Outline of Chapter 27:

         vv.     1–4           David Moves his Crew to Gath

         vv.     5–7           David is Given Ziklag to Live In

         vv.     8–12         David Attacks Israel’s Enemies and Tells Achish He has Plundered Israel

Charts, Short Doctrines and Maps:

         v.       1              1Samuel 27 Summarized by Keil and Delitzsch

         v.       1              What Did Jesus Mean when He said, “Your Faith has made You Whole”?

         v.       2              What Has Changed Since David was in Gath in 1Samuel 21

         v.       2              What Has Not Changed Since David was in Gath in 1Samuel 21

         v.       3              Principles of Teaching and Presenting Scripture

         v        7              How Do We Know that David Is Not in God’s Geographical Will?

         v.       8              Biblical Criticism Applied to 1Samuel 27:8c

         v.      12              Is David In God’s Will or Not?

I ntroduction: In 1Sam. 27, David takes his 600 men and leaves Israel, moving to Gath, a Philistine city-state. He reasons that he will always be on the run from Saul in Israel and that he will never escape persecution there. Israel’s foreign policy, after seizing the Land of Promise, has been primarily one of defense. When the Philistines entered into Israel (or anyone else), Israel would act to expel them; however, very little was done in Israel in the realm of offensive action. This undoubtedly entered into David’s reasoning when it came to deciding what to do. If he moved into Philistia, as long as he could make peace with the Philistines, it was unlikely that Saul would pursue him there, an estimation which proved to be correct.

Let me give you a little more detail: Saul has been pursuing David since 1Sam. 19. David has lived as a fugitive with a small army for several years now (we do not know exactly how long). David decides that unless he leaves Israel, he is going to die by Saul’s hand; therefore, he chooses to return to Gath (v. 1). Although much of the book of Samuel is presented without specifically telling us, and what David did here was wrong; nevertheless, what David did here was wrong. He is not going to die by Saul’s hand. He is the next king of Israel—this has been clearly promised to him by God through Samuel—so David’s concern over his life at this point is wrong. Whatever is not of faith is sin (Rom. 14:23b). Therefore, his decision to leave Israel for safety’s sake is wrong.

Application: I have noticed that many people spend a significant portion of their lives avoiding problems or running away from problems. They don’t get along with a co-worker or their boss, so they quit their job and find a new job; they have an argument with their spouse and decide it is time to walk away from this marriage, and they do. They get so sick and tired of a particular neighbor or a particular neighborhood association, so they move to a different neighborhood. There are times when you need to stay right where God put you and to deal with what God has for you there. Now, I am not saying that there are not times to move to a different job, to relocate, or even, on a rare occasion, to leave a spouse (for instance, if you are being physically abused). However, this does not mean that you ought to run away from every problem that you face. First of all, no matter where you live, no matter what you do, no matter who you spend time with, there will be problems—that is the nature of this life. As a mediocre observer of human behavior, I have often noticed that women will, at least as of late, find themselves in a rut or in a bad circumstance, and they will move or change jobs in order to solve the problem. I have worked for myself and I have worked for other people, and I have never had a job where there were no problems—in fact, I have never been in any job where there were not a handful of people who caused a great many problems where I worked (for me or for others). Now, in a perfect world, we might work at a job where everyone we meet takes the times to say 5 nice things to us every day; or, where we could just shoot those aforementioned handful of people at our present job; but that just isn’t going to happen. There is a time to move, there is a time to change circumstances; and often, God will prod you in that direction. However, David, in this chapter, has had his fill of Saul; and he figures, in human viewpoint, that if he simply leaves Israel, that his biggest problem, Saul, will be solved. However, all David is doing is, exchanging one set of problems for another set of problems. In fact, he is going from a place where he has great moral clarity (1Sam. 24 26) to a place where, no matter what choice David makes, there is tremendous moral ambiguity (1Sam. 29). You see, in order to solve his problem of being pursued by Saul, David is going to step outside the geographical will of God.

Application: When you are going to make a major change in your life, make certain that you are not simply stepping outside God’s geographical will. Obviously, your question is, how do I know? If you are unsure, that means either, you should not make the change, or, you do not have enough doctrine in your soul to make this decision. In the first case, you don’t make the change; in the second case, you learn enough doctrine to guide you in your life; and often God will take care of whatever changes need to be made.

Back to our narrative: David and his army of 600 men, along with their families, move to Gath, getting the okay from Achish, king of Gath. In fact, not only does Achish give David his royal okay but he also gives David a place to live (Ziklag, which is over 20 miles south of Gath—vv. 2–6). We will find out that this arrangement continued for nearly a year and a half (v. 7). Now David was not really a farming man; and he had his family and the families of his men to take care of. So, instead of ranching, trading or farming, David and his men raided the heathen of the land, killing every single man, woman and child, and took their possessions (vv. 8–9). Achish and David periodically met (or, Achish sent messengers to David). He knew that David was raiding various peoples in the south, so when he asks David about it, David claimed to be raiding the southern portions of Judah along with Judah’s allies (v. 10). Since David did not allow any of these people to live, there was no one to contradict him (v. 11—implying that Achish’s military intelligence was limited). Achish believed what David said and was confident that David would remain his servant forever, since he had made himself so odious to Israel (v. 12).

What David had to do was to make peace with the king of Philistia, which he does rather handily in this chapter, due to some deception on his part. David’s behavior at this point is suspect. I must admit that, It was not clear to me at first whether Philistia is God’s geographical will for David. However, now that I have had time to let all of this settle in, it is clear that David is out of God’s geographical will (see v. 12, where we discuss, Is David in God’s Geographical Will?). When David attacked the various Gentiles in his periphery, it is not clear that he is doing this in response to mandates from God. In fact, David will not know God’s will until 1Sam. 30:8; this will be the first time God’s will is actually mentioned. Furthermore, David’s relationship with Achish will be built upon deception in this chapter. For all of these reasons, we can conclude that David is out of God’s geographical will and possibly out of fellowship as well.

This brings up an interesting question: can you be out of the geographical will of God and yet be in fellowship? Being spiritual, being in fellowship, walking in light as opposed to walking in darkness is an all or nothing proposition. There is none of this part spiritual part not. So, if you are out of God’s geographical will, does this exclude you from spirituality, and thus from the plan of God? Definitely not. We are going to make mistakes in our lives. This mistakes are going to wreak all kinds of havoc with our lives (and sometimes, just a little havoc). What these mistakes will do is, at times, take us out of God’s geographical will. If, for instance, it is God’s plan is for us to be in Little Rock, Arkansas, and we find ourselves in New Orleans, Louisiana instead, then are we out of fellowship until we move to Little Rock? No. We still get back into fellowship in the same way: we name our sins to God. All of our sins are completely forgiven, those which we are aware of and those which we did not realize that we committed. However, God does not looks down and say, “Too damn bad, Charlie Brown; you’re in the wrong place; no filling of the Spirit for you.” That is legalism. That goes against what we are taught in 1John 1:9. Therefore, even if we get out of God’s geographical will, which is going to probably involve getting out of fellowship as well, we can get back into fellowship no matter where we are. God’s plan picks up for us right then and there. Even though David is clearly out of God’s geographical will, which involves him being out of fellowship, he will be back in fellowship in 1Sam. 30:6, prior to returning to Israel.

