1 Samuel 24 - David at En Gedi

Previously in 1 Samuel, we saw David save the inhabitants of Keilah from the Philistines, but had to flee again because of Saul’s pursuit. David and his men fled to the mountains of Ziph, an area belonging to his own tribe of Judah, but they betrayed him to Saul. As a result, they continued their southern retreat to a rock in the wilderness of Maon. Saul and his men were encircling David and his men, when word came to Saul that the Philistines had invaded the land. So, Saul left off his pursuit of David, and they named the place the Rock of Escape. So too, Jesus is our Rock of Escape from the wrath of God and the troubles of this life. After this, David and his men went up to the strongholds of En Gedi.

The wilderness of En Gedi is the largest oasis on the western bank of the Dead Sea, and En Gedi is one of the only two fresh water springs in the area. En Gedi means spring of the kid (goat), for wild goats used to live there. It is a good-sized creek running through a canyon with water falls and a lot of vegetation.  It was like a tropical paradise in the middle of the desert. There were also numerous caves on the hillsides, providing a good defensive position for David and his men.

After Saul had returned from following the Philistines, he was told that David was in En Gedi. So, Saul gathered together three thousand chosen men from all Israel to pursue after him on the rocks of the wild goats. He came to the sheepfolds by the road where there was a cave, and went in to attend to his needs (probably to relieve himself). Being a sheepfold, this would have been a large cave for shepherds to keep their flocks, and it was in the recesses of this cave that David and his men were hiding out. Saul did not know they were there, but they could obviously see him. Then David’s men said to him, “This is the day of which the Lord said to you, ‘Behold, I will deliver your enemy into your hand, that you may do to him as it seems good to you.’” We have no record that the Lord actually told David this, and in fact, this would have been contrary to the Lord’s will. They had either heard incorrectly or misinterpreted what they had heard. Sometimes in people’s desire to want to help, they hear what they want to hear.

Next, David arose and cut off a corner of Saul’s robe; however, after he had done so, he was convicted. In that culture, the hem of the garment was seen as a symbol of that person’s authority. He told his men, “The Lord forbid that I should do this thing to my master, the Lord’s anointed, to stretch out my hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord.” Apparently, there was still an ongoing disagreement between David and his men of whether or not they should kill Saul, but David was able to restrain them. No doubt, this would have been tempting for David and his men: it would have been a quick and easy fix to the problem, and David’s days on the run would have been over. However, David understood that Saul had been placed in power by the Lord, and therefore, the Lord was the only one who had the right to remove him. The Lord removes and sets up kings (Dan 2:21), they are appointed by Him (Rom 13:1), and we are told in the Scriptures to pray for them (1 Tim 2:1). David would have also set a dangerous precedent by killing Saul that later could have placed his own life in danger as king. Learning to obey the Lord despite your own emotions and what others are saying is an important lesson to learn for all of us, but especially if we are in leadership.

Next, David went out of the cave after Saul, and called after him. I believe we can learn some things from David of how to converse with our enemies, especially if they are in authority. He said, “My lord the king!” When Saul turned around to see who it was, David stooped with his face to the ground. David could have shown disrespect and even disdain toward Saul, but instead he showed him humility and reverence. This will prove to be fruitful as the conversation continues. Instead of directly confronting Saul, David begins by questioning him: “Why do you listen to the words of men who say, ‘Indeed David seeks your harm’?” Saul already saw David as his enemy, so confronting him right out of the gate would likely have provoked him further and closed him down to what David was about to say.

