.
Remnants of the House of Saul remained alive and constituted potential political threats to King David. Mephibosheth, born Meribbaal, was a son of Jonathan. (Recall, O reader, that “bosheth” means “shame.”) David and Jonathan had made a pact (1 Samuel 18:3 and 23:18). David honored that pact by keeping Mephibosheth alive, in the royal court, and at a place of honor, the king’s dining table. Also, David could always watch Mephibosheth.
Mentions of Mephibosheth also occur in 2 Samuel 16 and 19.
Mephibosheth was not all that was left of the House of Saul. There was Michal, of course. And Saul had at least seven surviving sons. Seven sons of Saul, despite being innocent of any offense other than being sons of Saul, died. They died, Chapter 21 tells us, to satisfy Saul’s blood guilt and to end a three-year-long drought. In an incident recorded nowhere else in the Bible, Saul had attempted the genocide of the Gibeonites. Seven sons of Saul died horribly–via impaling–for their father’s sin.
I, citing Ezekiel 18, reject holding children accountable for the sins of their parents.
These two passages portray King David as a complicated figure. We read of a man–a monarch–who kept faith/kindness/faithful love (hesed) with Jonathan’s son and simultaneously reined him in. Mixed motives are old news; human nature is a constant factor. One may also reasonable argue that David should have kept hesed with Michal and those seven unfortunate sons of Saul.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 30, 2020 COMMON ERA
PROPER 17: THE THIRTEENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST, YEAR A
THE FEAST OF SAINT JEANNE JUGAN, FOUNDRESS OF THE LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR
THE FEAST OF JOHN LEARY, U.S. ROMAN CATHOLIC SOCIAL ACTIVIST AND ADVOCATE FOR THE POOR AND THE MARGINALIZED
THE FEAST OF KARL OTTO EBERHARDT, GERMAN MORAVIAN ORGANIST, MUSIC, EDUCATOR, AND COMPOSER
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is post #2300 of BLOGA THEOLOGICA.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: David and Abigail
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING 1-2 SAMUEL, 1 KINGS, 2 KINGS 1-21, 1 CHRONICLES, AND 2 CHRONICLES 1-33
PART XXIV
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Samuel 25:1b-44
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Fight those who fight me, O LORD;
attack those who are attacking me.
–Psalm 35:1, The Book of Common Prayer (1979)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This story separates the two parallel stories in Chapters 23-24 and 26.
Nabal was a boor, literally. His name meant, “boor.” David’s forces, functioning as an unofficial police force, had guarded Nabal’s shepherds and sheep. Nabal, however, had contempt for David, who demanded protection money. Nabal could afford to pay it. Abigail, wife of Nabal, acted independently to prevent David from committing violence. She also understood that David would become the King of Israel. God, having judged Nabal, killed him. Abigail married David.
Meanwhile, King Saul, exceeding his rights, married off Michal to one Palti. This action hurt both David and Michal.
David’s three wives were Michal, Ahinoam, and Michal.
I notice certain aspects of this passage.
- Patriarchy treats women like objects.
- Violence and power are frequently companions.
- The story depicts Saul negatively.
- The story presents a mixed depiction of David.
- Abigail is the central figure.
- The reference to all males in Nabal’s household (v. 22) is literally, “all who piss upon the wall.” The same language occurs five other times, including in 1 Kings 14:10, in reference to the males of the household of King Jeroboam I of Israel. YouTube has a video of an Independent Baptist minister (not a seminary graduate) in Arizona preaching about the importance of men urinating standing up, and, therefore, being men. Really.
- The narrative goes out of its way, sometimes with difficulty, to make David look good. The contrast between the drunken, boorish Nabal feasting like a king while the future had no provisions in the wilderness is stark.
- I still wonder what the men in Nabal’s household did to warrant David’s vendetta.
- The story depicts Abigail as a prophet.
- The story depicts David as consolidating his power while on the run from King Saul.
1 Samuel 25:1b-44 is an interesting tale.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 22, 2020 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF JACK LAYTON, CANADIAN ACTIVIST AND FEDERAL LEADER OF THE NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY
THE FEAST OF SAINTS HRYHORII KHOMSYSHYN, SYMEON LUKACH, AND IVAN SLEZYUK, UKRAINIAN GREEK CATHOLIC BISHOPS AND MARTYRS, 1947, 1964, AND 1973
THE FEAST OF SAINTS JOHN KEMBLE AND JOHN WALL, ENGLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND MARTYRS, 1679
THE FEAST OF SAINTS THOMAS PERCY, RICHARD KIRKMAN, AND WILLIAM LACEY, ENGLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC MARTYRS, 1572 AND 1582
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Saul and David in the Cave of En-Gedi, by Willem de Poorter
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING 1-2 SAMUEL, 1 KINGS, 2 KINGS 1-21, 1 CHRONICLES, AND 2 CHRONICLES 1-33
PART XXII
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Samuel 23:15-24:22
1 Samuel 26:1-25
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If the LORD had not come to my help,
I should have dwelt in the land of silence.