Let’s think this through: we are in New Orleans, but it was God’s will for us to be in Little Rock. A legalist might tell you that you cannot be in fellowship until you hop in your car and drive to Little Rock. But, do you see the problem? You are working in the flesh in order to get back into fellowship. You are going through the steps of securing transportation out of New Orleans, where you are not in fellowship, to return to Little Rock, where you can then get back into fellowship. You are using the power of the flesh in order to go from point A to point B in order to be in God’s will. You do not accomplish anything of lasting spiritual value while in the flesh. Not ever! We have believers who have spent their entire lives out of fellowship. You can talk to believer after believer and they have no clue as to how they fall out of the fellowship and how they get back into fellowship. There are believers who do all kinds of works in the flesh—the give money to the church, they go to the mission field, they serve on the board of deacons, they pastor churches, they have evangelical ministries on television. Unless they are filled with the Holy Spirit, nothing that they do has any spiritual worth and it will be burned at the Judgment Seat of Christ (1Cor. 3:12–15). The foundation of all spiritual works is God’s grace, which is based upon the filling of the Holy Spirit. You may struggle and work and sweat to establish a mission somewhere and this may consume your entire life; but if you are not filled with God the Holy Spirit, then you are wasting your time. I have known Pentecostals whose ministry emphasizes the power of God the Holy Spirit; yet, most of them have no idea how to be filled with the Holy Spirit. They believe that if they get under a little psychological pressure from some other more advanced Pentecostals, and if they open up their mouth and try to let sounds come out without thinking about what these sounds should be, that this is indicates that they are being baptized and filled with God the Holy Spirit. It does not! Try to understand, if the most important post salvation thing for us to do is speak in tongues, don’t you think that Paul would have mandated that in his epistles? He does nothing of the kind, even in the only passage devoted to this, 1Cor. 14. Satan attacks in several ways: (1) he does whatever he can to keep us from the gospel. (2) However, since some people are going to go on positive volition toward Jesus Christ after reaching God consciousness, then Satan does not just throw up his hands and say, “Oh my; can’t do anything here.” Don’t be stupid. Satan is much more intelligent than any of us. He can think circles around you and around me. His next objective is to neutralize us as believers. If Satan can get huge groups of believers to spend the majority of their Christian lives out of fellowship, then he has accomplished plan B. Plan A: keep a person from believing in Jesus Christ: Plan B: keep a believer out of fellowship. There are entire denominations which are under Plan B. I have met many Pentecostals and many Catholics who I am convinced are believers in Jesus Christ. I am also convinced that they have no idea how to get in and out of fellowship with God. Catholics go the a priest (even though they themselves are priests) and they confess their sins (perhaps weekly, monthly, yearly) and the priest gives them some sort of human works to perform in order to get back into fellowship. Do you see the problems? They are confessing their sins to the wrong person (a priest rather than to God the Father); and they are performing works of the flesh in order to get back into fellowship (doing an act of penance, for instance). A believer who does this all of his life will never be filled with God the Holy Spirit (following the first time that he sins after salvation). Now let’s look at the charismatics. First of all, in their initial salvation, they are not really quite saved. They don’t have God the Holy Spirit. They might have to hang out with some other charismatics—you know, tarry after church or after a Bible study. These older charismatics will try a variety of methods to induce speaking in tongues. They will speak in tongues themselves; they will tell the uninitiated to lay down, lay back, lay their heads back, open up their mouths, and let whatever flow out. “Don’t think; just let the sounds come out.” They may lay a psychological trip on you: they are in the in-group; they speak with angelic tongues; you are in the out-group—you do not. There is only one way to move from the out-group to the in-group: speak with tongues. Once they have you speaking in tongues, then everything is as cool as Fonzie. From thereon in, when you are down, or you feel like things aren’t exactly right; then you just need to get with them and speak in tongues; or, perform good deeds with them. Again, a believer is completely and totally neutralized. He is filled with God the Holy Spirit at salvation; he loses this filling when he sins for the first time; and he never gets this back—he stays out of fellowship for the rest of his life (or as long as he hangs around with charismatics who think the key to spirituality is speaking in tongues).

Now, if you are a Catholic or a charismatic and you are reading this, I know what you are thinking: “This can’t be right—I’ve spent the past year (5 years, 20 years) in service to God. I have never confessed my sins directly to God. Are you telling me my Christian life has been for nothing? That can’t be!” I recall when I first heard about naming my sins to God in order to be in fellowship; this was a few months after I had become a Christian and, to me, what I had done in those few months was pretty good stuff—you see, I did not want to let go of my human good either. I did not want to let go of my works either. “I earned this! I’ve been doing stuff for God for these past several months—tell me I get some credit for it!” God does not work that way—it is His way, not ours. Salvation is clear and specific: you believe in Jesus Christ and you are saved. Being born into a religious family does not give you a relationship with God. Believing in Mohammed, Buddha, or Confucius does you no good; if you want a relationship with God, it is through Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ only. “I am the way, the truth and the life—no man comes to the Father but by Me!” (John 14:6). For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1Tim. 2:5). So, I’m sorry—I’d love to tell you that all of your works are really appreciated by God—but, unless you were filled with God the Holy Spirit, all of your works mean nothing to God.

Since I am here, let me tell you Satan’s Plan C: a person becomes a believer and they know how to get back into fellowship. Then Satan (well, more likely those in his demon corps) does everything to appeal to the lust pattern of that person. The person lusts after money—put the promise of money just beyond his reach. Put the promise of money side-by-side spiritual compromise. The person lusts after power: offer him power, but make certain that there are moral compromises which must be made in order to attain it. The person lusts after sex: get him out of fellowship via pornography, advertisements, television, movies or by people he (or she) meets. Plan C calls for Satan to get you out of fellowship and keep you out of fellowship as long as possible. Do you remember that jackass who cut you off in traffic on your way to Bible class, and pissed you off to the max? You are going to sin; you are going to fail. There are times you may fail so badly that you doubt your own salvation; there are times you will fail so badly that you may become discouraged, despondent, ashamed. None of those emotions gets you back into fellowship. You might be the biggest Christian screw up on this planet—no problem; the filling of the Spirit comes with the naming of your sins to God. Your sins may be completely offensive to my sensitive nature. I might want you to confess your sins to God and cut off a finger to remind yourself about how much you offended me. Doesn’t matter what I want and it doesn’t matter how much you offended me. What matters is that you admit to God your sins. On the other side of the coin, some of the sins I commit might offend you as well. Let me tell you—your opinion of my sins means little or nothing. The only thing that is important is that I name my sins to God. That puts me back into fellowship—your feelings about my category of sins is irrelevant. Your feelings and my feelings about the sins of others is irrelevant with respect to their spiritual lives. The key to their spirituality is confessing their sins directly to God.

Second question: okay, we are out of God’s geographical will, and we rebound, putting us back into fellowship. Must we hop in our car and go to wherever God wants us to be? That is a maybe. God can pick up His plan for our lives at any point in any geographical location. So, there are times we would stay; and times that we would leave. There are certainly going to be situations where leaving is almost impossible to do. That is when we allow God to work all things together for good—including whatever boneheaded decisions led us to the wrong destination in the first place. David will get back into fellowship in 1Sam. 30:6—he does not have all of his soldiers mount up for a return to Israel. He remains in Philistia territory.

David Moves his Crew to Gath

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so says David unto his heart, “Now I will be taken away a day one in a hand of Saul; nothing to me pleasant a delivery I am delivered in a land of Philistines. And has desisted from me Saul to seek me still in every border of Israel, and I have been delivered from his hand.”

Peshitta                                  And David said in his heart, Now if I should fall some day into the hands of Saul, it would not be good for me, but it is better for me that I should escape to the land of the Philistines; and Saul will despair of seeking me any more in the territory of Israel; so I will escape out of his hands.

Septuagint                              And David said in his heart, “Now I will be one day delivered into the hands of Saul; and there is no good thing for me unless I should escape into the land of the Philistines, and Saul should cease from seeking me through every coast [or, border] of Israel. So I will escape out of his hand.

Significant Differences:                    No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       [Saul went back home. David also left], but he thought to himself, "One of these days, Saul is going to kill me. The only way to escape from him is to go to Philistia. Then I'll be outside of Israel, and Saul will give up trying to catch me.

NJB                                        ‘One of these days,’ David thought, ‘I shall perish at the hand of Saul. The best thing that I can do is to get away into the country of the Philistines; then Saul will give up tracking me through the length and breadth of Israel and I shall be safe from him.’

NLT                                        But David kept thinking to himself, “Someday Saul is going to get me. The best thing for me to do is escape to the Philistines. Then Saul will stop hunting for me, and I will finally be safe.”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         David said to himself, "One of these days Saul will sweep me away. The best thing for me to do is to make sure that I escape to Philistine territory. Then Saul will give up looking all over Israel for me, and I'll escape from him.”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                     David said to himself, "One of these days I'll be swept away by Saul. There is nothing better for me than to escape immediately to the land of the Philistines. Then Saul will stop searching for me everywhere in Israel, and I'll escape from him.”

Young's Updated LT              And David says unto his heart, “Now am I consumed one day by the hand of Saul; there is nothing for me better than that I diligently escape unto the land of the Philistines, and Saul has been despairing of me—of seeking me any more in all the border of Israel, and I have escaped out of his hand.”

What is the gist of this verse? After thinking things over, David decides to semi-permanently elude Saul by moving into the Philistia territory.

Translation: So David said to himself [lit., to his (own) heart],... David thinks about his situation. It is clear that Saul will continue to pursue him (or, it at least appears that will be the case, despite what Saul says during times of repentance). Saul has sincerely regretted his aggressive acts against David on several occasions; and yet, he continued to pursue David. So David ponders this situation.

There is nothing wrong with thinking things through as a believer, and weighing your options. However, David has access to the Ephod of God (1Sam. 30:7). He could easily ask, “Should I stay in Judah, and continue to run from Saul or should I leave Judea and move to Philistia?” This is an option open to David, and he does not take it. Right away, this tells us that his final decision will be suspect.

Application: What about us? We don’t have the Ephod of God. We have no method by which we can ask God yes or no questions to determine what we should do. What we have is the entire Word of God. If you are a new believer, then you follow Paul’s advice and don’t make any major changes in your life (1Cor. 7:26–27). Get doctrine first, and then let God work out what is to follow. Let me see if I can make this more clear: if you do not have enough doctrine to make a decision to do this or that, and know it is the correct decision, then stay as you are until you have enough doctrine to make that decision. You have fallen in love, but you aren’t sure whether you should get married? If you don’t know for certain, stay single. You think you should change jobs or move to another city, but you are not sure if it is God’s will? Then don’t change; don’t move. Get enough doctrine to be able to make the decision. Matt. 6:33: But seek first God's Kingdom, and His righteousness; and all these things will be given to you as well. 1Cor. 7:26–27: I think that it is good therefore, because of the distress that is on us, that it is good for a man to be as he is. Are you bound to a wife? Don't seek to be freed. Are you free from a wife? Don't seek a wife.

