Outline of Chapter 25:

       v.      1           Samuel Dies

       vv.    2–3        Nabal and Abigail

       vv.    4–8        David Sends Men to Nabal to Collect for Their Protection of Nabal’s Enterprise

       vv.    9–13      Nabal Refuses to Pay David’s Men/David Vows Revenge

       vv.   14–17      Nabal’s Men Come to Abigail to Tell Her What Has Happened

       vv.   18–20      Abigail Pro-actively Goes to Meet David to Dissuade Him

       vv.   21–22      David Vows to Return Evil for Evil

       vv.   23–31      Abigail Appeals to David

       vv.   32–35      David Backs Down, Recognizing that God Sent Abigail to Dissuade Him

       vv.   36–38      God Strikes Nabal Dead, Exacting David’s Revenge

       vv.   39–42      David Marries Abigail

       vv.   43–44      An Accounting of David’s Marriages and Former Marriages

Charts and Maps:

       Introduction    William Ramey on the Centrality of 1Samuel 25

       v.      1           Clarke’s Dedication to Samuel

       v.      2           Sheep Ranching in the Bible

       v.      3           The Introverted Parallelism of 1Sam. 25:3

       v.     17           The Similarities Between Saul and Nabal

       v.     17           Was David Running a Protection Racket?

       v.     31           Various Translations of 1Samuel 25:30–31

       Addendum      William Ramey’s Literary Structure of 1Samuel 25:1-44

I ntroduction: The first time I read through 1Sam. 25, I thought, is David running some sort of protection racket? In the times of mobster’s, they would offer to protect businesses from themselves for money (or, so is the movie version of those times). It appears that David is doing the same thing. Nabal, a businessman with a lot of sheep, is now harvesting his wool. This is the end product; this is where Nabal makes his money. Everything else just brings him to this point. In this chapter, David will send men to him, and they will tell Nabal, “Nothing happened to your sheep; what’s our cut?” Or so it appears to the casual reader.

There is a particular commentary that I read, and often grimace at the man’s thoughts: What the Bible Really Says by Manfred Barthel. Barthel comments: ...we are given a highly sanitized but still unmistakable account of David’s extortion methods. He sends an unarmed advance party to the house of a wealthy landowner called Nabal—or he sends “Messengers” to “salute” him, as the Bible puts it. They explain to Nabal, in true Mafioso style, that though David’s band of desperadoes has been camping out on Nabal’s grazing land for some time now

...but Nabal “obstinately” refuses to pay off—to hand over “what ever comes into your hand to your servants, to the your son David” —and David sets out with four hundred armed men for Nabal’s farmstead.

Nabal’s shepherds, naturally mindful of the prospect of having their kneecaps smashed by David’s “messengers,” warn Nabal’s wife, Abigail, pointing out that David’s demands are perfectly reasonable and that Nabal is just being perversely stubborn.

You may want to read this passage for yourself and you might even find yourself convinced that this is what David had done—demanded protection money from an honest and helpless businessman. However, one must look back on those times. There was no police force, per se. There was a national army, but Saul had abused these soldiers and had them chasing after David half of the time. His concern was not for the general welfare of Israel. Therefore, a businessman like Nabal could not expect to be protected by the state. Therefore, he had to hire private protection (something which is done today as well), and apparently he had hired David. That is, it does not appear as though David just showed up uninvited. However, Nabal did decide not to pay David.

This leads to David making a mistake, getting out of fellowship, and coming to kill Nabal and every male hire of his. However, in steps Abigail, Nabal’s wife, and she heads David off, and reasons with him, and prevents him from killing her husband. However, when she tells Nabal what had happened, who has just awoken after a night of drunken carousing, he has a heart attack or a stroke and dies 10 days later.

To break this chapter down more: we actually begin with the death of Samuel in v. 1. We meet Nabal the businessman in v. 2 and he and his wife are described in v. 3. Vv. 4–5 appear to be a little sketchy—it appears as though David, out of the blue sends men to Nabal, to collect money from him because he suffered no loss when he had his sheep sheared near where David was. When David’s men go to Nabal, having been told what to say, Nabal berates them, and sends them back to David empty-handed (vv. 6–11). The men return to David, empty-handed and having been insulted by Nabal. David prepares his men to saddle up and kill Nabal (vv. 12–13). This tells us that David was simply not running some protection racket, but that there was some sort of contract in place.

Abigail, Nabal’s wife, now becomes involved. She talks to the men involved with Nabal’s sheep, got the straight dope on the situation, and persuaded by these men, springs into action (vv. 14–17). What Abigail does is assemble a gift far greater than anything that could have been agreed to, and gets things ready to take it to David (vv. 18–19). Interestingly enough, David and Abigail almost run into one another while David is muttering what he is going to do to Nabal (vv. 20–22). Abigail ingratiates herself to David and clearly tells him that she knows what a total ass Nabal is (vv. 23–25). Then Abigail does the unexpected; she properly interprets everything in the context of Who and What God is (vv. 26–31). David recognizes that what she says is divine viewpoint, and he properly credits Jehovah Elohim for sending her to him to stop him from his mission of revenge (vv. 32–35). This adversity being averted, Abigail returns home to Nabal, who is drunk off his butt at a party—what a surprise that Nabal is a lying thieving businessman and a drunk (v. 36). The next day, Abigail tells Nabal why some of their assets are missing and that David was about to destroy their lives, and Nabal dies (vv. 37–38). In vv. 39–42, David hears that Abigail is a widow and he sends for her, so make her his wife. The chapter concludes with a few things about David’s marital status (vv. 43–44).

