THE "Life of Abraham" was presented to our readers, because, as the nominal founder of the Jewish race, his position ent.i.tled him to that honour. The "Life of David," because, as one of the worst men and worst kings ever known, his history might afford matter for reflection to admirers of monarchical inst.i.tutions and matter for comment to the advocates of a republican form of government. The "Life of Jacob" served to show how basely mean and contemptibly deceitful a man might become, and yet enjoy G.o.d"s love. Having given thus a brief outline of the career of the patriarch, the king, and the knave, the life of a priest naturally presents itself as the most fitting to complement the present quadrifid series.
Moses, the great grandson of Levi, was born in Egypt, not far distant from the banks of the Nile, a river world-famous for its inundations, made familiar to ordinary readers by the travellers who have journeyed to discover its source, and held in bad repute by strangers, especially on account of the carnivorous Saurians who infest its waters. The mother and father of our hero were both of the tribe of Levi, and were named Jochebed and Amram. The infant Moses was, at the age of three months, placed in an ark of bulrushes by the river"s brink. This was done in order to avoid the decree of extermination propounded by the reigning Pharaoh against the male Jewish children. The daughter of Pharaoh, coming down to the river to bathe, found the child and took compa.s.sion upon him, adopting him as her son. Of the early life of Moses we have but scanty record. We are told in the New Testament that he was learned in the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts vii, 21), and that "when he was come to years he refused" by faith (Hebrews, xi, 24) "to be called the son of Pharaoh"s daughter." Perhaps the record from which the New Testament writers quoted has been lost; it is certain that the present version of the Old Testament does not contain those statements. The record which is lost may have been G.o.d"s original revelation to man, and of which our Bible may be an incomplete version. I am little grieved by the supposition that a revelation may have been lost, being, for my own part, more inclined to think that no revelation has ever been made.
Josephus says that, when quite a baby, Moses trod contemptuously on the crown of Egypt. The Egyptian monuments and Exodus are both silent on this point. Josephus also tells us that Moses led the Egyptians in war against the Ethiopians, and married Tharbis, the daughter of the Ethiopian monarch. This also is omitted both in Egyptian history and in the sacred record. When Moses was grown, according to the Old Testament, or when he was 40 years of age according to the New, "it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel," "And he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew;" "And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand." The New Testament says that he did it, "for he supposed that his brethren would understand how that G.o.d, by his hand, would deliver them." (Acts vii, 25) But this is open to the following objections:-The Old Testament says nothing of the kind;-there was no man to see the homicide, and as Moses hid the body, it is hard to conceive how he could expect the Israelites to understand a matter of which they not only had no knowledge whatever, but which he himself did not think was known to them;-if there were really no man present, the story of the after accusation against Moses needs explanation;-it might be further objected that it does not appear that Moses at that time did even himself conceive that he had any mission from G.o.d to deliver his people. Moses fled from the wrath of Pharaoh, and dwelt in Midian, where he married the daughter of one Reuel or Raguel, or Jethro. This name is not of much importance, but it is strange that if Moses wrote the books of the Pentateuch he was not more exact in designating so near a relation.
While acting as shepherd to his father-in-law, "he led the flock to the back side of the desert," and "the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire:" that is, the angel was either a flame, or was the object which was burning, for this angel appeared in the midst of a bush which burned with fire, but was not consumed. This flame appears to have been a luminous one, for it was a "great sight," and attracted Moses, who turned aside to see it. But the luminosity would depend on substance ignited and rendered incandescent. Is the angel of the Lord a substance susceptible of ignition and incandesence? Who knoweth? If so, will the fallen angels ignite and burn in h.e.l.l? G.o.d called unto Moses out of the midst of the bush. It is hard to conceive an infinite G.o.d in the middle of a bush, yet as the law of England says that we must not "deny the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be of divine authority,"
in order not to break the law, I advise all to believe that, in addition to being in the middle of a bush, the infinite and all-powerful G.o.d also sat on the top of a box, dwelt sometimes in a tent, afterwards in a temple; although invisible, appeared occasionally; and, being a spirit without body or parts, was hypostatically incarnate as a man. Moses, when spoken to by G.o.d, "hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon G.o.d." If Moses had known that G.o.d was _invisible_, he would have escaped this fear. G.o.d told Moses that the cry of the children of Israel had reached him, and that he had _come down_ to deliver them, and that Moses was to lead them out of Egypt. Moses does not seem to have placed entire confidence in the phlegomic divine communication, and asked, when the Jews should question him on the name of the Deity, what answer should he make? It does not appear from this that the Jews, if they had so completely forgotten G.o.d"s name, had much preserved the recollection of the promise comparatively so recently made to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. The answer given according to our version is, "I am that I am;"
according to the Douay, "I am who am." G.o.d, in addition, told Moses that the Jews should spoil the Egyptians of their wealth; but even this promise of plunder, so congenial to the nature of a bill-discounting Jew of the Bible type, did not avail to overcome the scruples of Moses. G.o.d therefore taught him to throw his rod on the ground, and thus transform it into a serpent, from which pseudo-serpent Moses at first fled in fear, but on his taking it by the tail it resumed its original shape.
