1
Samuel 25:14-17,32-38
Context:
1 Samuel 25:1-43
Memory
Verse: 1 Samuel 25:32-33
Main
Idea: God guards the honor of His name and
the steps of His people.
FIRST
THOUGHTS
How do you react when you feel that
you’ve been wronged? Think back over any recent insults, work-related problems,
personality conflicts, or even attacks against people you love. While many
Christians want their actions to be guided by prayer, grace, love, and patience,
it’s too tempting to settle for homegrown justice. We lash out in anger instead
of waiting patiently on God. We buy into the cliché that it’s better to ask
forgiveness than ask permission. And yes, it may feel good in the moment,
but will it be good in the long run?
Where is the line between defending yourself
and trusting God to step in on your behalf? How do you know when to wait
patiently on God when the only thing you want to do is defend yourself or those
you love?
The story of Nabal and David addresses
that exact problem through five main scenes: David and his men protected
Nabal’s shepherds, Nabal disrespected David, David started down a path of
retaliation, Nabal’s wife (Abigail) wisely deescalated the situation, and God
punished Nabal. The story reminds us that God is so sovereign, so big, so
completely in control that He doesn’t need our help to defend His honor or His
people. From David’s limited perspective, he needed to act for the problem to
be solved. From God’s complete perspective, the problem was already being
solved without David’s help.
I. UNDERSTAND
THE CONTEXT
1
Samuel 25:1-43
The place
called Carmel in 1 Samuel 25 is not the more famous Mount Carmel, where Elijah
had his contest with the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18). Mount Carmel is located
in the north, due west of the Sea of Galilee and on the triangle of land that
juts into the Mediterranean Sea. The Carmel of 1 Samuel 25 was a small town in
the far south of the wilderness of Judah, about eight miles southeast of
Hebron. The local economy was based on shepherding. The climate was too dry for
large scale farming of grain crops.
By this time, David was well established
in southern Judah. He had a significant following. His men constituted a small,
personal army, and probably by now many local people were beginning to
sympathize with him and against Saul. David was effectively in control of the
region. He was now what is often called a “warlord.” The term sounds negative
and even vicious, but that is not necessarily the case. A warlord exists in a
territory that is far removed from effective central government. He has a
private army, and he serves as the de facto government for the region. A
warlord could be cruel and exploitative, but he could also be fair and decent,
providing defense and justice for the local people. Indeed, a warlord could
become a great hero to the general population—as was the case with David.
Readers may wonder why David felt he had
the right to ask Nabal for payment for not harassing his shepherds or stealing
his sheep. From the perspective of ancient culture, Nabal’s flocks were in
David’s territory. As the warlord in control of the region, it was his domain.
Less scrupulous warlords would have simply swooped in whenever they felt the
need and taken as much as they wanted as a form of taxation. David refrained
from bullying and from appropriating such supplies as he saw fit. Instead, he
left the shepherds in peace and also protected them from bandits. Nabal knew
what the unwritten code of conduct required of him. His shepherds operated
under David’s shadow; contemporary cultural standards as well as simple
prudence and decency required that he send a substantial gift as a way of
thanking David.
II. EXPLORE
THE TEXT
A. Disaster Foreseen (1 Sam. 25:14-17)
14
But one of the young men told Abigail, Nabal’s wife, “Behold, David sent
messengers out of the wilderness to greet our master, and he railed at them. 15
Yet the men were very good to us, and we suffered no harm, and we did not miss
anything when we were in the fields, as long as we went with them. 16
They were a wall to us both by night and by day, all the while we were with
them keeping the sheep. 17 Now therefore know this and consider what
you should do, for harm is determined against our master and against all his
house, and he is such a worthless man that one cannot speak to him.”
VerseS 14-16
When David’s men came to him
and told him how they had been treated, he was in no mood to be forgiving.