Application: Okay, does this mean you cannot get married? The very fact that you would even ask that question tells me you do not have enough doctrine to get married. 1Cor. 7:28: But if you marry, you have not sinned. If a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have oppression in the flesh, and I want to spare you. The key is, wait until you have enough doctrine to know you are making the right decision. If you are unsure, then do not make such a life-changing decision. If you are a new Christian or a believer who has not been under good doctrinal teaching for very long (or, not at all), if you get married, if you move, if you decide to quit your job and take another job—and if you have any doubts about these decisions—then these bad decisions will haunt you for the rest of your life; particularly the marriage one. You cannot make a worse decision than marrying the wrong person.

Translation: ... “I will soon [lit., now] be taken away one day by the hand of Saul... In David’s thinking at this time, he believes that Saul will eventually capture him. Saul has attempted again and again to capture David; David here assumes that it is simply a matter of time.

At this time, we need to think this over. We cannot immediately condemn David and say, “God will make you king; so you have nothing to fear from Saul.” There is a reasonable trust in God and there is reasonable action. One who places such a huge emphasis on faith, I guess, would expect David to set up and lazy boy and a tv outside Saul’s palace and watch extreme sports all day long. Perhaps, he might additionally post a sign reading, “Bite me, Saul.” Some people would believe that such actions would reveal David’s great faith. However, this does not mean that David is demonstrating great faith. So, before we condemn David for being concerned about Saul, we should follow his thinking further. It is clear that, no matter where David goes to in Israel, Saul will come after him. Recall, David has delivered whole cities, and they have been willing to turn against him and turn him in to Saul. So, David’s estimation of his situation seems to be quite reasonable.

Application: You have an illness or you have been in an accident—is it a lack of faith if you go to the doctor’s? Of course not! Do not be an idiot. Just as it would have been stupid for David to set up a lazy boy outside of the palace of Saul and order ESPN to watch until Saul decides to try something, it is stupid for you to think that not going to the doctor exhibits great faith. It does not; if you do that, you are stupid, not great in faith.

Yes, I know about Jesus and healing thousands of people and that He often said, “Your faith has made you whole.” If you do not understand what is going on here, then you do not have enough doctrine to come in out of the rain. First of all, let us focus in on what is important: is it more important for you to alleviate some illness for 60 years or to spend eternity face to face with God? Your eternal relationship with God is 1,000,000 times more important than this or that infirmity. Therefore, when Jesus came in the flesh and spoke to man, what do you think the emphasis of His message would be on? Do you think He emphasized His healing powers or would He emphasize your eternal relationship with God? If you are not half an idiot, you know the answer to this. Let’s go back to the oft heard phrase, “Your faith has made you whole.” This phrase has a double meaning. It was issued to someone who had just been cured of an illness or an infirmity of some sort; but, more importantly, it indicated salvation and the means of salvation.

Translation: ...[there is] nothing for me [here]... I must admit to not being completely satisfied with this translation; literally, this reads nothing to me. My guess is, there is nothing for David in Israel, in this circumstance of Saul coming out after him at any time. It is just not worth the headache. Taking this approach, remember that David’s parents are in Moab; we are not positive where his brothers are (possibly with him). Saul’s daughter Michal, David’s wife, had remarried (as had David). There is no city which is clamoring for David to move there. There is no group of people, apart from his 600 soldiers, who are willing to give David shelter and rest from Saul’s continual pursuit. Therefore, there is nothing in any part of Israel which holds David.

The alternate understanding is that these couple words to not stand by themselves but should be affixed to what follows: ...[there is] nothing better for me [than]... This understanding of the Hebrew would mean, David has no other reasonable alternative. The alternative to his staying in Israel is stated below.

Translation: ...[it is] better that I certainly slip away [or, deliver myself] to the land of the Philistines.... David has determined that it will be better for him to be in the land of the Philistines. Now, at this point, I can see questioning David and his choice. The fact that he is not completely safe in Israel is clear; however, God has plans for David to rule over Israel. Therefore, how reasonable is it for David to go to a foreign country? At this point, I have personal questions about David’s choice here. Should David go to the land of an enemy? Isn’t it better for him to wait out Saul in secure areas in Israel? At this point, David is be straying from God’s geographical will.

This is the second time that David has gone to Philistia in order to escape Saul. The first time he went alone, back in 1Sam. 21. This is during his initial escape from Saul. Saul had sent soldiers to his house to pick him up and David first ran to Nob (which resulted in the priests of Nob being killed) and then to Gath (which probably initiated a Philistine movement against Israel, since their greatest warrior, David, was incapacitated).

By the way, when I criticize David’s choices, I don’t mean to set myself up as one who would have made the right choice. It should be clear that David was a great man of God. That he made some mistakes here and there does not take from his greatness. However, we need to examine his life and his decisions carefully, as they guide us in our lives today.

Wesley speaks to this verse as a mistake on David’s part: This was certainly a very great fault in David: for this [decision] proceeded from gross distrust of God's promise and providence; and that after such repeated demonstrations of God's peculiar care over him. He forsakes the place where God had settled him, 1Sam. 22:5, and given him both assurance and experience of his protection there. Clarke concurs, noting: This was a very hasty conclusion: God had so often interposed in behalf of his life, that he was authorized to believe the reverse. God had hitherto confounded all Saul’s stratagems, and it was not at all likely that he would now abandon him: there was now no additional reason why he should withdraw from David his helping hand. In fact, Clarke continues even more emphatically: There is not one circumstance in this transaction that is not blameable. David joins the enemies of his God and of his country, acts a most inhuman part against the Geshurites and Amalekites, without even the pretense of a Divine authority; tells a most deliberate falsehood to Achish, his protector, relative to the people against whom he had perpetrated this cruel act; giving him to understand that he had been destroying the Israelites, his enemies. I undertake no defense of this conduct of David; it is all bad, all defenseless; God vindicates him not. The inspired penman tells what he did, but passes no evaluation of his conduct; and it is false to say that, because these things are recorded, therefore they are approved. In all these transactions David was in no sense a man after God’s own heart.

And allow me to append the eloquent comments of Matthew Henry: He said to his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul. [David] represented to himself the restless rage and malice of Saul (who could not be wrought into a reconciliation) and the treachery of his own countrymen, witness that of the Ziphites, once and again; he looked upon his own forces, and observed how few they were, and that no recruits had come in to him for a great while, nor could he perceive that he got any ground; and hence, in a melancholy mood, he draws this dark conclusion: I shall one day perish by the hand of Saul. But, O you of little faith! Why do you doubt? Was he not anointed to be king? Did not that imply an assurance that he should be preserved to the kingdom? Though he had no reason to trust Saul's promises, had he not all the reason in the world to trust the promises of God? His experience of the particular care Providence took of him ought to have encouraged him. He that has delivered does and will. But unbelief is a sin that easily besets even good men. When without are fightings, within are fears, and it is a hard matter to get over them.

David has chosen to move into Philistine territory because they have been, historically, enemies of Israel. Therefore, Saul is unlikely to have any allies among them who will turn David in to him. Of course, you wonder—if these are historic enemies of Israel, aren’t they David’s enemies as well? Yes, they are. However, David has gone into Philistia once before and, despite his behavior, had somewhat of a connection with Achish, the king of Gath. Achish’s approach to David’s feigned insanity was one of humor and mercy, when he held all the cards. Therefore, David can see returning to him.

However, is this the right decision for David? No; the primary reason being, David has access to God’s will via the Ephod and he is not making use of that access.

Application: Have you ever had a decision to make and you are worried that the more you know about God’s Word, the less likely it is that you will choose to do what you want? Some people have difficult decisions to make and yet they do not go to God’s Word for guidance because they just are not really interested in what God has to say about the matter. David has put together a few logical thought points, but he does not integrate his thinking with God’s will. God’s will and guidance is never sought; therefore, it is likely that David’s decision will be a mistake.