Moses, with even other wonders at command, still hesitated; he had an impediment in his speech. G.o.d cured this by the appointment of Aaron, who was eloquent, to aid his brother. G.o.d directed Moses to return to Egypt, but his parting words must somewhat have damped the future legislator"s hope of any speedy or successful ending to his mission. G.o.d said, "I will harden Pharaoh"s heart that he shall not let the people go." On the journey back to Egypt G.o.d met Moses "by the way in the inn, and sought to kill him." I am ignorant as to the causes which prevented the omnipotent Deity from carrying out his intention; the text does not explain the matter, and I am not a bishop or a D.D., and I do not therefore feel justified in putting my a.s.sumptions in place of G.o.d"s revelation. Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh, and asked that the Jews might be permitted to go three days" journey in the wilderness; but the King of Egypt not only refused their request, but gave them additional tasks, and in consequence Moses and Aaron went again to the Lord, who told them, "I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the name of G.o.d Almighty; but by my name Jehovah was I not known unto them."
Whether G.o.d had forgotten that the name Jehovah was known to Abraham, or whether he was here deceiving Moses and Aaron, are points the solution of which I leave to the faithful referring them to the fact that Abraham called a place (Genesis xxii, 14) Jehovah-Jireh. After this Moses and Aaron again went to Pharaoh and worked wonderfully in his presence.
Thaumaturgy is coming into fashion again, but the exploits of Moses far exceeded any of those performed by Mr. Home or the Davenport Brothers.
Aaron flung down his rod, and it became a serpent; the Egyptian magicians flung down their rods, which became serpents also; but the rod of Aaron, as though it had been a Jew money-lender or a t.i.the collecting parson, swallowed up these miraculous compet.i.tors, and the Jewish leaders could afford to laugh at their defeated rival conjurors. Moses and Aaron carried on the miracle-working for some time. All the water of the land of Egypt was turned by them into blood, but the magicians did so with their enchantments, and it had no effect on Pharaoh. Then showers of frogs, at the instance of Aaron, covered the land of Egypt; but the Egyptians did so with their enchantments, and frogs abounded still more plentifully. The Jews next tried their hands at the production of lice, and here-to the glory of G.o.d be it said-the infidel Egyptians failed to imitate them. It is written that "cleanliness is next to G.o.dliness," but we cannot help thinking that G.o.dliness must have been far from cleanliness when the former so soon resulted in lice. The magicians were now entirely discomfited. The preceding wonders seem to have affected all the land of Egypt; but in the next miracle the swarms of flies sent were confined to Egyptians only, and were not extended to Goshen, in which the Israelites dwelt.
The next plague in connection with the ministration of Moses and Aaron was that "all the cattle of Egypt died." After "all the cattle" were dead, a boil was sent, breaking forth with blains upon man and beast.
This failing in effect, Moses afterwards stretched forth his hand and smote "both man and beast" with hail, then covered the land with locusts, and followed this with a thick darkness throughout the land-a darkness which _might_ have been felt. Whether it was felt is a matter on which I am unable to pa.s.s an opinion. After this, the Egyptians being terrified by the destruction of their first-born children, the Jews, at the instance of Moses, borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, jewels of gold, and raiment; and they spoiled the Egyptians. The fact is, that the Egyptians were in the same position as the payers of church rates, t.i.thes, vicars" rates, and Easter dues: they lent to the Lord"s people, who are good borrowers, but slow when repayment is required.
They prefer promising you a crown of glory to paying you at once five shillings in silver. Moses led the Jews through the Red Sea, which proved a ready means of escape, as may be easily read in Exodus, which says that the Lord "made the sea dry land" for the Israelites, and afterwards not only overwhelmed in it the Egyptians who sought to follow them, but, as Josephus tells us, the current of the sea actually carried to the camp of the Hebrews the arms of the Egyptians, so that the wandering Jews might not be dest.i.tute of weapons. After this the Israelites were led by Moses into Shur, where they were without water for three days, and the water they afterwards found was too bitter to drink until a tree had been cast into the well. The Israelites were then fed with manna, which, when gathered on Friday, kept for the Sabbath, but rotted if kept from one week day to another. The people grew tired of eating manna, and complained, and G.o.d sent fire amongst them and burned them up in the uttermost parts of the camp; and after this the people wept and said, "Who shall give us flesh to eat? We remember the fish we did eat in Egypt freely; the cuc.u.mbers and the melons and the leeks and the onions and the garlic; but now there is nothing at all beside this manna before our eyes." This angered the Lord, and he gave them a feast of quails, and while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the anger of the Lord was kindled, and he smote the Jewish people with a very great plague (Numbers, ix). The people again in Rephidim were without water, and Moses therefore smote the Rock of h.o.r.eb with his rod, and water came out of the rock. At Rephidim the Amalekites and the Jews fought together, and while they fought Moses, like a prudent general, went to the top of a hill, accompanied by Aaron and Hur, and it came to pa.s.s that when Moses held up his hands Israel prevailed, and when he let down his hands Amalek prevailed. But Moses"