David continued, “Look, this day your eyes have seen that the Lord delivered you today into my hand in the cave, and someone urged me to kill you. But my eye spared you, and I said, ‘I will not stretch out my hand against my lord, for he is the Lord’s anointed.’ Moreover, my father, see! Yes, see the corner of your robe in my hand! For in that I cut off the corner of your robe, and did not kill you, know and see that there is neither evil nor rebellion in my hand, and I have not sinned against you. Yet you hunt my life to take it. Let the Lord judge between you and me, and let the Lord avenge me on you. But my hand shall not be against you. As the proverb of the ancients says, ‘Wickedness proceeds from the wicked.’ But my hand shall not be against you. After whom has the king of Israel come out? Whom do you pursue? A dead dog? A flea? Therefore let the Lord be judge, and judge between you and me, and see and plead my case, and deliver me out of your hand.” David demonstrated that, if he was really out to seek Saul’s life, he would have taken the opportunity to do so in the cave, and the corner of Saul’s robe was the proof. He affirmed Saul’s place as appointed king over the nation, and that it was for this reason that he would not stretch out his hand to kill him. He also showed him reverence by calling him father, for Saul was his father-in-law. He did address Saul’s sin by pointing out that, although he had done nothing wrong, Saul was hunting him down in order to kill him. David did not take vengeance, but told Saul that the Lord would deal with him. David then ends with another question of why Saul was coming out against a dead dog or flea, further humbling himself in Saul’s sight.

When Saul heard this, he said, “Is this your voice, my son David?” Then he lifted up his voice and wept. David’s humility and respect, coupled with his rebuke of Saul had been effective. He told David that he was more righteous than he was, because David had rewarded his evil with good. He stated that David had demonstrated this by not killing him when he had the opportunity, and this was not typical behavior for someone who was your enemy. He stated, “Therefore may the Lord reward you with good for what you have done to me this day. And now I know indeed that you shall surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in your hand.” He then asked David to swear unto him by the Lord that when he was king, he would not cut off his descendants and his name from his father’s house. This was one of the pit-falls of having a king in those days: it was common that a new king would cut off the descendants of the last dynasty to prevent any up-risings. David swore that he would not do this, and they parted ways. Saul went home, and David went back to the stronghold. Saul appeared to have genuine regret or guilt over what he had done, but as we will see, it does not appear that he was repentant before God. There is a difference between feeling guilty for our sins and actually humbling ourselves before God through repentance. Repentance means to turn around or do a 180, and Saul ultimately will not turn away from his sins.

How do we address those who are our enemies? Do we respond with disrespect or disdain, or do we respond with humility and respect? Proverbs states, “A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” (Pro 15:1) And, “By long forbearance a ruler is persuaded, and a gentle tongue breaks a bone.” (Pro 25:15) Especially if they are in authority over us, they will see our disrespect, and reject what we have to say, even if it may be right.

This idea of respecting authority is not only important as it relates to secular rulers, but to spiritual rulers as well. Many people become disgruntled with Church leadership, and complain or seek to control what leadership does. While there are certainly legitimate times when Church leaders need to be disciplined or removed, more often than not they are a result of petty differences that can be resolved by prayer and learning contentment. If, for whatever reason, we just cannot see ourselves being able to submit to Church leadership, it would be better to find a different church. Sticking around and constantly fighting with leadership only causes division in the body of Christ that serves to hinder the work of God. In my experience, the congregational form of government lends itself more to these sorts of problems. If we do not like a pastor, we simply vote him out, and in my years of being a Christian, I have seen this numerous times. Churches split, and people are wounded, become embittered, and some leave the Church altogether. In those cases where a leader has truly done something wrong that is worth discipline, I would say that caution should still be used. They are the Lord’s anointed, the man the Lord has chosen to lead that particular flock. We should prayerfully consider what needs to be done, and use the Scriptures as our guide. A good place to start is 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and 5:17-20. Of course, if he has broken the law, then he should also answer to the law unless the law is in contradiction to the Scriptures. A Church leader is not above correction, but as David respectfully addressed Saul, so ought we our own Church leaders. Ultimately our leaders are accountable to the Lord, and if they are in the wrong, the Lord will deal with them in his time. In the next chapter we will see David put to the test in taking vengeance against someone who was not the Lord’s anointed, and how the Lord will spare him from making a big mistake.