–Psalm 94:17, The Book of Common Prayer (1979)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The editing of different sources into a composite narrative created a unified story with chronological inconsistencies. I have written of some of these contradictions in other posts in this series. That cutting and pasting (to use an anachronism) also gave us doublets–two versions of the same story. Careful reading of much of the Hebrew Bible has identified doublets, starting in Genesis.
The doublet on which I focus in this post pertains to David saving King Saul’s life, not taking it, while the monarch was trying to kill David. The doublets wrap around 1 Samuel 25 in the composite narrative.
In 1 Samuel 23:15-24:22, King Saul and his forces were pursuing David and his forces. Saul was eager to kill David. The inhabitants of Ziph were ready to facilitate David’s death, as those of Keilah had been earlier in Chapter 23. David spared Saul’s life and issued an order that nobody kill the monarch. In this familiar story, David cut off a piece of Saul’s cloak, made his presence known, and spoke to Saul. The king acknowledged that David would succeed him.
The editing of 1 Samuel 23, 24, and 26 is odd. It seems that 26:1-25, with its reference to the Ziphites, originally flowed from the end of Chapter 23.
In 1 Samuel 26:1-25, David spared Saul’s life and forbade violence against the monarch. However, David claimed Saul’s spear, the kingdom of his kingship. (See 1 Samuel 13:22; 18:10; 19:9; 20:33; and 22:6. Also see 2 Samuel 1:6.) David also took the water jar at Saul’s head. Saul and David also spoke, and the king admitted that David would win.
In both versions, Saul admitted to being in the wrong. Yet he persisted in the wrong. Saul did not repent.
I know what it is to be a wronged person. I know the names of those who have wronged me, actively or passively. I know their characters, objectively. I also affirm that they are responsible before God for their characters and deeds, just as I am responsible before God for my character and deeds. What kind of person am I? The answer to that question is more important than the issue of what kind of people others are. One cannot prevail against perfidy by falling into it.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 21, 2020 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT BRUNO ZEMBOL, POLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC FRIAR AND MARTYR, 1942
THE FEAST OF SAINTS CAMERIUS, CISELLUS, AND LUXORIUS OF SARDINIA, MARTYRS, 303
THE FEAST OF THE MARTYRS OF EDESSA, CIRCA 304
THE FEAST OF SAINT MAXIMILIAN OF ANTIOCH; MARTYR, CIRCA 353; AND SAINTS BONOSUS AND MAXIMIANUS THE SOLDIER, MARTYRS, 362
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: A Map Showing Israel at the Time of Saul and David
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING 1-2 SAMUEL, 1 KINGS, 2 KINGS 1-21, 1 CHRONICLES, AND 2 CHRONICLES 1-33
PART XXI
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Samuel 23:1-14
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Fight those who fight me, O LORD;
attack those who are attacking me.
Take up shield and armor
and rise up to help me.
–Psalm 35:1-2, The Book of Common Prayer (1979)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The events of 1 Samuel 23:1-14 flow from those of 1 Samuel 21 and 22.
In 1 Samuel 21, David, on the run, had lied to Ahimelech (great-grandson of Eli), priest at Nob. David had claimed to be on a mission for King Saul. Ahimelech had believed David yet not consulted God on David’s behalf. In the following chapter, Saul had ordered the execution of the priests, all the inhabitants of Nob, and their livestock. Ahimelech had allegedly consulted God on David’s behalf.
In 1 Samuel 23:1-14, David and his forces defeated Philistines threatening the town of Keilah. With Saul and his forces on the way, the inhabitants were ready to save themselves from the wrath of the king by turning David over to him. David fled and continued to live. Also, Abiathar son of Ahimelech consulted God on David’s behalf.
In 1 Samuel 23:4, David consulted God, who answered.
I like the Quaker doctrine of the Inner Light. As I age, I find myself growing into mysticism and contemplative prayer. Despite the strong rebuke of a certain fundamentalist Presbyterian I know, I recognize no spiritual error in listening to and for God. Contemplative prayer is an ancient aspect of Christian tradition. Contemplative prayer is a positive part of Christian tradition. Contemplative prayer has great value. Prayer is more than talking to God; it includes listening, too. God, I assume, has much to say and says it. One operative question is, are we listening? Are we consulting God? And, when we receive divine replies, how do we respond? Do we recognize them for what they are?