hands were heavy, and they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat thereon, and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side and the other on the other side, and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun, and Joshua discomfited Amalek, and his people with the edge of the sword. How the true believer ought to rejoice that the stone was so convenient, as otherwise the Jews might have been slaughtered, and there might have been no royal line of David, no Jesus, no Christianity. That stone should be more valued than the precious black stone of the Moslem; it is the corner-stone of the system, the stone which supported the Mosaic rule. G.o.d is everywhere, but Moses went up unto him, and the Lord called to him out of a mountain and came to him in a thick cloud, and descended on Mount Sinai in a fire, in consequence of which the mountain smoked, and the Lord came down upon the top of the mountain and called Moses up to him; and then the Lord gave Moses the Ten Commandments, and also those precepts which follow, in which Jews are permitted to buy their fellow-countrymen for six years, and in which it is provided that, if the slave-master shall give his six-year slave a wife, and she bear him sons or daughters, that the wife and the children shall be the property of her master. In these precepts it is also permitted that a man may sell his own daughter for the most base purposes. Also that a master may beat his slave, so that if he do not die until a few days after the ill-treatment, the master shall escape justice because the slave is his money. Also that Jews may buy strangers and keep them as slaves for ever. While Moses was up in the mount the people clamoured for Aaron to make them G.o.ds. Moses had stopped away so long that the people gave him up for lost. Aaron, whose duty it was to have pacified and restrained them, and to have kept them in the right faith, did nothing of the kind. He induced them to bring all their gold, and then made it into a calf, before which he built an altar, and then proclaimed a feast. Manners and customs change. In those days the Jews did see the G.o.d that Aaron took their gold for, but now the priests take the people"s gold, and the poor contributors do not even see a calf for their pains, unless indeed they are near a mirror at the time when they are making their voluntary contributions. And the Lord told Moses what happened, and said, "I have seen this people, and behold it is a stiffnecked people. Now, therefore, let me alone that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them." Moses would not comply with G.o.d"s request, but remonstrated, and expostulated, and begged him not to afford the Egyptians an opportunity of speaking against him. Moses succeeded in changing the unchangeable, and the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.
Although Moses would not let G.o.d"s "wrath wax hot" his own "anger waxed hot," and he broke, in his rage, the two tables of stone which G.o.d had given him, and on which the Lord had graven and written with his own finger. We have now no means of knowing in what language G.o.d wrote, or whether Moses afterwards took any pains to rivet together the broken pieces. It is almost to be wondered at that the Christian Evidence Societies have not sent missionaries to search for these pieces of the tables, which may even yet remain beneath the mount. Moses took the calf which they had made and burned it with fire and ground it to powder, and strewed it upon water and made the children of Israel drink of it. After this Moses armed the priests and killed 3,000 Jews, "and the Lord plagued the people because they had made the calf which Aaron had made."
(Exodus x.x.xii, 35) Moses afterwards pitched the tabernacle without the camp; and the cloudy pillar in which the Lord went, descended and stood at the door of the tabernacle; and the Lord talked to Moses "face to face, as a man would to his friend." (Exodus x.x.xiii, 11) And the Lord then told Moses, "Thou canst not see my face, for there shall no man see me and live." (Exodus x.x.xiii, 20) Before this Moses and Aaron and Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, "saw the G.o.d of Israel, and there was under his feet, as it were, a paved work of sapphire stone,.. and upon the n.o.bles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand; also they saw G.o.d, and did eat and drink." (Exodus xxix, 9)
Aaron, the brother of Moses, died under very strange circ.u.mstances. The Lord said unto Moses, "Strip Aaron of his garments and put them upon Eleazar, his son, and Aaron shall be gathered unto his people and shall die there." And Moses did as the Lord commanded, and Aaron died there on the top of the mount, where Moses had taken him. There does not appear to have been any coroner"s inquest in the time of Aaron, and the suspicious circ.u.mstances of the death of the brother of Moses have been pa.s.sed over by the faithful.
When Moses was leading the Israelites near Moab, Balak the King of the Moabites sent to Balaam in order to get Balaam to curse the Jews. When Balak"s messengers were with Balaam, G.o.d came to Balaam also, and asked what men they were. Of course G.o.d knew, but he inquired for his own wise purposes, and Balaam told him truthfully. G.o.d ordered Balaam not to curse the Jews, and therefore the latter refused, and sent the Moabitish messengers away. Then Balak sent again high and mighty princes under whose influence Balaam went mounted on an a.s.s, and G.o.d"s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he sent an angel to stop him by the way; but the angel did not understand his business well, and the a.s.s first ran into a field, and then close against the wall, and it was not until the angel removed to a narrower place that he succeeded in stopping the donkey; and when the a.s.s saw the angel she fell down. Balaam did not see the angel at first; and, indeed, we may take it as a fact of history that a.s.ses have always been the most ready to perceive angels.
Moses may have been a great author, but we have little means of ascertaining what he wrote in the present day. Divines talk of Genesis to Deuteronomy as the five books of Moses, but Eusebius, in the fourth century, attributed them to Ezra, and Saint Chrysostom says that the name of Moses has been affixed to the books without authority, by persons living long after him. It is quite certain that if Moses lived 3,300 years ago, he did not write in square letter Hebrew, and this because the character has not existed so long. It is indeed doubtful if it can be carried back 2,000 years. The ancient Hebrew character, though probably older than this, yet is comparatively modern amongst the ancient languages of the earth.