Narrative is kind of tricky sometimes. When you read one passage or one verse, you sometimes get an incorrect impression. It is easy to take an inference which is not there from a single verse. I know that I have done that on several occasions, and later, come to a verse which gives a completely different impression. So we have to be careful in making statements and saying things which a verse does not really say.

This is a general rule for Scripture. You cannot take one verse and beat it to death. I’ve seen many movies with vigil antes quote an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. I don’t know how many times this sort of thing actually occurred, but Scripture is crystal clear on this point—you do not get to exact revenge for a wrong which has been done to you. Nowhere, no way, no how. But if you take a verse like this, out of context, and ignore conflicting Scriptures, then you can be forced to a false conclusion. This is what cults do all of the time. They take a few pet Scriptures, some favorite verses, and devise a web of lies based upon those few Scriptures quoted out of context. The Jehovah Witnesses, for instance, love it when Jesus says, “The Father is greater than I.” They infer from this passage that Jesus is not God. To them, it is as clear as day. Therefore, they put great effort into beating down and explaining away the many verses which confirm our Lord’s deity.

Christian Science, which used to be a cultic force to reckon with, emphasized spiritual healing over the work of medical doctors (who are not perfect). They did not believe that medical science should be consulted in the matters of healing, which ignores specific Scriptures where medicine is applied. Again, the cult elevates a few passages, draws false inferences from those passages, and either ignores or explains away all that remains.

Application: Do now allowed yourself to be swayed from correct doctrine by what you find in two or three passages. These passages must be examined in context and in comparison to other passages on the same topi in order to come to a correct understanding. In other words, you should not read, “You will not kill” and interpret that as meaning that you never, under any circumstances, take the life of a person, animal or plant. Obviously, when the verse, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and a life for a life is nearby, that there is a valid reason for taking the life of another human being. There are provisions about eating in the Law which indicate that it is reasonable to slaughter animals and to harvest crops for food. And, as already mentioned, you cannot take the statement a life for a life and use it to justify vigil ante actions. The Law also provides a system of evidence, laws and governing bodies to sort out crimes which have been committed.

I re-emphasize this because, although David did no wrong with regards to the protection which he provided, he did great wrong with resorting to vigil ante action midway through this chapter. He will admit to his wrong when stopped by the gracious Abigail.

Most people, when they read this chapter, see it as basically a story about David and Abigail, and how they met. Of course, her husband Nabal, a louse, is also involved. However, this chapter marks an extremely important advance in David’s spiritual life, which will become more pronounced in the next chapter (often mistaken as an alternate view of 1Sam. 24). David will learn in this chapter that God will avenge his enemies for him.

Samuel Dies

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

The Dead Sea Scrolls            [not found]

Peshitta                                 And Samuel died; and all the Israelites were gathered together and mourned for him, an buried him in his grave in Ramtha. And David arose and went down to the wilderness of Paran.

Septuagint                             And Samuel died, and all Israel assembled and bewailed him, and they bury him in his house in Armathaim. And David arose and he went down to the wilderness of Maon [Alexandrian: Paran].

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Samuel died, and people from all over Israel gathered to mourn for him when he was buried at his home in Ramah. Meanwhile, David moved his camp to Paran Desert.

NJB                                        Samuel died and all Israel assembled to mourn for him. They buried him at his home in Ramah.

David then set off and went down to the desert of Maon.

NLT                                        Now Samuel died, and all Israel gathered for his funeral. They buried him near his home at Ramah.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Samuel died, and all Israel gathered to mourn for him. They buried him at his home in Ramah. Then David went to the desert of Paran.

JPS (Tanakh)                        Samuel died, and all Israel gathered and made lament for him; and they buried him in Ramah, his home.

David went down to the wilderness of Paran.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

NASB                                     Then Samuel died; and all Israel gathered together and mourned for him, and buried him at his house in Ramah. And David arose and went down to the wilderness of Paran.

Young's Updated LT              And Samuel dies, and all Israel are gathered, and mourn for him, and bury him in his house, in Ramah; and David rises and goes down unto the wilderness of Paran.

What is the gist of this verse? Samuel dies, and Israel mourns his passing. David goes to the wilderness of Maon.

1Sam. 25:1 almost stands by itself. It sets the stage for the next few chapters. David’s location is tied to this chapter. Samuel’s death is the background for Saul’s negative volition in chapters 27–28 and his foray into spiritism in 1Sam. 28.

Translation: Finally, Samuel died,... Samuel was the last judge, and some might call him the first of the office of prophets (recall that he organized a school of prophets). He has been an old man for a long time. This was made mention of at least twice previously in Samuel (1Sam. 8:1, 5 12:2). So it was only a matter of time before he died. He is passing along the torch to David, who will be the spiritual Atlas, if you will, of his generation. Clarke lists him as being 98 years old at his death, which information is obviously taken from an unnamed source. He also suggests that Samuel was involved in Israel’s roughly 16–20 years prior to Saul; however, I would not be surprised if he was involved for a longer period of time.

Translation: ...and all of Israel gathered... The people of Israel did not have to be requested to attend Samuel’s funeral; it just came naturally to them. Samuel was a great man of his day, well-respected even by men such as Saul. In fact, as we will see, Saul, even though he has not made contact with Samuel for sometime, will feel lost without him in the world.