Application: Don’t forget to use the right tool for the right job. Most people, when they are trying to make a tough decision, simply pray really hard and are sensitive to God’s will. Prayer is a fantastic weapon, but God is not going to tap you on the should during prayer and say, “You need to make a right turn up ahead.” God has given us a variety of tools for a variety of jobs. I can hammer a nail ineffectively with a screw driver and somewhat better with a pipe wrench. However, these are not the right tools for that job. Prayer is not the all-purpose tool. Prayer is not your Swiss army knife. Do you need guidance? God can do that. God is able to provide you guidance at the right time to make the right decision. But, just like everything else in life, you may not get it when you think you need it. When I first moved to Texas, I would have liked God to have dropped a million dollars into my lap. That would have been cool. Some of you probably give God the opportunity to do this almost every week when you buy a lottery ticket. However, right now, I really could care less whether God drops a million dollars into my lap or not. I have no interest in buying a lottery ticket; no interest in playing the slots; no interest in dropping my savings into a can’t miss leveraged investment; no interest in entering Publisher’s Clearing House Sweepstakes. Right now, a million dollars dropped into my lap (or ten million dollars) would be more of a headache than a problem-solver. So, even though 25 years ago, I would have been cool with God dropping a million dollars into my lap, and even though that would have, in my thinking, solved many of my problems, God chose not to do that. Now, you think I’ve gone far afield of my point here, but I haven’t. God will drop the solution to your problems, to your questions into your lap at the right time. You may not get it today. In fact, the answer might even become moot at some point in the future. What should you do? Stay where you are, don’t make any major decisions, and take in doctrine. Learn God’s Word. Through God’s Word you will know God’s will for your life. It is a life-long process. You will not find out overnight, or after a week of concentrated study, the answers to all your questions or guidance with respect to every one of life’s decisions. You live your life one day at a time and you make decisions one at a time. God knows all about your life; He has intimate knowledge concerning each and every detail of your life. He knows when you should zig, and He knows when you should zag. Do you know what? He is going to make that known to you. Your life is not just some big guessing game and some days you are going to guess right and other days, not so right. The key is knowing Bible doctrine. You need to be spiritually mature for your decisions to having much meaning anyway.

Let me give you an illustration. You bring a baby into a plant where solid wood doors are made. Now, you might cause this baby to make a left turn when he needs to, or a right turn when he needs to, but, just how many doors will this child make? None! A child will not build one single door, even though they are standing (or crawling) through a plant which does nothing but. Now, let’s say this child becomes an adolescent, and you guide them one step at a time to make a door—well, then, they might be able to make that kind of a door again (and they might need some help the next time as well); and if it is typical for a man to oversee the building of 50 doors in a shift, this teen might build 5 (and he will need someone guiding him most of the way). Now, if you get an adult in there who has had training in the construction of all of these different doors and he is mature and willing to work, when you cut him lose in this factory, he will be able to build the typical 50 doors in a shift. Now, look at the illustration—you can give the baby all of the guidance you can think of, and get right there with the baby and guide him so he will crawl in the correct direction, but, at best, he might saw off his own hand. However, you take a person with some maturity and training, all you have to do is put him inside the factory, and he will know which way to go, he will know what to do, and he will know how to do it. Producing a door will be based upon his volition; for a child, they do not even have a clue; for an adult, they can produce.

So it is in the spiritual life. When you are first saved, you might want to know if you will make a right turn up ahead, or whether you should go straight ahead. Should you call into work sick and go the Starbucks and witness to everyone there? Should you do this or that? What is the Spirit telling you to do? You are the baby in the door factory. You have no training, no maturity, no nothing. What you do is going have a minimal impact on the business of manufacturing doors. You life is going to have minimal impact in the spiritual realm, no matter how sincere and gung ho you are. If you have maturity and training, then what you do in the door factory will have meaning and you will produce. If you have maturity and spiritual training, then, first of all, you will not obsess about stupid things (should I turn right or go straight ahead?) and, secondly, you will actually amass some spiritual producing.

Let me add one more thing: spiritual production is not based upon physical maturity. You might be a Christian since 30 years ago, but this does not mean that you are able to produce one iota of divine good. If you do not have spiritual maturity, your chronological years are meaningless. A person who has been a believer for 5 years can be lightyears ahead of someone who has been a believer for 50 years. The believer of 50 years can still be the baby aimlessly crawling around in the door factory. The key is, spiritual maturity; not the mere amassing of years.

Application: Now, I have talked about having the right tools for the right job; therefore, let me give you your hammer, saw and screwdriver for the Christian life right here and right now; your most basic tool set. First, there is rebound. When you sin and get out of fellowship, then name your sin to God and get back into fellowship. No matter what you do in your life, no matter how badly you screw things up, this is your first tool to use after salvation. Secondly, you need God’s Word in your soul. You need to be under the teaching of a good and accurate pastor teacher. Once a week is not enough time to grow spiritually. Even 3 or 4 hours a week is not enough time to grow spiritually. You need doctrine each and every day to grow. Now, your church probably does not meet each and every day. Therefore, you will need additional teaching. What does your church offer? Do they have tapes or computer files of previous messages available to you (and they should be available to you, whether or not you have money)? Finally, prayer is a good tool as well; it is better to use it for thanksgiving than anything else; but certainly, you can use it to ask God for guidance. Just realize that He will probably guide you through His Word.

Let me give you a pet peeve of mine: prayer. Now, there is nothing wrong with legitimate prayer; do not misunderstand me in this. However, I cannot tell you how many people pray and pray and pray. I have unbelieving friends who would ask me to pray for them; and I suspect that they asked the same of other people of other faiths, just in case. But I digress. Here’s the problem that I have with most people who pray: these tend to be people who want to talk God’s ear off with their problems and troubles, but they are never willing to listen. Now, I don’t mean listen to that still, small voice within you; because most of the time, that is simply you telling you what you want to hear. But God has seen to it that you can hear His voice. You can have God talk to you. You can get God to help guide you in your decisions. How? Through God’s Word. God expresses Himself most eloquently in His Word. Now, I don’t mean pick up the Bible and simply start reading. It is too easy for the new believer to become confused, as the Bible is not always simple and easy to understand. God has designated certain men to be pastor teachers and, once and awhile, some of these men are able to teach and teach well. You might be surprised as to how willing God is to guide you. Personally, I began learning from R. B. Thieme Jr. about 30 years ago; and, even though I faced a few difficult decisions and even though I made a huge number of bad decisions; I need to tell you that there have been very few crossroads in my life which were difficult for me to determine if I should go left or right. This does not mean that I have not faced a huge number of decisions; I certainly have. But knowing what the right decision was has never been a difficult thing for me. Yes, I pray; but I am also willing to listen. Imagine if you took a course in Differential Equations how much you would learn if you walked into class everyday and talked nonstop. How much would you learn? How much would you get out of that class? Okay, now imagine if you talked to God everyday nonstop; how much guidance are you going to get? You have to be willing to listen. If you are not taking in God’s Word on a daily basis, you can pray and pray and pray, and then pray some more; and your life is still going to be a mess. As the oft-repeated saying goes, God gave you two ears, but only one mouth. That should guide you when it comes to how much you should listen versus how much you should talk. The spiritual application is, you might want to spend an hour in Bible class for every 30 minutes you pray.

Translation: Then Saul will desist from me,... What Saul will do is part of David’s reasoning. David assumes that Saul will desist from chasing him if he is in a foreign country. Saul will have no hope in capturing David; he will receive no cooperation with the Philistines. Saul is most concerned about his own life; if he wanders into a Philistine territory with his men, he is just as likely to get killed as anything else—and Saul is more concerned about his own skin than anything else. So, the idea of going to a foreign country is sound; David can expect to escape Saul’s continued pursuits in that way. Now, to some extent, David’s reasoning is sound. Saul will stop chasing after David (1Sam. 27:4). However, just because David is correct on one or two points does not mean that he is making the correct decision here.

Application: Maybe you have prayed earnestly for guidance and maybe a few things point you in the direction of X instead of Y. This is still not enough reason to go that route instead. There are good reasons why David should leave Judea and move to Philistia. He is certain that Saul will stop chasing him if he does. However, this does not mean that David should go to Philistia.

Translation: ...from seeking me [lit., to seek me] still... David assumes that Saul will stop seeking him out if he goes to a foreign country. His reasoning was covered in the previous paragraph. In this, David is correct. If he is in Philistia, Saul will cease pursuing him.

Application: This is something everyone needs to know: do not do something simply because it makes your life easier. That is not enough of a reason. Do not quit your job simply because your boss is an ass and an arrogant jerk. Do not quit your job simply because there are idiots who work there who do not like you. It appears to David that if he moved to Philistia, he is going to solve the Saul problem. However, all David is going to do is to trade one set of problems for a whole other set of problems. Do you see how that works? David will solve the Saul problem; in fact, he will never be troubled by Saul again. However, David is going to force himself into a life of deceit. David is going to be involved in questionable practices and decisions. In fact, David is going to get so far out of whack that he will eventually offer himself and his men to Achish as soldiers to fight against his mother country, Israel. Do you see how far off-kilter David will become? This is all because he will make a decision which is supposed to simplify his life. And note very carefully: David has completely understood and properly evaluated this decision from his own human wisdom. He is not wrong about Saul. Saul would probably at a future date pursue him again. He is not wrong about his move; Saul would not chase David into Philistia. David’s reasons, from a human viewpoint position, are correct and well-reasoned. The problem is, his decision is wrong.

Application: For whatever reason, I have observed this behavior in women more than men. They know that there is something wrong with their life, so they change something. They move, they change jobs, they get a makeover. There is something wrong, they know it, and so they try to fix it. The problem is, they try to fix it in the human realm. You are going to have problems in this life; you are going to have tribulations in this life; you are going to face injustices in this life. You cannot get away from any of this, no matter how many times you move, no matter how many times you change jobs or boyfriends. Here is how you deal with this: when God wants you to move, you move; when God wants you to change jobs, then you change jobs; when God says it is time to dump the present boyfriend, then you dump him. It is not rocket science. How do you make these determinations? You spend as much time as possible being filled with God the Holy Spirit; and you take in God’s Word. Here’s the real deal: most people only say they want God’s guidance—some might even think that is what they want—but the fact of the matter is, they really want to do what they want to do, and then they want God to overrule the problems which they will encounter because of their own hardheadedness.