It is urged by orthodox chronologists that Moses was born about 1450 B.C., and that the Exodus took place about 1491 B.C. Unfortunately "there are no recorded dates in the Jewish Scriptures that are trustworthy." Moses, or the Hebrews, not being mentioned upon Egyptian monuments from the twelfth to the seventeenth century B.C. inclusive, and never being alluded to by any extant writer who lived prior to the Septuagint translation at Alexandria (commencing in the third century B.C.), there are no extraneous aids, from sources alien to the Jewish Books, through which any information, worthy of historical acceptance, can be gathered elsewhere about him or them.
G.R. Gliddon"s Types of Mankind: Mankind"s Chronology, p 711
Moses died in the land of Moab when he was 120 years of age. The Lord buried Moses in a valley of Moab, over against Bethpeor, but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day. Josephus says that "a cloud came over him on the sudden and he disappeared in a certain valley." The devil disputed about the body of Moses, contending with the Archangel Michael (Jude, 9); but whether the devil or the angel had the best of the discussion, the Bible does not tell us.
De Beauvoir Priaulx,4 looking at Moses as a counsellor, leader, and legislator, says:-"Invested with this high authority, he announced to the Jews their future religion, and announced it to them as a state religion, and as framed for a particular state, and that state only. He gave this religion, moreover, a creed so narrow and negative-he limited it to objects so purely temporal, he crowded it with observances so entirely ceremonial or national-that we find it difficult to determine whether Moses merely established this religion in order that by a community of worship he might induce in the tribe-divided Israelites that community of sentiment which would const.i.tute them a nation; or, whether he only roused them to a sense of their national dignity, in the hope that they might then more faithfully perform the duties of priests and servants of Jehovah. In other words, we hesitate to decide whether in the mind of Moses the state was subservient to the purposes of religion, or religion to the purposes of state."
4 Questiones Mosaicae, p. 438.
The same writer observes5 that, according to the Jewish writings, Moses "is the friend and favourite of the Deity. He is one whose prayers and wishes, the Deity hastens to fulfil, one to whom the Deity makes known his designs. The relations between G.o.d and the prophet are most intimate. G.o.d does not disdain to answer the questions of Moses, to remove his doubts, and even occasionally to receive his suggestions, and to act upon them even in opposition to his own pre-determined decrees."
5 p. 418.
NEW LIFE OF DAVID
IN compiling a biographical account of any ancient personage, impediments often arise from the uncertainty, party bias, and prejudiced coloring of the various traditions out of which, the biography is collected. Here no such obstacle is met with, no such bias can be imagined, for, in giving the life of David, we extract it from an all-wise G.o.d"s perfect and infallible revelation to man, and thus are enabled to present it to our readers free from any doubt, uncertainty, or difficulty. There is perhaps the fear that the manner of this brief sketch may be adjudged to be within the operation of such common law as wisely protects the career of the saints from mere sinful common-sense criticism; but as the matter is derived from the authorised version for which England is indebted to James, of royal and pious memory, this new life of David may be safely left to the impartial judgment of Mr.
Justice North, aided by the charitable and pious counsel of Sir Hardinge Giffard. The latter, who has had more than one criminal client for whom he has most ably pleaded, might be relied on to make out a strong, if not a good, case for punishing any one who is unfair to the man after G.o.d"s own heart. Mr. Justice Stephen has furnished me with some slight guide in his notice of Voltaire"s play called "David:"-
"It const.i.tutes, perhaps, the bitterest attack on David"s character ever devised by the wit of man, but the effect is produced almost exclusively by the juxtaposition, with hardly any alteration, of a number of texts from different parts of David"s history. It would be a practical impossibility to charge a jury in such a case, so as to embody Lord Coleridge"s view of the law. The judge would have to say: "It is lawful to say that David was a murderer, an adulterer, a treacherous tyrant who pa.s.sed his last moments in giving directions for a.s.sa.s.sinations; but you must observe the decencies of controversy. You must not arrange your facts in such a way as to mix ridicule with indignation, or to convey too striking a contrast between the solemn character of the doc.u.ments from which the extracts are made, and the nature of the extracts themselves, and of the facts to which they relate.""
It is in the spirit of this paragraph that I have penned the present life.
The father of David was Jesse, an Ephrathite of Bethlehem Judah, who had either eight sons, (1 Samuel xvi, 10-11, and xvii, 12), or only seven (1 Chronicles, ii, 13-15), and David was either the eighth son or the seventh. Some may think this a difficulty, but such persons will only be those who rely on their own intellectual faculties, or who have been misled by arithmetic. If you are in any doubt, consult some qualified divine, and he will explain to you that there is really no difference between eight and seven when rightly understood with prayer and faith, by the help of the spirit. Arithmetic is an utterly infidel acquirement, and one which all true believers should eschew. The proposition that three times one are one is a fundamental article of the Christian faith.