Application: Those who have raised you spiritually will eventually leave this world. In fact, everybody dies; so it is just a matter of time. You must give your spiritual growth over to God. This does not mean that when your spiritual mentor dies, that you just wait for God to speak to you; but God will provide a teacher for you.

Translation: ...to grieve [lit., and so they grieve] for him. Israel recognized that God was with Samuel and that he spiritually guided the nation. Therefore, they were sorry that he died. For some, this would have left them in a state of spiritual panic.

Keil and Delitzsch tell us: [Samuel’s] labours as a prophet were recognised by the whole nation as a blessing for Israel. Since the days of Moses and Joshua, no man had arisen to whom the covenant nation owed so much as to Samuel, who has been justly called the reformer and restorer of the theocracy.

Translation: They buried him at his estate [lit., in his house] in Ramah. Samuel’s home had been Ramah; it is where he was born and where he returned to after being brought up in the Tabernacle of God. This is apparently where he made his base of operations when he functioned as a circuit judge.

It is highly unlikely that Samuel was physically buried inside his house, but he may have been buried in the courtyard or something like that. Jamieson, et. al, write: that is, his own mausoleum. The Hebrews took as great care to provide sepulchers anciently as people do in the East still, where every respectable family has its own house of the dead. Often this is in a little detached garden, containing a small stone building (where there is no rock), resembling a house, which is called the sepulcher of the family--it has neither door nor window. Although this makes perfect sense, they give us no references to confirm this.

Gill tells us that the Greeks and Romans sometimes buried the dead in their homes; however, this was not a Hebrew custom. Gill gives us several theories which have been proposed as to where Samuel was buried; however, in the courtyard of his estate makes the most sense. Gill tells us, that according to the historical records, Samuel's bones remained, until removed by Arcadius the emperor into Thrace; Benjamin of Tudela reports (Itinerar. p. 52), that when the Christians took Ramlah, which is Ramah, from the Mahometans, they found the grave of Samuel at Ramah by a synagogue of the Jews, and they took him out of the grave, and carried him to Shiloh, and there built a large temple, which is called the Samuel of Shiloh to this day. I do not know the time frame here (although at least a millennium would have passed between Samuel’s death and being moved anywhere by Christians; nor do I know if this is even accurate.

Freeman tells us that we cannot assume that Samuel’s tomb was actually somewhere on his land; but that the house here spoken of is actually Samuel’s tomb (compare 1Kings 2:34 Job 30:23). He says that it is much more likely that a tomb built for a body is referred to as a house, rather than the house for the living be used as a burial place. On the one hand, burying a person on their estate seems a natural thing to do, Samuel was a national figure and it is possible that his body was buried in a more public place (it is also possible that his estate became a more public place—if he was buried there).

Translation: David also arose, but he went down to the wilderness of Maon [possibly, Paran]. David, despite his seemingly cordial visit with Saul, knows that Saul is not a man to be trusted. Therefore, David cannot go to the funeral of Samuel. There is no telling what might be running through Saul’s head again.

Gill also suggests that David was living among the Kedarenes while living that far south, and associates David’s living there with Psalm 120:5, where the author (possibly David) mentions living in the tents of Cedar (there are other interpretations of this passage as well). However, we do not know if David really was residing in the wilderness of Paran (see below).

We have the Massoretic text, which reads the wilderness of Paran and the LXX which reads the wilderness of Moan. Let’s first examine these two general areas:

The wilderness of Paran is a relatively large desert area with the wilderness of Sinai to the south; the wilderness of Zin to the north, and the wilderness of Shur to the northwest. Today, this is the center of the Sinai Peninsula, which is sandwiched between the Mediterranean, the Suez Gulf and the Gulf of Aqaba. This is the area where exodus generation wandered for some of the time. Although this region is generally inhospitable, ZPEB says the eastern edge of the Sinai peninsula is intensely broken up into dissected hills, through faults, and wadi floors—a wild assortment of landforms impossible to describe in detail. The indication is, there might be some areas where David’s group could survive. The biggest problem here is, this is pretty far from the action in Carmel. That is, David and his men, if they were in the wilderness of Paran, would not be that close to Carmel, where Nabal’s business is. In fact, they would be about 150–200 miles away, even if they were at the northeastern tip of the wilderness of Paran (some author’s suggest to the wilderness of Paran was must general and included southern Judah—this would put David 80–100 miles away). This does not mean that David didn’t go to the wilderness of Paran first and then drift back up to the Maon-Carmel area. However, we have nothing in the passage which documents that sort of movement. Jamieson, et. al. suggests that the wilderness of Paran stretches to the southern portion of Judah. If this is the case, then this translation makes sense. There would be several days to ride between northern Paran and Maon.

On the other hand, the wilderness of Maon is in the general area of Maon and Carmel. The wilderness of Maon is mentioned but twice in the Old Testament, and all in the same passage, but in relation to David and Saul’s movements in that general area (1Sam. 23:24–25). The majority of David’s movements are confined to that general area, making this the most likely reading from the standpoint of logic. On the other hand, there are two laws of textual criticism which suggest Paran: (1) It is possible that a copyist at some point, copied Maon from another verse instead of Paran; and (2) Maon is the most reasonable location here, meaning that it is more likely that a copyist would intentionally change Paran to Maon rather than the other way around.