Translation: ...in every border of Israel;... This continues David’s reasoning—if he is not inside Israel, then it is less likely that Saul will pursue him. People that David has delivered have turned David in to Saul. No matter where David goes in Israel, there are going to be those who are allied with Saul (or will want whatever influence that Saul gives them). So, David has determined that no matter where he goes, Saul may still be told where David is from other Israelites. However, it is less likely that someone from another country will go to Saul to turn David in. There is no reward for a foreigner to do this and they could be risking their lives to turn David in. So, David would definitely be safer, with regards to Saul, if he is in Philistia.

Translation: ...and I will be delivered from his hand.” This is David’s solution. He will go into Philistia, and be assured of escaping Saul’s long arm. Whether David is geographically in God’s will when he moves to Philistia is still up for discussion; however, his reasoning is sound. Saul will not pursue him into a foreign country—especially not the land of the Philistines.

Matthew Henry tells us: David was a man after God's own heart, and yet he had his faults, which are recorded, not for our imitation, but for our admonition.

Application: Let’s get one thing straight here: you are not to read a Bible passage and then imitate everything that you find in that passage. Don’t be a blithering idiot! There are times when this is pretty obvious: e.g., David having sex with Bathsheba and then killing her husband. Only the most psycho believer could read that and decide that is God’s will for his life. But, realize this is also true when the Apostles elected a 12^th Apostle in Acts 1; this is also true when the Apostles spoke in foreign languages throughout the book of Acts; this is also true when Jesus completely healed various people of all manner of diseases. You must rightly divide the Word of Truth. Some of the things which the Apostles did, we will imitate; some of the things which they did, we will not. It is not a matter of simply what is sin and what is not; but what is God’s plan for our lives. So, how can you, a believer, pick up the Bible, read through the book of Acts, and know what to do? Let me be frank with you: if you are a young believer, you cannot read through the book of Acts and determine what you should and should not do. This is why God has given us pastor teachers. It is the job of a pastor teacher to examine the Scriptures as a whole, guided by God the Holy Spirit, and present the mandates of God in an organized fashion to us. Some of you, for instance, will be mandated in your lives to become pastor teachers; others to become missionaries. None of you are mandated to speak in gibberish. A young believer cannot determine God’s path for his life on his own. A young believer cannot pick up a Bible, open it to any miscellaneous chapter and read it and fully understand it. Therefore, we don’t read this chapter and decide, “Hey, we are really getting persecuted here; we need to move (to a new job, a new city, a new country). That is what David did and David is a man of God.” It is the job of a pastor to guide you in your life through his teaching of God’s Word and to guide you away from making boneheaded decisions.

Application: It is not up to the pastor to make any of your decisions for you, by the way. There is no way a group of deacons should follow you around and make your decisions for you. Let’s say a pastor put one of the deacons on you to shadow you, to keep you from doing that which is wrong—would that make everything better because you would certainly be sinning less? No. In fact, hell no. God gave us volition and expects us to use it. Being intimidated from committing a sin means little or nothing. You are paying attention to the wrong thing. They key is, the filling of God the Holy Spirit. The key is, from your own free will, you name your sins to God when you sin. The key is, you do not give in to sin from your own free will; not because you are intimidated.

It is interesting that David has made this decision in particular. Philistia is not his only option. His parents are being guarded in Moab by an ally there. Moving to Moab is an option. However, David does not explore that option. Again, the problem is, David has access to God’s guidance and he does not use it.

Application: You do not have access to the Ephod of God, but you do have access to God’s Word. There are now more resources on God’s Word than ever before. There are a dozen outstanding teachers who have provided their teaching on the internet. I should have a list of them on my links page. If you desire to know God’s truth, God will see that you have that opportunity.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so arises David and so he goes over—he and six hundreds of a man who [are] with him—unto Achish ben Maoch, king of Gath.

Peshitta                                  So David arose and went over, he and the 600 men who were with him, to Achish, the son of Maachah, king of Gath.

Septuagint                              So David arose, and the 600 men that were with him, and he went to Anchus, son of Ammach, king of Gath.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       David and his six hundred men went across the border to stay in Gath with King Achish the son of Maoch. His men brought their families with them. David brought his wife Ahinoam whose hometown was Jezreel, and he also brought his wife Abigail who had been married to Nabal from Carmel. [vv. 2–3 are combined].

NLT                                        So David took his six hundred men and their families and went to live at Gath under the protection of King Achish.

REB                                       So David and his six hundred men set out and crossed the frontier to Achish son of Maoch, king of Gath.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         So David went with his 600 men to King Achish of Gath, Moach's son.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                     So David set out with his 600 men and went to Achish son of Maoch, the king of Gath.

Young's Updated LT              And David rises, and passes over, he and six hundred men who are with him, unto Achish son of Maoch king of Gath;...

What is the gist of this verse? David chooses to take his men to Achish, the king of Gath.

Translation: David then arose... David has reasoned within himself as to what he was going to do; and then he acts. We often find this verb used when someone is going to act on their volition.

Translation: ...and he went over—he and his 600 men who are with him... David no doubt explained his reasoning to his men. Probably he thought through this, as we find in v. 1, presented his reasoning to his top generals, and the explanation trickled down to his men.

Translation: ...to Achish son of Maoch, king of Gath. David chooses to go to Achish. Achish is the king of one of the Philistine cities—the city of Gath.

We find Achish mentioned in 1Sam. 21 27–29 1Kings 2 and Psalm 34. David first went to Achish to escape Saul, and when he realized his precarious situation, he feigned insanity in order to escape (1Sam. 21). The way that Achish dealt with the situation was interesting; he used humor and revealed no vindictiveness (David had been a traditional enemy to the Philistines). This may not seem like much of a recommendation; however, look at some of the radical Arab leaders today—I write this at a time when Iraqis are killing other Iraqis because they want to vote in an election. This is obviously not a group of people who are known for being reasonable—at least their fringe element. So, after thinking things over, David decides to return to Achish (who is much more stable and much more trustworthy than Saul).

Maoch, the father of Achish, is only mentioned in this passage. However, Achish is called the son of Maachah in 1Kings 2:39; these nouns are close, but not so close that there could have been an error made by the copyist. The first two consonants are the same; Maoch (Strong’s #4582) ends with a kaph (ך) and Maachah (Strong’s #4601) ends with a kaph (כ) and a taw (ת) (or, a hê—ה). Maachah could be the feminine of Maoch. One could be the short version of the other. Because the passage referred to is 40 years later and because we are not positive about the relationship between Maoch and Maachah, we do not even know if this is the same Achish in 1Kings 2:39.

We have no idea how all of this transpired—that is, did David just show up at the doorstep of Achish? Did Achish issue David an invitation, knowing of his troubles, causing David to think the thoughts of v. 1? We can only speculate at this point. The result, in any case, is that David and his men went to Gath.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic text                        And so dwells David with Achish in Gath—he and his men, a man and his house, David and a pair of his wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess and Abigail woman of Nabal the Carmelitess.

Peshitta                                  And David dwelt with Achish at Gath, he and his men and the household of David and his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail the Carmelitess, Nabal’s wife.

Septuagint                              And David dwelt with Anchus, he and his men, each with his family; and David and both his wives, Achinaam the Jezraelitess, and Abigaia the wife of Nabal the Carmelite.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       David and his six hundred men went across the border to stay in Gath with King Achish the son of Maoch. His men brought their families with them. David brought his wife Ahinoam whose hometown was Jezreel, and he also brought his wife Abigail who had been married to Nabal from Carmel. [vv. 2–3].

NLT                                        David brought his two wives along with him—Ahinoam of Jezreel and Abigail of Carmel, Nabal’s widow.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         David and his men stayed with Achish in Gath. Each one had his family, and David had his two wives, Ahinoam from Jezreel and Abigail (who had been Nabal's wife) from Carmel.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       And David lived with Achish at Gath, he and his men, every man with his household, and David with his two wives, Ahinoam of Jezreel, and Abigail of Carmel, Nabal's widow.

Young's Updated LT              ...and David dwells with Achish in Gath, he and his men, each one with his household, even David and his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail wife of Nabal the Carmelitess.

What is the gist of this verse? David and his men moved to the Gath area; and brought with them their families. David still has his two wives, Ahinoam and Abigail.

Translation: So David lived with Achish in Gath,... David and his men moved to an area near Gath. He did not actually live in Gath with Achish.