When young, David tended his father"s sheep, and apparently while so doing he gained a character for being cunning in playing a mighty valiant man, a man of war and prudent in matters. He obtained his reputation as a soldier early and wonderfully, for he was "but a youth;"
and G.o.d"s most holy word a.s.serts that when going to fight with Goliath, he tried to walk in armor and could not, because he was not accustomed to it (1 Samuel xvii, 39 _c.f._ Douay version). Samuel shortly prior to this anointed David, who, while yet a lad, had been selected by the Lord to be King of the Jews in place and stead of Saul, who had wickedly disobeyed the commands of the Lord, who in his infinite love and mercy had said (1 Sam. xv, 3): "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and a.s.s." Saul, however, behaved unrighteously, for he "spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them." This not unnaturally irritated and annoyed the Lord. "Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel, saying, It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be King: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments," and the Lord bid Samuel fill a "horn with oil," and sent Samuel, who anointed David the son of Jesse in the midst of his brethren, and the spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. If a man takes to spirits his life will probably be one of vice, misery, and misfortune; and if spirits take to him, the result in the end is nearly the same. Every evil deed which the Bible records as having been done by David was after the spirit of the Lord had so come upon him. Saul being King of Israel, an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him. The devil has, it is said, no love for music, and Saul was recommended to have David to play on a harp, in order that harmony might drive this evil spirit back to the Lord who sent it. The Jew"s harp was played successfully, and Saul was often relieved from the evil spirit by David"s ministrations. There is nothing miraculous in this; at the People"s Concerts many a working man has been relieved from the "blue devils" by a stirring chorus, a merry song, or patriotic anthem; and on the contrary many evil spirits have been aroused by the most unmusical performances of the followers of General Booth. David was appointed armor-bearer to the King; but curiously enough, this office does not appear to have interfered with his duties as a shepherd; indeed, the care of his father"s sheep took precedence over the care of the king"s armor, and in the time of war he "went and returned to feed his father"s sheep." Perhaps his "prudence in matters" induced him thus to take care of himself.
A Philistine, one Goliath of Gath (whose height was six cubits and a span, or about nine feet six inches, at a low computation) had defied the armies of Israel. This Goliath was (to use the vocabulary of a reverend sporting correspondent to a certain religious newspaper) a veritable champion of the heavy weights. He carried in all about two cwt. of offensive and defensive armor upon his person, and his challenge had great weight. None dared accept it amongst the soldiers of Saul until the arrival of David, who brought some food for his brethren.
David volunteered to fight the giant, but Elias, David"s brother, having mocked the presumption of the offer, and Saul objecting that the venturesome lad was not competent to take part in a conflict so dangerous, David related how he pursued a lion and a bear, how he caught him by his beard and slew him. Which animal it was that David thus bearded the text does not say. The Douay says it was "a lion or a bear."
To those who have chased the king of the forests or studied the habits of bears, the whole story looks, on an attentive reading, "very like a whale." David was permitted to fight the giant; his equipment was simple, a sling and stones, and with these, from a distance, he slew the giant. Some suggest that the weapon Goliath fell under was the long bow.
This suggestion is rendered probable by the book itself. One verse says that David slew the Philistine with a stone, another verse says that he slew him with the giant"s own sword, while in 2 Samuel xxi, 19, we are told that Goliath the Gitt.i.te was slain by Elhanan. Our translators, who have great regard for our faith and more for their pulpits, have kindly inserted the words "the brother of" before Goliath. This emendation saves the true believer from the difficulty of understanding how Goliath of Gath could have been killed by different men at different times.
David was previously well known to Saul, and was much loved and favored by that monarch. He was also seen by the king before he went forth to do battle with the gigantic Philistine. Yet (as if to verify the proverb that kings have short memories for their friends) Saul had forgotten his own armor-bearer and muchloved harpist, and was obliged to ask Abner who David was. Abner, captain of the king"s host, familiar with the person of the armor-bearer to the king, of course knew David well; he therefore answered: "As thy soul liveth, O king, I cannot tell." David, having made known his parentage, was appointed to high command by Saul; but the Jewish women over-praised David, and thus displeased the king. One day the evil spirit from the Lord came upon Saul and he prophesied. Men often talk great nonsense under the influence of spirits, which they sometimes regret when sober. It is, however, an interesting fact in ancient spiritualism to know that Saul prophesied with a devil in him.
Under the joint influence of the devil and prophecy, Saul tried to kill David with a javelin, and this was repeated, even after David had married the king"s daughter (whose wedding he had secured by the slaughter of two hundred men). Saul then asked his son and servants to kill David; but Jonathan, Saul"s son, loved David, "And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan: and Saul sware, As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain." It is interesting as showing the utility of oaths that after having thus sworn Saul was more determined than ever to kill David. To save his own life David fled to Naioth, and Saul sent there messengers to arrest David; but three sets of the king"s messengers having in turn all become prophets, Saul went himself, and the spirit of the Lord came upon him also, and he stripped off his clothes and prophesied as hard as the rest, "laying down naked all that day and all that night."