To sum up: from the standpoint of logic, this is probably Maon; from the standpoint of textual criticism, this would be Paran. A third option is this could be a different wilderness of Paran makes little sense.

Proper interpretation of this passage may yield a semi-reasonable explanation: David’s men have already guarded Nabal’s sheep in Carmel. This was a contract which had been negotiated and fulfilled on one side. However, neither David nor his men had been paid on this contract. Therefore, even though they had to move to an area quite far away, they were still able to ascertain the information needed in order to determine when it was their payday. However, even with this explanation, Paran is a distance away; even northern Paran. The distance between Maon and Paran would have been several days journey. On the other hand, if David and his men are this far from Nabal, Nabal would have had the nerve to stiff David for the money owed. The difference to us is, everything David or his men go to Carmel, we are talking perhaps a week’s journey. If David and his men are in Maon, then the journey would be half a day. Abigail’s quick action (v. 18) would suggest that David is nearby.

Barnes opinion: The Septuagint has the far more probable reading “Maon.” The wilderness of Paran lay far off to the south, on the borders of the wilderness of Sinai (Num. 10:12; 1Ki. 11:18), whereas the following verse 1Sa. 25:2 shows that the scene is laid in the immediate neighborhood of Maon. If, however, Paran be the true reading, we must suppose that in a wide sense the wilderness of Paran extended all the way to the wilderness of Beersheba, and eastward to the mountains of Judah .

Now, all this aside, you may wonder, what does David’s location or relocation have to do with Samuel’s death? It is simply this: Samuel was one of the few men who could reason with Saul and get him, at least for a short time, more or less on board for God’s plan. In a bind, David could always go to Samuel, and it is unlikely that Saul would harm Samuel to get to David. However, with Samuel gone, the little restraint that Saul may have exhibited in the past is almost sure gone completely. Therefore, David needs, in his own mind, to be more careful and hidden further from Saul. This would tend to support the reading of the Masoretic text (which reads Paran), where David is looking to move further and further from Saul.

Nabal and Abigail

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Septuagint                             And there was a man in Maon, and his flocks were in Carmel, and [he was] a very great man; and he had 1000 sheep and 100 she-goats. And he happened to be shearing his flock in Carmel.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Nabal was a very rich man who lived in Maon. He owned three thousand sheep and a thousand goats, which he kept at Carmel. His wife Abigail was sensible and beautiful, but he was from the Caleb clan and was rough and mean.

NLT                                        There was a wealthy man from Maon who owned property near the village of Carmel. He had three thousand sheep and a thousand goats, and it was sheep-shearing time.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Now, there was a man in Maon whose business was in Carmel. He was a very rich man. He had 3,000 sheep and 1,000 goats. And he was shearing his sheep in Carmel.

JPS (Tanakh)                        There was a man in Maon whose possessions were in Carmel. The man was very wealthy; he owned three thousand sheep and a thousand goats. At the time, he was shearing his sheep in Carmel.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Young's Updated LT              And there is a man in Maon, and his work is in Carmel; and the man is very great, and he has three thousand sheep, and a thousand goats; and he is shearing his flock in Carmel.

What is the gist of this verse? Maon is a rich man who lives in Maon and he has his sheep business in Carmel and he is shearing his flock in Carmel.

Translation: [There was] a man in Maon... This is the second time the Maon is mentioned in the book of Samuel (1Sam. 23:24–25).

Translation: ...and his work [was] in Carmel;... Nabal (the name of this guy) was one of the early commuters. He had a home in the suburbs in Maon, but he worked in Carmel. Obviously, the bus line was a couple years in the future, which meant that he would split his time between Maon and Carmel.

Carmel has also been mentioned before in this book (1Sam. 15:12 18:12). This is not the Mount Carmel west of the plain of Esdraelon, but the Carmel which is close to Maon (see Joshua 15:55). This is the Carmel where Saul erected a monument to himself. Caleb claimed a territory very near here, which confirms the fact that Nabal is a Calebite (v. 3).

Translation: ...and this man [was] very rich [lit., great]. For a man to have a house in one place, but have a business venture elsewhere made him a very rich person. Because he was rich, people thought of him as being great.

Translation: And he had [lit., to him] 3000 sheep and 1000 goats. His balance sheet is given to us, just in case we did not recognize how wealthy he is. Interestingly enough, sheep is used in the Hebrew as we use it in the English—as a collective plural; and goats is also used in the Hebrew as we use it in the English—as a simple plural noun.

Translation: And [the following] came to pass [lit., was] as [he] sheared his sheep in Carmel: the events which follow occurred while he was shearing his sheep in Carmel (while Nabal was on the job).

Interestingly enough, Scripture records two incidents of sheep shearing: Gen. 38:12-13 2Sam. 13:23-24. This is the time when the labors of the sheep owner come to fruition. Once the sheep are shorn, the wool will be sold or traded, and that will represent the profits of this particular business man.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Peshitta                                 Now the name of the man was Nabal; and the name of his wife was Abigail; and she was a beautiful woman, and of a beautiful countenance; but the man Nabal was harsh and evil in his doings, and like a dog.

Septuagint                             And the man’s name, Nabal; and his wife’s name, Abigaia; and his wife [was] of good understanding and very beautiful in person; but the man [was] harsh and evil in his doing, and the man [was] churlish.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       [Nabal was a very rich man who lived in Maon. He owned three thousand sheep and a thousand goats, which he kept at Carmel. His wife Abigail was sensible and beautiful, but he was from the Caleb clan and was rough and mean]. [vv. 2–3 are combined].

