“For David had said to him, “‘Your blood be on your own head. Your own mouth testified against you when you said, ‘I killed the Lord’s anointed.”
~ 2 Samuel 1:16
Hi James and Ellen,
Do you think that character should play a key role in accepting a guy or gal to be a friend, choosing a boss to work for and electing a bureaucrat to govern where you are living? Would you prefer to have as a friend a kid whose character is underpinned with integrity or would you be okay with having as a friend a kid whose character has been undermined by dishonesty? Would you prefer when you get as old as your dad and ma to be in a job in which you are able to do with veracity what it is that you are tasked to do or would you prefer when you get as old as your dad and ma to end up in a job in which deceit can help you obtain position, power and prestige? Would you prefer today to have as elected bureaucrats guys and gals who have internalized a political ideology that advocates accountability, encourages involvement and respects propriety or would you rather have today elected bureaucrats guys and gals who have adopted a political ideology that discounts any reason for taking personal responsibility, advances an entitlement mindset that can be mollified from a bottomless money kitty that has been governmentally generated through taxation and devalues truth when truth becomes an obstacle to whatever it is that is obsessively desired? How tolerant do you think a guy, gal or kid should be to a guy, gal or kid who uses mistruths to make himself or herself look better, accepts the idea that a fetus is a disease and believes that wealth is to be distributed equally?
How tolerant are you of guys, gals and kids who embrace ethical norms and who adopt moral beliefs that are not aligned with your mores and values? David most of the time did tolerance well. Even though David had to live for years – because of Saul jealous hatred of him, a nomadic, subhuman lifestyle, David still accepted unreservedly God’s anointing of Saul to be the first king to reign over the guys and gals who lived in Israel. Even though David had opportunities to kill Saul and even though David knew because he had been anointed by the prophet Samuel to replace Saul as the next king to reign over the guys and gals who lived in Israel, David was not about to take into his hands what God did when He had Samuel anoint Saul to be the first king to reign over the guys and gals who lived in Israel. 2 Samuel 1 is the continuation of the first part of the Samuel Book – which Septuagint translators divided arbitrarily into two separate books. Saul’s death ends the first part of the Samuel Book and Saul’s death begins the second part of the Samuel Book. While Saul was in a battle against the Philistine people group army – which the Philistine army were winning, Saul along with three of his sons – Jonathan, Abinadab and Malki-Shua, fought their last fight on Mount Gilboa – which is a ridge in northern Israel. The first part of the Samuel Book ends by reporting that Saul fell on his sword. The second part of the Samuel Book begins with an Amalekite people group guy – with torn clothes and dust on his head, arriving at David’s camp with news that Saul and three of his kids had died while fighting on Mount Gilboa. When David pressed the Amalekite people group guy how it was that he knew that Saul was really dead, the guy told David that while he had just happened to be on Mount Gilboa that he had come upon a mortally wounded Saul. The Amalekite people group guy than told David that when Saul asked him to kill him – as Saul knew that he was going to die, that he complied with what Saul asked him to do. There is a real possibility that the Amalekite people group guy was scavenging on Mount Gilboa – robbing the dead and wounded Philistine and Israelite people groups’ soldiers of their values and weapons. This presumptuous Amalekite people group guy may have thought that David would give him a reward for killing Saul. What he did not know was that David had just won a battle against his Amalekite people group army and that he would not be in the mood to entertain the thought of giving a reward to a guy who had just killed the leader of his people group. After David and the guys who were with him finished their ritual norm of tearing their clothes and of mourning, weeping and fasting – which was not to stop until the evening of the day that they had gotten the news of the deaths of Saul and of David’s really good friend – who was Jonathan, David ordered one of his guys to kill the Amalekite people group guy who said that he killed Saul. Verse 16 justifies David killing the Amalekite people group guy, “For David had said to him, “‘Your blood be on your own head. Your own mouth testified against you when you said, ‘I killed the Lord’s anointed.’’”
Before David moved from where he was camped with his guys, David taught his guys a song which he called the ‘lament of the bow’. This lament song was more of a eulogy and a curse than a lament. David’s profound grief from losing his best friend – Jonathan, and his anger against the Philistines had David cursing the Philistine people group and the place where Jonathan was killed. David’s total acceptance of Saul as having been anointed by God to be the first king to reign over the guys and gals who lived in Israel has David referring to Saul – and to Jonathan, as being swifter than eagles, stronger than lions and mighty warriors. Do you have trouble putting behind you the pains and hurts that others kids sometimes inflict on you? Your grandpaa knows that he could do a lot better in pulling a David. So – what are your thoughts about David having the Amalekite people group guy executed instead of . . .?
2 Samuel 1 (944)