David lived in exile for some time in G.o.dly company, having collected round him every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented. Saul made several fruitless attempts to effect his capture, with no better result than that he twice placed himself in the power of David, who twice showed the mercy to a cruel king which he never conceded to an unoffending people. David having obtruded himself upon Achish, King of Gath, doubtful of his safety, feigned madness to cover his retreat. He then lived a precarious life, sometimes levying a species of black mail upon defenceless farmers. Having applied to one farmer to make him some compensation for permitting the farm to go unrobbed, and his demand not having been complied with, David, who is a man after the heart of G.o.d of mercy, immediately determined to murder the farmer and all his household for their wicked reluctance in submitting to his extortions. The wife of farmer Nabal compromised the matter. David "_accepted her person_" and ten days after Nabal was found dead in his bed. David afterwards went with 600 men and lived under the protection of Achish, King of Gath, and while thus residing (being the anointed one of G.o.d who says, "Thou shalt not steal") he robbed the inhabitants of the surrounding places. Being also obedient to the statute, "Thou shalt do no murder," he slaughtered, and left neither man nor woman alive to report his robberies to King Achish; and as he "always walked in the ways" of a G.o.d to whom "lying lips are an abomination," he made false reports to Achish in relation to his actions. Of course this was all for the glory of G.o.d, whose ways are not as our ways. Soon the Philistines were engaged in another of the constantly recurring conflicts with the Israelites. Who offered them the help of himself and hand? Who offered to make war on his own countrymen?
David, the man after G.o.d"s own heart, who obeyed G.o.d"s statutes and who walked in his ways, to do only that which was right in the sight of G.o.d.
The Philistines rejected the traitor"s aid, and prevented the consummation of this baseness. While David was making this unpatriotic proffer of his services to the Philistines, his own city of Ziglag was captured by the Amalekites, who were doubtless endeavoring to avenge some of the most unjustifiable robberies and murders perpetrated by David and his followers in their country. David"s own friends evidently thought that this misfortune was a retribution for David"s crimes, for they spoke of stoning him. The Amalekites had captured and carried off everything, but they do not seem to have maltreated or killed any of their enemies. David was less merciful. He pursued them, recaptured the spoil, and spared not a man of them, save 400 who escaped on camels. In consequence of the death of Saul, David was elevated to the throne of Judah, while Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, was made king of Israel. But Ishbosheth having been a.s.sa.s.sinated, David slew the a.s.sa.s.sins, when they, hoping for reward, brought him the news, and he reigned ultimately over Israel also.
As religious readers are doubtless aware, the Lord G.o.d of Israel, after the time of Moses, usually dwelt on the top of an ark or box, between two figures of gold; and on one occasion David made a journey with his followers to Baal, to bring thence the ark of G.o.d. They placed it on a new cart drawn by oxen. On the journey the oxen stumbled, and consequently shook the cart. One of the drivers, whose name was Uzzah, possibly fearing that G.o.d might be tumbled to the ground, took hold of the ark, apparently in order to steady it, and prevent it from overturning. G.o.d, who is a G.o.d of love, was much displeased that any one should presume to do any such act of kindness, and killed Uzzah on the spot as a punishment for his sin. This shows that if a man sees the Church of G.o.d tumbling down, he should never try to prop it up; if it be not strong enough to save itself, the sooner it falls the better for humankind-that is, if they keep away from it while it is falling. David was much displeased that the Lord had killed Uzzah; in fact, David seems to have wished for a monopoly of slaughter, and always manifested displeasure when any killing was done unauthorised by himself. Being displeased, David would not take the ark to Jerusalem, but left it in the house of Obed Edom; then, as the Lord proved more kind to Obed Edom than he had done to Uzzah, David determined to bring the ark away, and did so, dancing before the ark in a state of semi-nudity, for which he was reproached by Michal. Lord Campbell"s Act is intended to hinder the publication of indecencies, but the pages of the Book which the law affirms to be G.o.d"s most holy word do not come within the scope of the Act, and lovers of obscene language may therefore have legal gratification so long as the Bible shall exist. The G.o.d of Israel, who had been leading a wandering life for many years, and who had "walked in a tent and in a tabernacle," and "from tent to tent," and "from one tabernacle to another," and "who had not dwelt in any house" since the time that he brought the Israelites out of Egypt, was offered "an house for him to dwell in," but he declined to accept it during the lifetime of David, although he promised to permit the son of David to erect him such an abode. David being now a powerful monarch, and having many wives and concubines, saw one day the beautiful wife of one of his soldiers.
To see with this licentious monarch was to crave for the gratification of his l.u.s.t. The husband Uriah was fighting for the king, yet David was base enough to steal his wife"s virtue during Uriah"s absence in the field of battle. "Thou shalt not commit adultery" was one of the commandments, yet we are told by G.o.d of this David, that he was one "who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart to do only that which was right in mine eyes" (1 Kings, xiv, 8). David having seduced the wife, sent for her husband, wishing to make him condone his wife"s dishonor. In modern England under a Stuart or a Brunswick, Uriah might have become a Marquis or a Baron. Some hold that virtue in rags is less worth than vice when coro-neted. Uriah would not be thus tricked, and David, the pious David, coolly planned, and without mercy caused to be executed, the treacherous murder of Uriah. G.o.d is all-just; and David having committed adultery and murder, G.o.d punished and killed an innocent child, which had no part or share in David"s crime, and never chose that it should be born from the womb of Bathsheba. After this king David was even more cruel and merciless than before. Previously he had systematically slaughtered the inhabitants of Moab, now he sawed people with saws, cut them with harrows and axes, and made them pa.s.s through brick-kilns. Yet of this man, G.o.d said he "did that which was right in mine eyes." So bad a king, so treacherous a man, a lover so inconstant, a husband so adulterous, was of course a bad father, having bad children. We are little surprised, therefore, to read that his son Amnon robbed of her virtue his own sister, David"s daughter Tamar, and that Am-non was afterwards slain by his own brother, David"s son Absalom, and we are scarcely astonished that Absalom himself, on the house-top, in the sight of all Israel, should complete his father"s shame by an act worthy a child of G.o.d"s select people. Yet these are G.o.d"s chosen race, and this is the family of the man "who walked in G.o.d"s ways all the days of his life."