The Message                         The man's name was Nabal (Fool), a Calebite, and his wife's name was Abigail. The woman was intelligent and good-looking, the man brutish and mean.

NLB                                       This man’s name was Nabal, and his wife, Abigail, was a sensible and beautiful woman. But Nabal, a descendant of Caleb, was mean and dishonest in all his dealings.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         This man's name was Nabal, and his wife's name was Abigail. She was sensible and beautiful, but he was harsh and mean. He was a descendant of Caleb.

JPS (Tanakh)                        The man’s name was Nabal, and his wife’s name was Abigail. The woman was intelligent and beautiful, but the man, a Calebite, was a hard man and an evildoer.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Updated Emphasized Bible   Now ║the name of the man║ was Nabal, and ║the name of his wife║ Abigail, —and ║the woman║ was of good understanding and of beautiful figure, —but ║the man║ was unfeeling and of evil practices and he was a Calebite.

Young's Literal Translation    And the name of the man is Nabal, and the name of his wife Abigail, and the woman is of good understanding, and of fair form, and the man is hard and evil in doings; and he is a Calebite.

What is the gist of this verse? Nabal, a descendant of Caleb, is a rat bastard and his wife Abigail is his polar opposite.

Translation: The name of the man [is] Nabal... At this point, we get to know who our principal characters are. There is first the man, whose name is Nabal. There are occasions in Scripture where I don’t think the actual name of the person is recorded, but more his essence. I believe that is what we have here. Nabal means fool, and Nabal was an ass and a jerk. God the Holy Spirit could have determined that it would not be worth the trouble to record this man’s actual name. For principal of narrative, we will simply refer to him as the ass. However, Nabal’s actual name was certainly at least very close to the word foolish, given what his wife, Abigail will say about him in v. 25. Now, of course, the simplest explanation is that Nabal was his name, although we do not know why his parents chose to give him that name. Another explanation is, this is how he became to be known, because of his stupidity. Perhaps Nabal was a play on his actual name (various authors suggest several different scenarios).

Translation: ...and the name of his wife [is] Abigail. The wife of this jerk had the name Abigail. This was her actual name and it means my father is joy or my father is joyous or my father’s joy (the latter seeming to be a very apropos name given by a father to his daughter). Quite obviously, when Abigail was born, her father was extremely joyous to have a daughter. Now, this goes against the custom of the ancient world, where sons seemed to be over-valued. However, the father looks at this little girl and he was overjoyed; he was happy and blessed to have a little girl. This would indicate that he took great care in bringing this girl up from a baby into adulthood.

Translation: The woman [was] of good understanding... The first thing that we are told about Abigail is that she was a woman of good understanding; or, that she was pleasant yet understanding and insightful. In any case, she was a woman of intelligence.

Translation: ...with a beautiful figure;... Abigail also has a beautiful, striking figure. The person who recounted this at some point in time (probably David) was struck immediately by her attractive figure. In fact, it was so attractive that he just had to tell us about it.

Translation: ...while [lit., and] the man [was] harsh and practiced evil [lit., (was) evil of deeds]. Nabal is pretty much the polar opposite of Abigail. He was harsh and severe. That means, he lacked compassion. It was his way or the highway. How others felt and thought was really unimportant. He had things that he wanted in life, and he went out and got them, others be damned. The needs of others are not his concern. They can look out after themselves; and if their needs or desires conflicted with his, then his would supplant theirs.

Gill comments that Nabal is morose and ill natured in the temper and disposition of his mind, and wicked in his conversation, and fraudulent and oppressive in his dealings with men.

Furthermore, this is a man of evil. He practiced evil. He did evil. He did that which was wrong. In order to satisfy his own desires, Nabal would do anything. If doing this wrong or that gained him an extra dollar in his checking account, then he was all for that. He didn’t mind screwing someone else, if the end result was that he was richer.

You may wonder, what happened that this extremely intelligent and wonderful woman ended up with a jerk like Nabal. Look around you—it happens all the time.

Translation: He [was] a Calebite [i.e., a dog]. Now, for the final contrast: Nabal was a descendant of Caleb. Caleb was a man of great character and faith. Caleb was the number 2 man next to Joshua. Had Joshua not been around, Moses would have selected Caleb to follow in his footsteps and to lead Israel. However, Nabal was more of a dog, a creature which was hated in the ancient world.

David Sends Men to Nabal to Collect for Their Protection of Nabal’s Enterprise

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Septuagint                             And David heard in the wilderness, that Nabal the Carmelite was shearing his sheep.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       One day, Nabal was in Carmel, having his servants cut the wool from his sheep. David was in the desert when he heard about it.

The Message                         David, out in the backcountry, heard that Nabal was shearing his sheep.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         While David was in the desert, he heard that Nabal was shearing his sheep.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Young's Updated LT              And David hears in the wilderness that Nabal is shearing his flock,...

What is the gist of this verse? While David is in the wilderness [of Maon], he hears about Nabal shearing his sheep.

Translation: [While] in the wilderness, David hears... David is without any wealth or means of support; therefore, he keeps his ear close to the ground for opportunities; in this case, David is waiting to be paid for some work that he and his men have already done.