Nabal’s claim that David was a rebel against Saul was a slanderous insult (1
Sam. 25:10). It was also an excuse (justifying Nabal’s refusal to reciprocate
the good treatment his employees and livestock had received). By this time, it
would have been clear to most honest observers, especially in Judah, that David
was no rebel and that Saul was behaving outrageously. David’s response was
quick and resolute: “Every man strap on his sword!” (v. 13).
The anonymous servant in
verse 14 showed great wisdom. First, he knew that Nabal had put everyone in
danger by his haughty and selfish action. We have no reason to think that this
servant, one of Nabal’s shepherds, had seen or heard about David’s anger and
his intention to respond with violence. But he knew that, given the cultural
realities of the day, such a response was to be expected.
Second, he went to Abigail, whom he apparently knew to be just, wise, and
resourceful. He knew that there was no point in trying to persuade Nabal to
change his mind.
Third, he gave a reasoned
argument to Abigail. David’s men, although vastly more powerful than Nabal’s
shepherds, had never harmed, harassed, or stolen from them. More than that,
they had given them protection day and night. Both Abigail and the shepherd
knew that by the code of the wilderness, David’s troops were owed compensation.
Verse 17
Fourth, he told Abigail that
she had to act: Now therefore know this and consider what you should do.
She could not just commiserate with the servant over Nabal’s actions; she had
to do something to counteract them.
Fifth, the servant concluded
his speech with an emotional appeal grounded in the truth: Nabal is such a
worthless man that one cannot speak to him. It could have been very
dangerous for the servant to speak to Nabal’s wife in this way, but he knew
that she was too moral and decent to deny his words. The intensity of his
language got her moving.
Prompted by the servant’s
appeal, Abigail got together a large amount of provisions (v. 18), the very
thing David had asked for. The wine, the loaves of bread, and the roasted grain
may have represented considerable expense. We must remember that Carmel was in
wilderness of Judah, country fitted for little besides raising sheep and goats.
The grains and wine probably had to be purchased from far away. As they marched
on Nabal, the last thing David and his angry army expected was to see was
Nabal’s wife, prostrate on the ground in the middle of the path with a large
peace offering all around her (v. 23).
We should also say a word
about her comment, “Nabal is his name, and folly is with him” (v. 25). The
Hebrew word nabal means “insolent, selfish, and stupid person.” It is
astonishing that anyone should have such a name. It may be that originally this
was an epithet, used only behind his back, but over the course of time, it
became the only name by which he was remembered.
Wisdom
can take many forms. Sometimes we must deal with a problem ourselves, and
sometimes we must appeal to another person to deal with it. Why didn’t the
servant deal with the problem himself? How does his approach serve as a model
for us?
B. David Relents (1 Sam. 25:32-35)
32
And David said to Abigail, “Blessed be the Lord,
the God of Israel, who sent you this day to meet me! 33 Blessed be
your discretion, and blessed be you, who have kept me this day from bloodguilt
and from working salvation with my own hand! 34 For as surely as the
Lord, the God of Israel, lives,
who has restrained me from hurting you, unless you had hurried and come to meet
me, truly by morning there had not been left to Nabal so much as one male.” 35
Then David received from her hand what she had brought him. And he said to her,
“Go up in peace to your house. See, I have obeyed your voice, and I have
granted your petition.”
Face to face with Abigail,
David realized how foolish he had been and how he had been saved from a
terrible sin. To understand this, we need to look back for a moment.
At Saul’s direction, Doeg
the Edomite killed the priests of Nob and then slaughtered all the inhabitants
of the village (22:18-19). The episode described here parallels what we see
there, but with several differences. Saul had only imagined that Ahimelech and
the other priests were his enemies. Nabal, however, had genuinely insulted
David, and his refusal to give any compensation to David and his men had been a
serious offense against normal protocol and prudence. Even so, David in his
anger let himself get out of control. He was prepared to do exactly what Saul
had done. Leading his armed men toward Nabal’s household, he declared, “God do
so to the enemies of David and more also, if by morning I leave so much as one
male of all who belong to him” (25:22). Being a wealthy man, Nabal would have
had a very extensive household, including his extended family, his employees
and their families, slaves, and others. David was ready to kill them all. Once
bloodlust had taken hold of David’s men, they may not have stopped short of
killing everyone in Carmel, Nabal’s town. In his great rage, David was ready to
kill many innocent people to avenge the arrogance of one man.