G.o.d, who is all-wise and all-just, and who is not a man that he should repent, repented that he had made Saul king because Saul spared one man.
In the reign of David the same good G.o.d sent a famine for three years on the descendants of Abraham, and upon being asked his reason for thus starving his chosen ones, the reply of the Deity was that he sent the famine on the subjects of David because Saul slew the Gibeonites.
Satisfactory reason!-because Oliver Cromwell slew the Royalists, G.o.d will punish the subjects of Charles the Second. One reason is, to profane eyes, equivalent to the other, but a bishop or even a rural dean would soon show how remarkably G.o.d"s justice was manifested. David was not behindhand in justice. He had sworn to Saul that he would not cut off his seed-i.e., that he would not destroy Saul"s family. He therefore took two of Saul"s sons, and five of Saul"s grandsons, and gave them up to the Gibeonites, who hung them. Strangely wonderful are the ways of the Lord! Saul slew the Gibeonites, therefore years afterwards G.o.d starves Judah. The Gibeonites hang men who have nothing to do with the crime of Saul, except that they are his descendants, and then we are told "the Lord was intreated for the land." The anger of the Lord being kindled against Israel, he, wanting some excuse for punishing the descendants of Jacob, moved David to number his people. The Chronicles say that the tempter was Satan, and pious people may thus learn what there is of distinction between G.o.d and Devil. Philosophers would urge that both personifications are founded in the ignorance of the ma.s.ses, and the continuance of the myth will cease with the credulousness of the people. David caused a census to be taken of the tribes of Israel and Judah. There is a trival disagreement of about 270,000 soldiers between Samuel and Chronicles, but readers must not allow so slight an inaccuracy as this to stand between them and heaven. What are 270,000 men when looked at prayerfully? That any doubt should arise is to a devout mind at the same time profane and preposterous. Statisticians suggest that 1,570,000 soldiers form a larger army than the Jews are likely to have possessed; but if G.o.d is omnipotent, there is no reason to limit his power of miraculously increasing or decreasing the armament of the Jewish nation. David, it seems, did wrong in numbering his people, but we are never told that he did wrong in robbing or murdering their neighbors, or in pillaging peaceful agriculturists. David said: "I have sinned," and for this an all-merciful G.o.d brought a pestilence on the people, and murdered 70,000 Israelites, for an offence which their ruler had committed. The angel who was engaged in this terrible slaughter stood somewhere between heaven and earth, and stretched forth his hand with a drawn sword to destroy Jerusalem itself; but even the bloodthirsty Deity of the Bible "repented him of the evil," and said to the angel: "It is enough." Many volumes might be written to answer the enquiries-where did the angel stand, and on what? Of what metal was the sword, and where was it made? As it was a drawn one, where was the scabbard? and did the angel wear a sword-belt? Examined in a pious frame of mind, much holy instruction may be derived from the attempt to solve these solemn problems.
David now grows old and weak, and at last his death-hour comes. Oh! for the dying words of the Psalmist! What pious instruction shall we derive from the death-bed scene of the man after G.o.d"s own heart! Listen to the last words of Judah"s expiring monarch. You who have been content with the pious frauds and forgeries perpetrated with reference to the death-beds and dying words of the great, the generous, the witty Voltaire; the manly, the self-denying, the incorruptible Thomas Paine; the humane, simple, child-like man, yet mighty poet, Sh.e.l.ley-you who have turned away from these with unwarranted horror-come with me to the death-couch of the special favorite of G.o.d. Bathsheba"s child stands by his side. Does any thought of the murdered Uriah rack old David"s brain, or has a tardy repentance effaced the b.l.o.o.d.y stain from the pages of his memory? What does the dying David say? Does he talk of cherubs, angels and heavenly choirs? Nay, none of these things pa.s.ses his lips. Does he make a confession of his crime-stained life, and beg his son to be a better king, a truer man, a more honest citizen, a wiser father? Nay, not so-no word of sorrow, no sign of regret, no expression of remorse or repentance escapes his lips. What does the dying David say? This foul monster whom G.o.d has made king; this redhanded robber, whose life has been guarded by "our Father which art in Heaven;" this perjured king, whose lying lips have found favor in the sight of G.o.d, and who, when he dies, is safe for Heaven. It is written: "There shall be more joy in heaven before G.o.d over one sinner that repenteth than over ninety and nine righteous men." Does David repent? Nay, like the ravenous wolf, which, tasting blood, is made more eager for the prey, he too yearns for blood; and with his dying breath begs his son to bring the grey hairs of two old men down to the grave with blood. And this is G.o.d"s anointed king, the chief one of G.o.d"s chosen people.