Now we only get part of the story here. In fact, throughout this chapter, it is easy to take one verse and misinterpret what is going on. The chapter must be taken as a whole, and each verse must be considered in its context and with the other verses. I have occasionally written a summary for a verse, or had an idea as to what was going on, and later had to revise when examining the other verses. As has been mentioned when I introduced this chapter is, some interpret this as some sort of a protection racket on David’s part. As we look at the first few verses, this is how it appears. Again, one must take the entirely of the chapter into consideration.

Translation: ...that Nabal is shearing his sheep. At the end of a growing cycle, a farmer harvests his crops. This is after nearly a year’s worth of work, all of his labors come to fruition. The problem and risk here is that souls who are less industrious, may want to take advantage of the farmer and steal from him after all of the work has been done. With a sheepherder who sells his wool, the situation is similar. He cares for his sheep for a specific period of time, feeding them and tending to their needs, and then gives them all a haircut. That is the fruition of the shepherd’s labors. It is also the time when he is vulnerable to attack. In that day and age, it was like the armored car had shown up to haul the money from the bank. Just as a bank will hire private security guards, so an owner of sheep would hire security for himself—particularly during the shearing period. However, that David was hired is only implied in this chapter—it is never stated.

Now, what apparently has happened is that David guarded these sheep for the many months previous. Nabal apparently said, “David, you know I can’t pay you now; however, as soon as I sell the wool, you will be the first man paid.” So David is waiting for news that Nabal is shearing his sheep, so that he and his men can get their back wages.

Jamieson, et. al comment: David and his men lurked in these deserts, associating with the herdsmen and shepherds of Nabal and others and doing them good offices, probably in return for information and supplies obtained through them. Hence when Nabal held his annual sheep-shearing in Carmel, David felt himself entitled to share in the festival and sent a message, recounting his own services and asking for a present. "In all these particulars we were deeply struck with the truth and strength of the biblical description of manners and customs almost identically the same as they exist at the present day. On such a festive occasion, near a town or village, even in our own time, an Arab sheik of the neighboring desert would hardly fail to put in a word either in person or by message; and his message, both in form and substance, would be only a transcript of that of David" [ROBINSON].

Again, we are not completely positive of where David is. If the wilderness of Paran is understood to extend into southern Judah, David is perhaps 80–100 miles away from Nabal. However, if he and his men are in the wilderness of Maon, then he is only a morning’s ride from Nabal.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Septuagint                             And David sent ten young men, and he said to the young men, “Go up to Carmel, and go to Nabal, and ask him in my name concerning peace.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       So he sent ten men to Carmel with this message for Nabal: I hope that you and your family are healthy and that all is going well for you. [vv. 5–6 are combined].

The Message                         ...and sent ten of his young men off with these instructions: “Go to Carmel and approach Nabal. Greet him in my name, 'Peace!’

NJB                                        ...he sent ten young men, instructing them: “Go up to Carmel. Pay Nabal a visit and greet him in my name.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         So David sent ten young men and told them, "Go to Carmel, visit Nabal, and greet him for me.

JPS (Tanakh)                        David dispatched ten young men, and David instructed the young men, “Go up to Carmel. When you come to Nabal, greet him in my name.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Young's Updated LT              ...and David sends ten young men, and David says to the young men, “Go up to Carmel, and [when] you have come in unto Nabal, and asked of him in my name of [his] welfare,...

What is the gist of this verse? David sends ten of his men to contact Nabal.

Translation: Therefore [lit., then] David sent 10 young men... David was always looking for work; he was an enterprising young man, and this was on behalf of those who had come to him and put their trust in him. He hears about Nabal, who is a very successful rancher, and what David is going to do is solicit work on behalf of his men. So he chooses ten men to go to speak to Nabal.

You may ask, why is David sending ten men? Is this to intimidate Nabal? Of course not. If David wanted to intimidate Nabal, he would have gone with 100+ men and David would have been up in front. These men are merely collecting payment for what is owed them, and since the ancient world worked on trade, it would take ten men to carry back to camp all that they expected. One man could not have transported what was due David on his own. Even five men would be too few. Ten was just the right amount.

Translation: ...and David said to the young men,... David does not send his men out without careful instructions. He is in a difficult position. He is still hiding out, to some degree from Saul (although he is enjoying a respite from that search due to the events of the previous chapter). So David can be a little more overt. However, he has to be careful, so when he sends these men out there, he is careful to send them out with instructions.

Translation: ...“Go up to Carmel and when you have come to Nabal,... David knows nothing about Nabal’s reputation; or, if he does, he has decided to not be influenced by the rumors. What we have so far in this chapter is what was known about Nabal after the fact. As far as David knows, Nabal is just another businessman who might be interested in some temporary labor.

It may be important to note that many crooked businessmen have marvelous personalities. This is how they are able to easily swindle so many people. They are able to project often what we want to see. So, if David and Nabal had a face to face meeting, then it would be reasonable to assume Nabal charmed David and got David’s guard down.

Secondly, from the second verse on, you may have wondered, “How does a beautiful and intelligent woman like Abigail get hooked up with a guy like Nabal?” First off, it happens all the time, even in modern society. If Nabal is both successful and charming, and able to keep his true nature hidden, he could have snagged a woman like Abigail, even though she may have felt that she was getting a good deal when they got married.

Translation: ...ask about his welfare on my behalf [lit., in regards to him in my name with reference to peace]. David has a reputation. He is also temporarily safe from Saul, which makes him more bankable. The ten men are to begin with a standard greeting and this is one to inquire as to Nabal’s welfare from David. Therefore, these ten men function more or less as David’s emissaries or ambassadors.