Allow me a diversion at this point: here we have a good, non-emotional way to approach proof-texting and allowing context and other verses to tells us exactly what is going on. In this portion of v. 3, it sounds as if David has moved into Achish’s palace and is bunking with him. If we were to look at this portion of the verse, a pastor could look his congregation in the eyes and say, “Now, here it is, in your own Bible, in whatever translation you use: ‘David and Achish are roommates.’ ” As we proceed in this verse, and in the next, it will become clear that David and Achish are not roommates. However, if you examine this portion of the verse, and ignore all else in the context, that is the conclusion that someone could force you to. Now, whether David is bunking with Achish or not has no emotional affect upon you in any way—this is not an issue that you care about one way or the other. You are not going to get your theological feathers in a huff, because we land on one side or the other of this simple issue. Therefore, you can look at this portion of v. 3, factor in to the rest of v. 3 and what follows, and come to the conclusion that David did not actually room with Achish. David and his men and their respective households did not move in with Achish. This becomes clear with the context. If your pastor simply gives you doctrines and proof texts, and does not exegete entire books, then there is a problem. If you, as a pastor, will not teach whole books of Scripture; but you teach doctrines and principles and quote proof texts, you are doing a disservice to your congregation even if your doctrines are accurate.

Okay, now the idea is, David will live in the same general area as Achish, although that is not clear by this portion of Scripture—in fact, that will not be clear until we get a few more verses into this chapter. However, what appears to be the case is, David lived in Gath for awhile with Achish (meaning in the same city); and later, Achish gives him a city to live in.

Translation: ...he and his men,... David traveled with his soldiers and he took care of them as a leader should. David did not simply say, “Hey guys, things are a little too worrisome for me here in Judah; I think I am going to split for awhile. My best to you and yours. Maybe we will hook up again sometime.” David took his men with him and he took responsibility for them.

I should point out that this is David’s behavior even though he is out of God’s geographical will when he moved to Gath. Just because David does one thing dreadfully wrong (which is going to lead to a series of wrong moves on David’s part), does not mean that every single decision that David makes and everything that he does will be wrong. David should be taking care of his men. However, taking them to Gath is not the way to do it.

Translation: ...each man [lit., a man] and his household,... Now, these were not simply a band of nomad soldiers, but these were normal men who had wives and children. David nowhere discouraged his men from leading semi-normal lives, given the circumstances.

Now, don’t get weird on me and decide this means a soldier should travel with his family. A soldier goes into battle to protect his wife and children; to protect his extended family; to protect his homeland—he does not go into the service to place them in harm’s way. Furthermore, this is more than a band of soldiers. David has essentially adopted this itinerant band of misfits who allied themselves with him. David properly sees to their needs and guides them. Part of this involved the fact that some had wives and children and some probably acquired them along the way, as David had. David, as a leader, took responsibility for all of them—his men, their wives and their children.

In case you need an analogous situation, there are some men in the armed forces, who are stationed in areas where there is no war. They might be moved to this base or that; and, in many cases, at least with the officers, the families move with them. This is what is happening here. There are companies which may find it necessary to move their employees around to other cities. If the company assists them in moving their entire family and settling the entire family, then that company is acting as David does here.

Allow me a tangent here: there are “spiritual” organizations out there which encourage their members not to marry—monks and nuns, for instance. All of this is based upon Paul talking about his lack of a wife. One comment or two, made as an aside by Paul, which should not have given birth to huge marriage-less organizations. This is an extreme example of proof-texting. In the Aaronic priesthood, in the early church, and in David’s small, mobile army, no suggestion of complete celibacy (and I mean in terms of no marriage) is ever found in Scripture. It is a complete perversion of Paul’s message.

Translation: ...David and his two wives,... We have already talked about David and his small collection of wives. In 1Sam. 25, we saw how David met Abigail.

Translation: ...Ahinoam the Jezreelitess... We discussed the very little that we know about Ahinoam back in 1Sam. 25:43, which is not much. She apparently produced David’s firstborn and we know more about him (Amnon) than we do about his mother.

Translation: ...and Abigail, widow [lit., wife] of Nabal, the Carmelitess. We found out a lot about Abigail back in 1Sam. 25, but what we get out of this portion of the verse is a little about Hebrew grammar. I have served this portion of v. 3 up to you in the order that it is found in the Hebrew, for a particular reason: Carmelitess refers back to Abigail; it cannot refer to Nabal, as Carmelitess is a feminine gentilic adjective. This tells us that we do not find relationships only side-by-side. Therefore, we have to be extremely careful when we deal with genealogies. That is, if we examine Bob, son of Burt, brother of Barney; it may take some further examination in order to determine if Barney is Bob’s brother or Bob’s uncle. Properly speaking, in proper English, Barney would be Bob’s uncle; the problem is, not everyone writes in proper English (including those who speak English).

If you will recall, back in 1Sam. 25:43, I mentioned, it is difficult to determine, simply from this passage, whether Jezreel is a place or a people. Carmel is a place; given the way it is found here, and given the obvious parallelism with Jezreel, we may reasonably conclude that Jezreel is a place as well (rather than a people). This will become even more clear when we get to 1Sam. 29:1.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic text                        And so it was made known to Saul that had fled David [to] Gath and he did not add again to seek him.

Septuagint                              And it was told Saul that David had fled to Geth; and he no longer sought after him.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       When Saul found out that David had run off to Gath, he stopped trying to catch him.

NLT                                        Word soon reached Saul that David had fled to Gath, so he stopped hunting for him.

TEV                                        When Saul heard that David had fled to Gath, he gave up trying to find him.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When Saul was told that David had fled to Gath, he didn't search for him anymore.

JPS (Tanakh)                         And when Saul was told that David had fled to Gath, he did not pursue him any more.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                     When it was reported to Saul that David had fled to Gath, he no longer searched for him.

MKJV                                     And Saul was told that David had fled to Gath. And he never again looked for him.

Young's Updated LT              And it is declared to Saul that David has fled to Gath, and he has not added any more to seek him.

What is the gist of this verse? When Saul finds out that David is in Gath, he no longer attempts to find him.

Translation: When [lit., and so] it was made known to Saul that David had fled [to] Gath,... There was always someone out there willing to report David’s movement to Saul. It may have been immediately, and David may have put out the word where he was going to (although he has no reason to do so). However, given that Saul had several times in the past told of David’s whereabouts, then it is logical for others to tell Saul when David leaves the country.

It appears that there was always a battle between the Israelites and the Philistines, and that each pushed against the borders of the other. Given this fact, and the fact that there were few roads and few passageways during this time period, it is reasonable that no one had to actually follow David to Gath in order to confirm this. When they saw the direction that David was heading, and where he was, and only thing logically before him was the city-state of Gath.

Gill suggests that Saul had spies out there watching David, determining his movements, and then sending the information back to Saul. This is not exactly the case. First of all, in their last meeting, Saul left David more or less with his tail between his legs, as David could have killed him but did not (see 1Sam. 26:24–25). So Saul had not turned around and established a spy unit already. In fact, he never needed to do that. There were always people in David’s general area who were more than willing to reveal to Saul David’s movements (see 1Sam. 23:11–12 24:1 26:1).

Translation: ...he no longer sought after him [lit., he did not add again to seek him]. Although Saul seemed generally brave with respect to the Philistines (with the exception of the Goliath incident), there is little which cause us to think that Saul pressed against the Philistines to take territory from them (unless this was originally Israelite territory). So, going into a Philistine city to seek after a man with a small crack force was just not a good choice for Saul. He had what he wanted; David was as good as dead. There was the added bonus, in Saul’s twisted mind, that the Philistines might actually kill David.

Wesley suggests that Saul was done chasing after David, given his final remarks of sincere repentance in 1Sam. 26:24–25. Saul had, in the past, on several occasions, seen the error of his ways and regretted his actions and his evil thoughts (1Sam. 19:6–7 24:16–22). However, he still, after a few months went by, would get freaked out about David and pursue David once again (1Sam. 23:24–24 24:1–2 26:2). Therefore, there is no reason that we should assume that Saul’s repentance would have been permanent. There are a lot of churches who put a premium on emotions and do what they can to make Christians have a cathartic experience in church or at an evangelistic meeting. If they can get the backslided Christian to come forward with tears in his eyes over his sinful rebellion against God, vowing to turn to God and to never sin again, they feel like they have done a great service to that person. Saul would have been right up front every time, his eyes filled with tears, his voice choked with emotion, confessing to all that his pursuit of David was wrong. And, the next day, he’d gather up 3000 of his crack soldiers and go pursue David.

Application: There are times that you will have a sincerely emotional response to this spiritual truth or that; or because you have been such a dog, and now you realize it. That is fine; and you may even feel better once you have let it all out. Just do not mistakenly think you have made a real breakthrough in your Christian life. The breakthrough will be when you make the decision day after day, sometimes minute after minute, to name your sins to God and to take in God’s Word. These decisions may or may not be emotional; but these decisions will be the ones which have the real impact on your Christian life.