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 21, 2020 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT BRUNO ZEMBOL, POLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC FRIAR AND MARTYR, 1942
THE FEAST OF SAINTS CAMERIUS, CISELLUS, AND LUXORIUS OF SARDINIA, MARTYRS, 303
THE FEAST OF THE MARTYRS OF EDESSA, CIRCA 304
THE FEAST OF SAINT MAXIMILIAN OF ANTIOCH; MARTYR, CIRCA 353; AND SAINTS BONOSUS AND MAXIMIANUS THE SOLDIER, MARTYRS, 362
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: Princess Michelle Benjamin with David Shepherd, in Kings (2009)
A Screen Capture
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING 1-2 SAMUEL, 1 KINGS, 2 KINGS 1-21, 1 CHRONICLES, AND 2 CHRONICLES 1-33
PART XVII
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Samuel 18:6-30
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rescue me from my enemies, O God;
protect me from those who rise up against me.
Rescue me from evildoers
and save me from those who thirst for my blood.
See how they lie in wait for my life,
how the mighty gather together against me;
not for any offense or fault of mine, O LORD.
–Psalm 59:1-3, The Book of Common Prayer (1979)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
David had become a political threat to King Saul. Usually, a monarch received credit for his warriors’ successes. Yet David, not Saul, received credit for David’s successes. The author understood divine favor to account for David’s successes. Saul, already unhinged, became jealous. He tried to arrange David’s death while luring the great warrior into false sense of comfort. Saul’s plan to kill David by placing him at the head of the troops (verse 13) was like David’s plan (in 2 Samuel 11) to kill Uriah the Hittite. Saul established a seemingly high bride price for his daughter Michal. David paid double.
Michal loved David (verses 20 and 28). In the Hebrew Bible, she was the only woman whom the text described as loving her man.
David, by marrying Michal, received the right of succession, behind Saul’s sons. Again the promise passed through the younger child–in this case, Michal.
Saul’s strategy in this chapter reminds me of Don Vito Corleone’s advice in The Godfather (1972):
Keep you friends close and your enemies closer.
Even that plan failed, for, as the author wanted the audience to know, God favored David. Saul, however, was not finished trying to kill David. The unhinged monarch continued to attempt to terminate David with extreme prejudice in 1 Samuel 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 26,
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
AUGUST 15, 2020 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT MARY OF NAZARETH, MOTHER OF GOD
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Above: The Fiery Furnace
Image in the Public Domain
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning:
Grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them,
that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of life,
which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns
with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
—The Book of Common Prayer (1979), page 236
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Daniel 3:19-30
Psalm 57:8-11
Revelation 11:15-19
Luke 1:5-20, 57-66
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wake up, my spirit;
awake, lute and harp;
I myself will waken the dawn.
I will confess you among the peoples, O LORD;
I will sing praise to you among the nations.
For your loving-kindness is greater than the heavens,
and your faithfulness reaches the clouds.
Exalt yourself above the heavens, O God,
and your glory over all the earth.
–Psalm 57:8-11, The Book of Common Prayer (1979)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In Revelation 11 we read the announcement that
Sovereignty over the world has passed to our Lord and his Christ, and he shall reign for ever.
–Verse 15b, The Revised English Bible (1989)
Nevertheless, we must wait until Chapter 21 for that sovereignty to become apparent.
The sovereignty of God is indeed a challenging concept. In the Gospels the Kingdom of God is already partially present. The Roman Empire and its agents, one of whom goes on to order the execution of St. John the Baptist, born in Luke 1, is fully present.
Truly bad people who wield authority always seem to present somewhere. Nebuchadnezzar II, hardly a nice man, is a figure of ridicule in the Book of Daniel. He is fickle and seems unaware of the extent of his authority at times. He is willing to send people to die for refusing to serve the gods, so how nice can he be? He, as monarch, can change the law, too. Later in the Book of Daniel (Chapter 4) he goes insane. Also troubled and in one of the readings (sort of) is King Saul, a disturbed and mentally unwell man. The not attached to Psalm 57 contextualizes the text in 1 Samuel 22-24 and 26, with David leading a group of outlaws while on the run from Saul. In the story David saves the life of the man trying to kill him. (Aside: Chapters 24 and 26 seem to be variations on the same story. The Sources Hypothesis explains the duplication of material.)
One might detect a certain thread common to three of the readings: The lives of the faithful are at risk. That theme is implicit in Luke 1. God will not always deliver the faithful, hence the martyrs in Revelation 14. The sovereignty of God will not always be obvious. But we who claim to follow Christ can do so, by grace, and proclaim God among the peoples in a variety of circumstances.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
APRIL 29, 2017 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINTS BOSA OF YORK, JOHN OF BEVERLEY, WILFRID THE YOUNGER, AND ACCA OF HEXHAM, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS
THE FEAST OF SAINT CATHERINE OF SIENA, ROMAN CATHOLIC NUN
THE FEAST OF TIMOTHY REES, ANGLICAN BISHOP OF LLANDAFF
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adapted from this post:
https://adventchristmasepiphany.wordpress.com/2017/04/29/devotion-for-the-second-sunday-of-advent-ackerman/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BLOGA THEOLOGICA 
You must be logged in to post a comment.