The learned and pious Puffendorf explains that David having only sworn not himself to kill Shimei (1 Kings, ii, 8) there was no perjury on the part of David in persuading Solomon to contrive the killing from which David had sworn to personally abstain.
David is alleged to have written several Psalms, but of this there is little evidence beyond pious a.s.sertion. In one of these the psalmist addresses G.o.d in pugilistic phraseology, praising Deity that he had smitten all his enemies on the cheek-bone, and broken the teeth of the unG.o.dly. In these days when "muscular Christianity" is not without advocates, the metaphor which presents G.o.d as a sort of magnificent Benicia Boy may find many admirers. In the eighteenth Psalm, David describes G.o.d as with "smoke coming out of his nostrils and fire out of his mouth," by which "coals were kindled." He represents G.o.d as coming down from heaven, and says: "he rode upon a cherub." The learned Parkhurst gives a likeness of a one-legged, four-winged, four-faced animal, part lion, part bull, part eagle, part man, and if a cloven foot be any criterion, part devil also. This description, if correct, will give some idea to the faithful of the wonderful character of the equestrian feats of Deity. In addition to a cherub, G.o.d has other means of conveyance at his disposal, if David be not in error when he says that the chariots of the Lord are 20,000.
In Psalm xxvi the writer adds hypocrisy in addition to his other vices.
He has the impudence to tell G.o.d that he has been a man of integrity and truth, and that he has avoided evil-doers, although, if we are to believe Psalm x.x.xviii, the hypocrite must have already been subject to a loathsome disease-a penalty consequent on his licentiousness and criminality. In another Psalm, David the liar tells G.o.d that "he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight." To understand David"s pious nature we must study his prayer to G.o.d against an enemy (Psalm cix, 6-14): "Set thou a wicked man over him; and let Satan stand at his right hand. When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. Let his days be few: and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor. Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out. Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the Lord; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out."
A full consideration of the life of David must give great help to the orthodox in promoting and sustaining faith. While spoken of by Deity as obeying all the statutes and keeping all the commandments, we are astonished to find that murder, theft, lying, adultery, licentiousness, and treachery are amongst the crimes which may be laid to his charge.
David was a liar, G.o.d is a G.o.d of truth; David was merciless, G.o.d is merciful, and of long suffering; David was a thief, G.o.d says: "Thou shalt not steal;" David was a murderer, G.o.d says: "Thou shalt do no murder; "David took the wife of Uriah, and "accepted" the wife of Nabal, G.o.d says: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor"s wife." Yet, notwithstanding all these things, David was the man after G.o.d"s own heart!
Had this Jewish monarch any redeeming traits in his character? Was he a good citizen? If so, the Bible has carefully concealed every action which would ent.i.tle him to such an appellation. Was he a kind and constant husband? To whom? To which of his many wives and mistresses?
Was he grateful to those who aided him in his hour of need? Rather, like the serpent which, half-frozen by the wayside, is warmed into new life in the traveller"s breast, and then treacherously stings his succorer with his poisoned fangs, so David robbed and murdered the friends and allies of the King of Gath, who afforded him protection against the pursuit of Saul. Does his patriotism outshine his many vices? Does his love of country efface his many misdoings? Not even this. David was a heartless traitor who volunteered to serve against his own countrymen, and would have done so had not the Philistines rejected his treacherous help. Was he a good king? So say the priesthood now; but where is the evidence of his virtue? His crimes brought plague and pestilence on his subjects, and his reign is a continued succession of wars, revolts, and a.s.sa.s.sinations, plottings and counterplots.
The life of David is a dark blot on the page of human history, fit in companionship for the biographies of Constantine the Great and Henry VIII; but it is through David that the genealogies of Jesus are traced, and without David there would be no Christian faith.
A NEW LIFE OF JONAH
JONAH was the son of Amittai of Gath-hepher, which place divines identify with Gittah-hepher of the Children of Zebulun. Dr. Inman says that Gath-hepher means "the village of the Cow"s tail," but he also says it means "the Heifer"s trough." Gesenius translates it "the wine-press of the well." Bible Dictionaries say that Gath-hepher is the same as el-Meshhad, and affirm that the tomb of Jonah was "long shown on a rocky hill near the town." The blood of Saint Januarius is shown in Naples to this day. Nothing is known of the s.e.x or life of Amittai, except that Jonah was his or her son, and that Gath-hepher was her or his place of residence; but to a true believer these two facts, even though standing utterly alone, will be pregnant with instruction. To the sceptic and railer, Amittai is as an unknown quant.i.ty in an algebraic problem. Jonah was not a very common proper name, [--Hebrew--] means a dove, and some derive it from the Arabic root-to be weak, gentle:-so that one meaning of Jonah, according to Gesenius, would be feeble, gentle bird. The Prophet Jonah was by no means a feeble, gentle bird; he was rather a bird of pray. Certainly it was his intention to become a bird of pa.s.sage. The date of the birth of Jonah is not given; the margin of my Bible dates the book of Jonah B.C. cir. 862, and my Bible Dictionary fixes the date of the matter to which the book relates at "about B.C.
830." If from any reason either of these dates should be disagreeable to the reader, he can choose any other date without fear of anachronism.