Matthew Henry makes the very interesting observation: Notwithstanding the professions of repentance Saul had lately made, if he had had David in his reach, he would have aimed another blow. But, because Saul dares not to come where he is, he resolves to let him alone. Thus many seem to leave their sins, but really their sins leave them; they would persist in them if they could. Saul sought no more for him, contenting himself with his banishment, since he could not have his blood, and hoping, it may be (as he had done, 1Sam. 18:25), that he would, some time or other, fall by the hand of the Philistines; and, though he would rather have the pleasure of destroying him himself, yet, if they do it, he will be satisfied, so that it be done effectually.

David is Given Ziklag to Live In

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic text                        And so says David unto Achish, “If please I have discovered grace in your [two] eyes, they will give to me a place in one of [the] cities of the land and I might dwell there; and to why dwells your servant in a city of the kingdom with you?”

Peshitta                                  And David said to Achish, “If I have now found grace in your eyes, let the people give me a place in one of the towns in the desert, that I may live there; so that your servant may not dwell in the royal city with you.”

Septuagint                              And David said to Anchus, “If now your servant has found grace in your eyes, let them give me, I pray you, a place in one of the cities in the country, and I will live there; for why does your servant live with you in the city reigned over?”

Significant differences:           No significant differences.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       One day, David was talking with Achish and said, "If you are happy with me, then let me live in one of the towns in the countryside. I'm not important enough to live here with you in the royal city.”

The Message                         Then David said to Achish, "If it's agreeable to you, assign me a place in one of the rural villages. It doesn't seem right that I, your mere servant, should be taking up space in the royal city.”

NLT                                        One day David said to Achish, “If it is all right with you, we would rather live in one of the country towns instead of here in the royal city.”

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         David said to Achish, "If you will permit me, let me have a place in one of the outlying towns so that I can live there. Why should I live in the royal city with you?”

JPS (Tanakh)                         David said to Achish, “If you please, let a place be granted me in one of the country towns where I can live; why should your servant remain with you in the royal city?”

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                     Now David said to Achish, "If I have found favor with you, let me be given a place in one of the outlying towns, so I can live there. Why should your servant live in the royal city with you?”

MKJV                                     And David said to Achish, If I have now found grace in your eyes, let them give me a place in some town in the country so that I may live there. For why should your servant live in the royal city with you?

Young's Updated LT              And David says unto Achish, “If, I pray you, I have found grace in your eyes, they give to me a place in one of the cities of the field, and I dwell there, yea, why does your servant dwell in the royal city with you?”

What is the gist of this verse? David asks for a separate place to live, apart from Achish in the royal city.

Translation: David then said to Achish,... Now, in the CEV, it sounds as though David has been bunking with Achish, and, while the two are sitting on the front porch sipping beers, David suddenly speaks up to Achish, and asks him for a place of his own. However, it is also possible that David and his men went to Gath and that all of the men and their families actually stayed outside on the outskirts of Gath, while David with a very small delegation came to Achish and made this request. It is very likely that we are only seeing a portion of the request here. My take is, David first secured permission for himself and his men to live in Philistine territory, and then he suggests that they take up living outside of Gath. It is possible that David and his men did live for awhile in Gath (see v. 3a) or just outside of Gath before moving to Ziklag (which is coming up in v. 6).

Translation: ...“If perchance [lit., please] I have found grace in your eyes,... David first asks Achish if he has found grace in the sight of Achish. This means that he is going to ask Achish a favor, and it is a favor which David really does not deserve. He is not going to Achish saying, “This is what you need to do for me; this is what I require and what I need.” Instead, David approaches Achish from the standpoint of asking him a favor.

Translation: ...[then let] them give me a place in one of the cities of the country that... It is interesting the way that David phrases this. He does not ask Achish to give him a particular place; he asks Achish if some group of people might grant him a place to stay. David may or may not have a particular place in mind. The people who would give this to David would be citizens of Gath, living on the outskirts of Gath; and they would allow David and his men to live with them.

Translation: ...[lit., and] I might live there.... As you see, I have a great deal of discussion on the voluntative hê above. The existence of this cannot be denied, as there is the actual letter hê added to the end of the verb. As I stated above, one way to render this would be with one of the helping verbs could, would or might. We could also render this, Let me live there.

Wesley suggests that David wanted to live in a different city so that his men would not be exposed to the idolatry of the Philistines (from that envy, and malice, which diversity of religion might have caused ). Gill makes a similar suggestion, and adds a few reasons for this: David's view in this might be partly to prevent the envy of the courtiers of Achish, who might think that David was too near the king, and might have too great an interest in him, and receive too many of his favours, and become his chief confidant and prime minister; and partly to preserve himself and people from all temptations to idolatry, and corruptions in religion; as also that ho might have an opportunity, without the knowledge of Achish, to fall upon the enemies of Israel. Henry makes some similar suggestions, saying that David knew what it was like to have the court of a high official envy him.

Quite frankly, I don’t know what David’s actual motivation is. I suspect that David, in his ride toward Gath, also was determining what he had planned to do while there. David has 600 men and their families to take care of; so he has to have more of a plan than, Let’s all just move to Gath. David will begin to raid the heathen who lived around southern Judah, and I suspect this was the plan he formulated when it came to determining how they would sustain themselves. For this kind of behavior, he might require a little distance from Gath—enough distance so that Achish knew sort of what David was doing, but not in any detail. Given David’s present spiritual condition (he is most certainly out of fellowship), I don’t believe that any spiritual notions came into play when first moving to Gath, and then suggesting that Achish give him his own city.

Barnes explains: David, with characteristic Oriental subtlety (compare 1Sam. 21:2), suggests as a reason for leaving Gath that his presence was burdensome and expensive to the king. His real motive was to be more out of the way of observation and control, so as to act the part of an enemy of Saul, without really lifting up his hand against him and his own countrymen of Israel. Let me add, this would also allow the raiding of various heathen groups in order to provide sustenance for his men, without being under the close scrutiny of the Philistines.

Translation: ...For why [should] your servant live in the royal city with you?” David has an army of 600 men who were loyal to him. They were Israelites, and not necessarily the most easy-going of the Israelites. Even though Achish very likely has a much larger standing army, having these two forces in the same city is a recipe for disaster. However, David does not present the situation to Achish in that way. My thinking is, David has not moved into Gath yet, but is moving there; he has his men and their families, and he wants to find a place to live peacefully among the Philistines. Most of David’s men are on the outskirts of town, camped out; while David and a small delegation meet with Achish.

Recall that David has been to Gath before and has been taken to Achish before. David was here before without the entourage and that he acted as though he were crazy before Achish, which likely caused Achish to attack the Jews, since he saw their greatest military leader as being incapacitated. As mentioned at the beginning of this verse, we do not know if this is the same man before whom David stood back in 1Sam. 21. I believe that it is, for two reasons: (1) very little time has passed between now and then; and (2) this Achish appears to be a fairly amiable person who lacks vindictiveness. He could have had David killed back in 1Sam. 21, but he chose not to. In fact, if you will recall, what he said was rather humorous. David was feigning madness before him, and Achish said to those who brought David to him, “I’m already surrounded by madmen; do you really think I need another one?” Having said one or two humorous things in my life, I realize that, sometimes you are willing to sacrifice some things in order to be humorous. Achish had a chance to deliver this line, which probably amused himself primarily, and then he allowed David to leave. It would have been incongruous to say something like this before David and then to order David’s execution. Secondly, David is Achish’s Israelite counterpart. What general does not have respect for the general of the opposing army; what grunt does not have respect for a grunt in his opposing army? Recall, Saul allowed Agag, the king of the Amalekites, to live. Saul did not simply pick out a couple of lower level soldiers to let live; he let his counterpart live. At that time when David appears mad before Achish, he was not a threat, in the eyes of Achish, and he was his counterpart—therefore, Achish spared him.

I should include the divine explanation as well. God had a purpose for David; David was going to lead the nation Israel to its greatest days (well, actually, to set Israel up to enjoy its greatest days under Solomon); therefore, God saw to it that David lived. In fact, in both of these very different circumstances, God will protect David. We do not know all of the factors involved; however, I have suggested several above. Obviously, the fact that there is a king like Achish ruling over Gath plays a significant part in all of this.

Now, it is a different situation. David is there with an army proposing to live in that general area. Since their meeting previously, David, sounding quite sane now, has done nothing against the army of Achish. David has protected some Israelite cities, which is to be expected; but David never made any attempts to take a Philistine city since their meeting. So Achish is weighing these things in his mind. He also knows about David and Saul and how they are on the outs. David has no doubt made that known to him in this conversation: “Look, I had to leave Israel, because every time I turned around, Saul was after me desiring to kill me.” Even though this is never stated in our context, it is reasonably something which David said to Achish.

We do not know an exact time frame for this, nor do we know if David actually lived for any amount of time in Gath, or on its outskirts. It is possible that David and his troops did spend some time in Gath, and then David went to Achish again, and asked for a city which was not near Gath. The other option is, David not only asked Achish for a place to stay, but, after granted that, then asked that he stay in a city other than Gath. This means that his men would have remained in Gath or on its outskirts for no more than a few days (the length of time of their arrival and then David’s meeting with Achish). There is no reason to suppose that this was a 10 minute meeting which Achish took in the middle of the day. There was probably a protocol that they observed and that there was even a meal involved. There are many times when Scripture gives us a few highlights of this incident or that, without giving us any details.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic text                        And so gives to him Achish in the day the that Ziklag (for so was Ziklag to kings of Judah as far as the day the this).