There is yet another curious
parallel. Nabal was a descendant of Caleb (25:3). Caleb, although attached to
the tribe of Judah, was a Kenizzite—a descendant of Kenaz (Josh. 14:6). Kenaz
was an Edomite clan chief, making Caleb, and also Nabal, biologically of
Edomite descent, although they were legally members of Judah (remember that
Israel was a mixed multitude). Thus, the Edomite Doeg instigated the slaughter
at Nob, and the Edomite Nabal almost instigated the slaughter at Carmel. The
ancient reader would have caught the connections and the similarities and so
would have known that David came perilously close to emulating Saul’s crime and
folly.
The consequences for such an
act would have been enormous. First and foremost, David would have had great
bloodguilt on his hands. Second, all the goodwill he had gained as a result of
the restraint and respect his men had shown to the local people of southern
Judah would have vanished. Third, Israel would have judged him to be no better
than Saul, and in fact to be worse, since at least Saul had the authority of
being the king, whereas David had no legal standing. People would have been
more resistant to accepting David as king after Saul’s death. Fourth, David’s
men would have become more callous, more accustomed to senseless killing, and
more difficult to control.
Verses 32-35
Brought to his senses, David
realized what a near thing it had been: blessed be you, who have kept me
this day from bloodguilt and from working salvation with my own hand! He
acknowledged that but for her, he would have committed a great atrocity. He
told her, Go up in peace to your house, and he accepted the provisions
and turned back.
David’s repentance was
complete. He did not send an angry message to Nabal, telling him that but for
his wife, Nabal’s head would now be on top of a spear. He did not tell Abigail
to make sure Nabal never did something like this again. He simply went back.
This is a model for us for letting go of wrath. When turned aside from doing
evil, we should thank God and those who intervened, and we should turn away
from the sin entirely. We should not hold on to a little piece of it, thinking
we can always return to it if things don’t go as we wish.
Can you
recall episodes in your life when someone turned you from a wrong and foolish
act? How did this serve as a milestone in your Christian pilgrimage?
C. God Intervenes (1 Sam. 25:36-38)
36
And Abigail came to Nabal, and behold, he was holding a feast in his house,
like the feast of a king. And Nabal’s heart was merry within him, for he was
very drunk. So she told him nothing at all until the morning light. 37
In the morning, when the wine had gone out of Nabal, his wife told him these
things, and his heart died within him, and he became as a stone. 38
And about ten days later the Lord
struck Nabal, and he died.
Verse 36
Nabal, blissfully ignorant
of the fact that his life hung in the balance, gorged himself in a great feast.
One can only imagine how the servant who had warned Abigail felt at this time,
wondering if David’s army would swoop in at any moment and strike down
everyone. At least his mind would have been set at ease when Abigail returned.
But she could not speak to Nabal, as he was too drunk to grasp what was going
on.
Verses 37-38
The next day Abigail told
Nabal everything. It seems that on top of everything else, Nabal was a coward,
and the account of David’s anger gripped him with terror. Whether by cardiac
arrest or aneurysm or some other cause, he collapsed. The Hebrew literally says
that he “became a stone,” apparently meaning that he was paralyzed, catatonic,
or in a coma. And about ten days later, he died. Regardless of
the natural causes, the Bible summarizes it well enough: the Lord struck Nabal.