Again, it appears as though David is contacting Nabal after the fact—that is, that David supplied protection without being asked, and now is sending men to collect. This is not the case, something which will be discussed later in this chapter, once we put all of the facts together.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Septuagint                             And you will say thus, “May you and your house seasonally prosper, and all yours be in health.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       So he sent ten men to Carmel with this message for Nabal: I hope that you and your family are healthy and that all is going well for you. [vv. 5–6 are combined].

The Message                         Life and peace to you. Peace to your household, peace to everyone here!

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Say to him, ‘May you live long! May you, your home, and all you have prosper!

JPS (Tanakh)                        Say as follows: ‘To life! Greetings to you and to your household.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Young's Updated LT              ...and said thus: ‘To life! And you, peace; and your house, peace; and all that you have—peace!

What is the gist of this verse? David’s greeting was ingratiating. He wishes peace and prosperity to Nabal and his entire house.

Translation: And you will say this [lit., thus],... David is not haphazard in his instructions. He does not want to appear untoward. The men which he sends, he instructs carefully. He tells them exactly what to say.

Translation: ...‘Peace to [your] life and you;... David’s men are first to wish peace and prosperity to Nabal and to his life. The idea is, David is concerned for his welfare.

Translation: ...peace [to] your house,... David also tells his men to wish peace and prosperity to Nabal’s estate. This would include Nabal’s family, his house, his servants, and his general estate.

Translation: ...and peace [to] all that is yours [lit., (is) to you]. Finally, David wishes peace to everything that belongs to Nabal. The idea is, if David missed anything in the previous quote, he is making up for it here.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Peshitta                                 Your shepherds were with us and we did not harm them, and they did not miss anything all the time they were in Carmel.

Septuagint                             And now, behold, I have heard that your shepherd who were with us in the wilderness are shearing you sheep; and we did not hinder them; neither did we demand anything from them all the time they were in Carmel.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       I've heard that you are cutting the wool from your sheep. When your shepherds were with us in Carmel, we didn't harm them, and nothing was ever stolen from them.

The Message                         I heard that it's sheep-shearing time. Here's the point: When your shepherds were camped near us we didn't take advantage of them. They didn't lose a thing all the time they were with us in Carmel.

NLT                                        I am told that you are shearing your sheep and goats. While your shepherds stayed among us near Carmel, we never harmed them, and nothing was ever stolen from them.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         I hear that your sheepshearers are with you. Your shepherds have been with us, and we have not mistreated them. Nothing of theirs has been missing as long as they've been in Carmel.

JPS (Tanakh)                        I hear that you are now doing you shearing. As you know, your shepherds have been with us; we did not harm them, an nothing of theirs was missing all the time they were in Carmel.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Amplified Bible                I have heard that you have shearers. Now your shepherds have been with us, and we did them no harm, and they missed nothing, all the time they were in Carmel.

Updated Emphasized Bible   ║Now║ therefore, I have heard that you have shearers, —

Well, ║the shepherds that you have║ have been with us,

We reproached them not,

Neither did they miss anything.

NASB                                     ‘And ow I have heard that you have shearers; now your shepherds have been with us and we have not insulted them, nor have they missed anything all the days they were in Carmel.

Young's Updated LT              And, now, I have heard that you have shearers; now, the shepherds whom you have been with us, we have not put them to shame, nor has anything been looked after by them, all the days of their being in Carmel.

What is the gist of this verse? David says that he hears that Nabal has brought in his shearers. When David’s men acted as protection for Nabal’s shepherds, all went well while they were in Carmel.

This verse is the key to this entire passage. Misread it is to misinterpret the entire passage.

Translation: And now I have heard that you have sheep-shearers [lit., that (there are) sheep-shearers for you];... Here is where you must read this passage carefully; here and in the next portion of this verse. David tells Nabal that he knows that he is shearing the sheep. This means that, it is payday for Nabal; and it is time to settle his previous debts. David has heard that Nabal has hired some sheep shearers, meaning that he is about to bring all of his ranching efforts to fruition for this season. Just recognize the simple fact that sheep shearers are not the same as the shepherds. Different words and very different functions.

Translation: ...now, when your shepherds [lit., the ones shepherding which (are) to you] were with us,... All that Nabal has for a very short time will be vulnerable. But, it does not compare to the time that David and his men had already spent with Nabal’s sheep while they were being shepherded in Carmel. The shearing and selling of the wool may take a few days at most. However, David has already provided a season’s worth of protection for Nabal. Now, he wants to be paid for that.

Here is what happened; Nabal hired David’s men to protect his flocks while they were in Carmel. David and his men did. Then Nabal told David, “Look, I don’t have my profits yet from these sheep. Wait until the week that I shear them, and come by then for your paychecks.” What these men were to do, going with David’s words, was to gently remind Nabal of his previous obligations.

Translation: ...we did not reproach [shame or injure] them they lacked not one thing [lit., nothing (was) lacking to them] all the days they were in Carmel. Now David makes his point: he and his men, seen by some as a gathering of reprobates and malcontents, were spending time in the same general area as Nabal’s shepherds; however, David’s men never reproached, shamed or injured Nabal’s shepherds all the time that they were in Carmel. Furthermore, not one of their personal items ever turned up missing. That is, David’s men did not steal into the shepherds’ camp and take their food or supplies. What is apparently the case, David and his men provided hired protection for Nabal. They just were not in the same geographical area by coincidence. David’s men had protected Nabal’s sheep for a season; and this is a gentle reminder of that. David is simply asking for Nabal to share some of the wealth, an appropriate amount for the protection which David rendered.