Septuagint                              And he gave him Sekelac in that day; therefore, Sekelac came into possession of the king of Judea to this day.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Achish gave David the town of Ziklag that same day, and Ziklag has belonged to the kings of Judah ever since.

The Message                         So Achish assigned him Ziklag. (This is how Ziklag got to be what it is now, a city of the kings of Judah.)

NAB                                       That same day Achish gave him Ziklag, which has, therefore, belonged to the kings of Judah up to the present time.

NJB                                        That very day Achish gave him Ziklag; and this is why Ziklag has been the property of the kings of Judah to the present day.

NLT                                        So Achish gave him the town of Ziklag (which still belongs to the kings of Judah to this day).

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         So Achish immediately gave him Ziklag. (This is why Ziklag still belongs to the kings of Judah today.)

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

HCSB                                     That day Achish gave Ziklag to him, and it still belongs to the kings of Judah today.

Young's Updated LT              And Achish gives to him in that day Ziklag, therefore has Ziklag been to the kings of Judah till this day.

What is the gist of this verse? Achish gave Ziklag to David, and this city has been a possession of the Judæan kings until this time (the time of writing).

Translation: So Achish gave Ziklag to him in that day... As mentioned before, David has stood before Achish twice and is spared both times. In fact, in this situation, Achish essentially hands over a piece of real estate to David. We do not know much about Ziklag—that is, how many Philistines lived there, how they reacted when David moved in, etc.

Ziklag is even with the lower third of the Dead Sea, but much closer to the Mediterranean Sea. It is about midway on the diagonal line between Ashkelon and Beer-Sheba. It was originally Judæan property, gained by Joshua and first deeded over Judah and then to Simeon in the great land distribution (Joshua 15:31 19:5). Given the location of Ziklag and the nature of Philistine aggression, and this passage, we would expect this city to have fallen into Philistine possession. It is also possible that the Judæans never really took control of it; however, Judges 1:17–18 seems to imply that they did (Ziklag is not named specifically; but it would have been in that general area). No matter what the case, this city is under the control of Achish during this time period. Given the nature of the relationship between Israel and Philistia, it is reasonable to suppose that some border cities and territories changed hands one or more times.

It is interesting that Achish, king of Gath, would give this city to David, as Gath is about 22 miles (35 km) north-northwest of Ziklag. Gaza is closer (approximately 15 miles away), but there may have been no easy or direct route between the two. In any case, Ziklag was Achish’s to give. Since Ziklag is in the southern portion of Palestine, this made it open to attacks from other nomads from that general area, as we will see in 1Sam. 30. It is possible that Achish found it difficult to maintain this city under his control, being that it was so far away and subject to attacks from all manner of heathen (as we will find out in this chapter).

Given what we know about the location of some cities and who controlled which city, it is important to note that the ancient peoples of that day tended not to own large blocks of contiguous real estate, but rather cities, which may or may not be near one another. Philistine attacks against Israel tended to be right through the middle of Israel, and they tended to capture individual cities (e.g., Beth-shan) rather than huge tracts of land. Certainly, at various times, the Philistines controlled tracts of land, as did Israel; but there were also times when the Philistines might hold several cities which were right in the middle of Ephraim. Don’t forget that God chose to leave the heathen in several sections of Israel to discipline the Israelites (Judges 1:27–36 2:3, 19–23). What this means is, you may look on this map or that and see that Manasseh covered this specific range of contiguous land, and that God awarded them a specific set of cities; however, dotted throughout Manasseh would be cities which were controlled by various groups of Canaanites (e.g., Beth-shan, Taanach, Dor—Judges 1:27).

Translation: ...(therefore, Ziklag is [a possession] of the kings to Judah to this day). It is clear in this context that Achish not only gives David carte blanc when it comes to Ziklag, but he apparently gave David authority in Ziklag as well—either that, or David assumed authority through living there. The reason we may assume this is, Ziklag becomes a possession of Israel’s. David did not later on come back and conquer this city. This phrase indicates that the act of Achish giving the city to David was more than simply saying, “Okay, no problem; you and your guys can hang out in this city.”

What we have here in this second half of v. 6 is known as a gloss. That is, an addition made not by the original writer of this portion of Scripture, but by a later copyist or editor. It would be most reasonable for this to be added at least a generation later, if not later than that. David would not write here, “The kings of Judah own Ziklag to this day” because there were no kings of Judah. It is even not likely that Solomon wrote this either, because he would have referred to this as a possession of Israel (the united kingdom) and not to a possession of the kings of Judah. The phrase the kings of Judah is more reasonably something which was added at least two or three kings into the divided kingdom. Barnes reasonably suggests: This phrase, coupled with the title the kings of Judah, implies that this was written after the revolt of Jeroboam, and before the Babylonian captivity.

This causes us to have several questions: (1) Is this a part of Scripture; that is, is this line, not written by the original author, also inspired by God the Holy Spirit? (2) What does this tell us about the composition of Scripture during the time of the Old Testament?

I would love to give you definitive answers to both of these questions; however, the best I can do is offer an educated guess or two. There is at least one chapter in 1Samuel which sounds like it was written by Jonathan (1Sam. 14); although most of this book (and Samuel) appear to be written by David. Furthermore, the first dozen or so chapters appear to be written by Samuel, for whom this book is named. We have seen this in the book of Genesis, which covers many generations of believers in the Age of Conscience (or the Age of the Gentiles). My personal guess is, there are historical records which are later assembled by an editor. I would not be surprised if David or Solomon did this; however it is also possible that someone a few generations later collected all of this. If such an editor did exists, several generations after David, then it would be reasonable that he inserted this comment.

Since the book of Samuel (one book in the Hebrew) covers pretty much David’s life, it is reasonable that David, the writer of many psalms, also collected this material himself and kept it with the other portions of Scripture (or others later added it to the existing portions of Scripture). Given that these ancient manuscripts were probably on rolls of velum, what Samuel wrote and what David wrote were probably on separate rolls. Given that there is no chapter which would easily end Samuel’s time and begin David’s, whenever they were assembled together, they remained as one unit.

I would think that a divinely inspired editor would reasonably had added this and other comments (which are actually very few); rather than a copyist. That is, a man moved by God the Holy Spirit, with access to these records, gathered, edited and finalized the book of Samuel. If not for this gloss, I would think that man would be Solomon (although that is not an impossibility). Other candidates might include Joash, Amaziah, Jotham or Hezekiah (or even Elijah). But, bear in mind, we are dealing with an editor or a copyist who would have added this information.

More importantly, I would personally guess that this is a part of Scripture that we can trust. That is, Achish giving this city to David did result in this city belonging to the kings of Judah thereafter is a fact that we could trust several generations into the kingly line of Judah.

What we have are two sets of books which cover the same history: Samuel/Kings and Chronicles. We also know that the original writings were done by Samuel, Gad and Nathan (although there is reason to believe that David and Jonathan had chronicled many incidents themselves). 1Chron. 29:29: Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the history of Samuel the seer, and in the history of Nathan the prophet, and in the history of Gad the seer. At some point in time, at least two different editors either copied from these authors, and added a comment here and there. There are portions of Samuel and Chronicles which are almost identical, so it is reasonable that they either used the same source material or the book of Samuel was used as source material for the book of Chronicles. Now, this does not compromise the inspiration of Scripture in any way. Luke is an example of one who gathered a great deal of information from eyewitness accounts and some recorded documents and wrote the book of Luke and Acts based upon this information which he gathered. The fact that he gathered his information from many sources in no way compromises the inspiration of the book of Luke. That there were several authors of the book of Samuel, which was later edited into one book does not in any way take from its inspiration.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic text                        And so is a number of the days that dwelt David in a country of Philistines: days and four moons.

Peshitta                                  And the time that David lived in the eland of the Philistines was a full year and four months.

Septuagint                              And the number of the days that David lived in the country of the Philistines was four months.

Significant differences:           The Latin and the Greek set this time period as being 4 months; the MT and the Aramaic have the time period as a year and 4 months (which seems more realistic, given the things which David does here). This would be a wonderful place for the Dead Sea Scrolls to weigh in; unfortunately, this verse is lacking in the Dead Sea Scrolls (as are many others).

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       David was in Philistia for a year and four months.

NJB                                        The time that David stayed in Philistine territory amounted to a year and four months.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         David stayed in Philistine territory for one year and four month.

JPS (Tanakh)                         The length of time that David lived in Philistine territory was a year and four months.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

Updated Emphasized Bible    And the number of days that David dwelt in the country [lit., field, field-country] of the Philistines became a year and four months [lit., days and four months].

ESV                                       And the number of the days that David lived in the country of the Philistines was a year and four months.

Young's Updated LT              And the number of the days which David dwelt in the field of the Philistines is days and four months.

.

What is the gist of this verse? David lives in Philistine territory for almost a year and a half.