The outcome of this series
of events vividly illustrates Romans 12:19: “Beloved, never avenge yourselves,
but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will
repay, says the Lord’” (see also Deut. 32:35). David refrained from doing
violence to Nabal, and God swiftly stepped in deal with him. But we should
understand that pulling back had not been an easy thing for David to do. He
would have never turned aside had Abigail not intervened. In addition, Nabal
had violated one of David’s core moral principles: he had repaid good with
evil. Consider how frequently this motif appears in the psalms:
• “If I have repaid my friend with evil or plundered
my enemy without cause, let the enemy pursue my soul and overtake it” (Ps.
7:4-5).
• “Do not drag me off with the wicked, with the
workers of evil, who speak peace with their neighbors while evil is in their
hearts” (Ps. 28:3).
• “For it is not an enemy who taunts me—then I could
bear it; it is not an adversary who deals insolently with me—then I could hide
from him. But it is you, a man, my equal, my companion, my familiar friend”
(Ps. 55:12-13).
• “So they reward me evil for good, and hatred for
my love” (Ps. 109:5).
All of the above citations
are from psalms of David, and they illustrate some of David’s core values:
loyalty to one’s friends, reciprocity to those who deal fairly and kindly with
you, and not engaging in unprovoked hostility. These are the virtues one would
expect of a morally grounded professional soldier, which is precisely what
David was at this time.
The point is this: when
Nabal haughtily turned away David’s emissaries, repaying David’s kindness with
insults, he violated the principles by which David governed his life. For his
part, David’s loyalty to Saul, as God’s anointed, was so great that he would not
retaliate even as Saul was trying to kill him (1 Sam. 24:3-6). For this reason,
Nabal’s provocation would have been intolerable to David. It would have been
the hardest kind of offense for David even to endure, much less to forgive. And
yet, thanks to Abigail’s intervention, he was able to turn away from his path
of violence and put the matter in God’s hands.
It is never easy to refrain
from retaliation when we feel someone has wronged us. But God calls on us to be
forbearing and to leave vengeance to Him, even when someone has done a wrong
that we consider unconscionable. We can find the strength to do so when we
remember that Christ paid for others’ sins as He paid for ours.
What
other examples come to mind in which God defended Himself and the honor of His
name? How is Jesus’ death and resurrection an act of God that counters
humanity’s taking matters into our own hands?
At the end of this story,
David took Abigail as his wife. She was only one of many. In the current moral
and sexual chaos that is now sweeping over the United States, we can be sure
that this issue will become more prominent. Homosexual marriage is now the law
of the land, and agitation for legalizing polygamy has already begun. Thinking
about polygamy in the Bible, we should be aware of the following points.
• In the harsh realities of Iron Age Israel,
survival was marginal and people felt they had to do what was needed to
preserve themselves and their families. A woman alone was in great danger. She
needed the home of a man, and she also needed a son to care for her in her old
age. In that sense, David’s marriage to Abigail may have been a mercy. The
world we live in is radically different from the Judean wilderness of the 10th
century B.C.
• Abigail may have brought her wealth and
connections to the Calebites with her into the marriage. If so, the marriage
was politically advantageous to David. It is certain that in the polygamous
world of the Old Testament, marriages were often contracted for purely economic
and political reasons. These marriages were not characterized by love, and
modern polygamy would soon take on the same qualities.
• David’s many wives led to moral chaos in his
household. There was murder, rape, intrigue, and civil war. Sin can arise in
any family, but things are much worse if wives and their children are put in a
situation where intense rivalry and factions are all but certain.
• Polygamy, like divorce, was never God’s intention
for humanity. These things were only allowed because of our hardness of heart.
God desires for one man and one woman to be “one flesh.” (See Gen. 2:24 and
Matt. 19:3-9.)
KEY
DOCTRINE
Peace and War
It is the duty of Christians
to seek peace with all men on principles of righteousness.
BIBLE SKILL
Use a Bible dictionary (either print or on the Internet) to learn more
about a Bible character.
Use a Bible dictionary to
look up the meaning of the name Nabal. How did Nabal in 1 Samuel 25 live up to
his name? In what ways was his name fitting?