Clarke comments: It is most evident that David had a claim upon Nabal, for very essential services performed to his herdmen at Carmel. He not only did them no hurt, and took none of their flocks for the supply of his necessities, but he protected them from the rapacity of others; they were a Wall unto us, said Nabal’s servants, both by night and day. In those times, and to the present day, wandering hordes of Arabs, under their several chiefs, think they have a right to exact contributions of provisions, etc., wherever they come; David had done nothing of this kind, but protected them against those who would.

Gill says about the same thing: [David’s men] did not steal a sheep or lamb from them, as was common for soldiers to do; nor did they allow any of the Arabs to rob them—these Arabs who lived in the wilderness of Paran, who lived upon plunder. Furthermore, David kept Nabal’s sheep safe from the wild beasts who hurt them. David’s men were a wall unto them by night and day, as Nabal's servants reported to Abigail (1Sam.25:16).

You have to understand the mental state of the ancient soldier. They were paid in what they took during a battle. If they wanted this or that from an enemy, they just took it. If they saw a woman they wanted, they raped her or they took her with. So, David’s men exercised great restraint when they were around Nabal’s shepherds. What they could have taken from Nabal would have been far greater than what they would have been paid. However, their behavior was honorable and impeccable.

I want you to understand something here: I am not an apologist for David. When David is wrong—and he is many times in Scripture—I will properly castigate him (not to ever imply that I would have been better under the same circumstances). However, on the other hand, when David is righteous in his actions, I am not about to sully his name. Here, David begins by being righteous, but he does fall out of fellowship part-way through this chapter because of the mental attitude sin anger (in v. 13).

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Septuagint                             Ask your servants, and they will tell you. Let then your servants find grace in your eyes, for we are come on a good day. Give, we pray you, whatever your had may find, to your son David.

Significant differences           .

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Ask your shepherds, and they'll tell you the same thing. My servants are your servants, and you are like a father to me. This is a day for celebrating, so please be kind and share some of your food with us.

The Message                         Ask your young men--they'll tell you. What I'm asking is that you be generous with my men--share the feast! Give whatever your heart tells you to your servants and to me, David your son.’ ”

NAB                                       As your servants and they will tell you so. Look kindly on these yong men, since w come at a festival time. Please give your servants and your son David whatever you can manage.’ ”

NLT                                        As your own servants, and they will tell you this is true. So would you please be kind to us, since we have come at a time of celebration? Please give us any provisions you might have on hand.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Ask your young men, and let them tell you. Be kind to my young men, since we have come on a special occasion. Please give us and your son David anything you can spare.”

JPS (Tanakh)                        Ask your young men and they will tell you. So receive these young men graciously, for we have come on a festive occasion. Please give your servants and your son David whatever you can.’ ”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Young's Updated LT              “Ask your young men, and they declare to you, and the young men find grace in your eyes, for on a good day we have come; give, I pray you, that which your hand finds, to your servants, and to your son, to David.”

What is the gist of this verse? At this point, Nabal has money, because he is shearing his sheep, and David sends his men there to collect on a debt for handling security while Nabal’s sheep grazed in Carmel.

Translation: Ask your young men [about these things] and they will confirm what I have told you [lit., make known to you]. The information which David is conveying through his 10 young men is accurate and can be verified by Nabal’s men. All he has to do is ask them, and they will confirm all that David has said to them.

Now, if this was some kind of scam, if David were running a protection racket rather than a valid security force, then Nabal’s young men would have reported that. They would have said, “Hey, David’s men showed up on occasion, talked a lot of trash, but really provided no real protection except from themselves.” However, David knows that this will not be how his job will be reviewed. Those who were in the field day-by-day could testify to to the competence of David and his men. David also mentions this because Nabal wasn’t there all of the time. He lived in Maon, but kept the ranch in Carmel. Therefore, he did not live on the ranch and possibly visited this place of business only infrequently. And there is reasonable evidence to suggest that there was a mutual contract agreed to by both parties.

Translation: Furthermore [let] the young men find grace in your eyes... Now David asks Nabal for a favor. Nabal has looked these young men over; they have provided a service, and David is asking that Nabal take this into consideration.

I want you to notice the deference and politeness we find here. David does not say, “Bill’s past due; you’ve got money; now pay us.” This is how we conduct business today in modern American. We only do business by signing contracts that only lawyers understand, and are more than willing to argue about for vast sums of money. There, they had a handshake deal. Their honor was in the handshake.

Translation: ...on [this] good day we have come,... David asks for Nabal to consider this on this good day that these men of David’s have arrived. It is a good day for Nabal, because he is having his sheep sheared and he will reap some serious profit. He now has the money to pay David for services rendered.

We find this sort of thing in business all of the time. A business might order supplies or raw materials, but be billed for these purchases, only to pay on those bills once they have garnered some profits. As a matter of fact, many business depend upon this sort of arrangement where they have a month’s time to make good on the items that they have purchases. Therefore, the idea that David was willing to forgo payment until Nabal turned a profit is a common practice today and not a reason to misunderstand what is here.