Deeper ReflectionSAUL’S RESPONSE to David’s God-centred humble appeal to him for reconciliation (1 Sam 24:8-15) surfaces two effects of the appeal.
The impact of David’s goodness: Saul saw what David did to him as acts of goodness: “you have repaid me
good, whereas I have repaid you evil” (v.17) and “you have done
good to me” (v.18). David’s actions toward Saul were a demonstration of “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with
good”, by feeding the enemy when he is hungry and giving him a drink when he is thirsty, and in so doing “heap burning coals on his head” (Rom 12:20-21). David’s actions “defied military logic”
20: “the LORD delivered” Saul into David’s hands, yet he “did not kill” him (v.18). His actions “defied common sense”
21: conventional wisdom is to kill one’s enemy when found, but David let Saul “go away safely” (literally, “on a
good road” v.19). Saul had so far refused to mention the name of his enemy, but always referred to him as “the son of Jesse” (cf. 1 Sam 20:27, 30-31; 22:7-9, 13). But now, for the first time, he called him “David” (v.16).
The assurance of God’s faithfulness: God spoke to David through Saul’s acknowledgement that David “will surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel will be established” in his “hand” (v.20; cf. 1 Sam 20:31; 23:17). A timely divine reassurance. Ironically, the certainty of God’s promise was confirmed through an enemy’s mouth.
22 God can speak by any means that He chooses.
20 Robert D. Bergen, 242
21 Robert D. Bergen, 242
22 Dale Ralph Davis, 252
