DAVID. 
that are contained in it. Notwithttanding Saul’s promife to 
David at Ziph that he would d o more harm, yet know- 
pee of Gath, who gave him, his 
family and companions, a very friendly reception, and af- 
fi~ned to him the town of Ziklag, as a permanent property 
for himfelf and followers, Heré David was joined by feveral 
: mpanied him in his invation 
of the Sie apa Gezrites, and Amalekites. David’s con- 
ut on this occafion has been feverely cenfured, and alfo 
cailrenret ate by Bayle. In mitigation of the fev 
exercifed by David, it has been faid, that the Amalekites 
wer 
9 Achifh, and upon being afked 
where he made his incurfion? David an{wers, “ Againft the 
fouth of Judah, &c.” which reply Mr. Bayle charges with 
falfhood, calling it, not vewy liberally, ‘a lie.” But the an- 
{wer was literally true, but ambiguous; for all thofe people 
dwelt on the fouth of Judah, &c. David was now ina critical 
fituation; oe the — and beft cafuifts have allowed, that 
ambizuous antw always a but fometimes 
juidable, epecialy in fuch a fituatio rotius de 
j. Beet P. Li . §. £0, and Gronovius’ s note on the 
pag, pret I. “Hote 74) ease this fentiment were So- 
rate Cicero, the Sroics. = 
Quin lian A me beens. - Grotius, (lib, v. c. 
§. 9s page 3 and 
David, having becn 3 afterwards preffed into the Philiftine 
camp and fervice by Achifh, was reduced to the greateit 
ftraits, and fcarcely knew how to condu& himfelf, con- 
fittently with the confidence which that prince placed in 
h: rm, the duty which = wed to hee country, and his own 
os of the crown and king- 
ne Providence cay extricated him from 
. sembarrailment (1 Sam. xxix. 1, &c.); for as the troops 
f the Philiftines were 
t David and his 
the eisai fo that Ac hith w 
induced to difmifs David and his followers. i 
to Ziklag, he attacked the Amalekites, and recovered all 
that they had taken away, their wives and families, and en- 
tire fubftance ; and at Ziklag, he diftributed his fhare of 
the {poil partly to thofe of the elders of Judah, who were his 
arene and partly among the inhabitants of thofe towns, 
ich had given refuge to himfelf an 
s act mani- 
felted his prudence, gratitude, and ju 
avid now refided among the Philitines, in whofe c 
s had commi 
un- 
great depredation 85 
in war wit. 
the Hebre d incapable of defending thei ron- 
tiers. He w eir gt obliged to a& in their favour, a 
behaved like a foldier of honour, in avenging the injuries 
that had been donee : and we obferve upon the 
sr that David’s ececution of vengeance on the Amalek- 
es for their treacherous invafion and unprovoked a&ts of 
pleas whillt neither the Philiflines nor the Hebrews 
could defend their territories, was a deferved and neceflary 
feverity. There are other circumftances and confiderations, 
tial a 
reader,/ 
Ag 
In this expedition he cvinced h 
courage, and his zeal in promoting the welfare of his coun- 
"Ys though he was ina ttate of aCtual banifhment from it, 
d forced to feek for fhelter in the dominions of an enemy. 
aw was further enabled to fecure, and ingratiate himfelf with 
his former friends, the elders of Judah, by the prefent which 
he refpectfully fent them; and thefe were fortunate circum- 
jult before the death of Saul, 
e fons, were Gas in battle againft the 
€ mountein ilboa 
he third day after David? ¢ return to Ziklag (28 
the flanghter of the Amalekites, he was S informed 
thus to ingratiate himfelf aa Davids but he kne 
difpofition, and that a crown would b vnweleome 7 him 
at the ‘a of treafon, and that a throne would n 
him, it it were to be purchafed by parricide. Could he, 
who himtele thrice fpared Saul’s life, when he found it ab- 
folutely in his oe endure the ies that boafted of ye 
murthered him? 
a 
eae ing a their whole tri was natural for 
his tribe to fee € opportunity of Saul’s death, and to 
cknowledge him, whom God ha 
d pointed out to them for 
their king; efpecially as he was of their own trib a 
gained the general efteem by his perfonal virtues, and mili- 
tary abilities. This tribe might further have been induced 
to raife David to the throne over them, becaufe they hoped 
that the ancient prophecy of Jacob (Gen. xlix. 10.) was 
now about to be accomplifhed. This tribe was allo the 
molt oie and ref{pe@able of all the twelve; and as they 
had a t to chufe ie own prince, they might reafon- 
ably hee epee at the other tribes would have fol- 
fubmitted to t pointment of God, as they themfelves 
done ’ 30 years old (B.C. 1055); and 
having, on many occafions, hewn his courage, fortitude, 
moderation, and patience, and having maintained an in- 
vincible purpofe not to haften his acceflion to the throne by 
any acts of treafon and violence, God now began to reward 
his fingular virtue; and, from a fugitive and exile, ‘he was 
made king over all the tribes, by their unfolicited and volun- 
tary confent; as an earneft of what God had in farther re- 
ferve for him ;—the kingdom over all his people. 
a younger fon of Saul, wa 
eth king 
over Ifrael by military force; without the cnaice or confent 
of the eleven tribes, and in dire& oppofition to the choice 
and confent of the tribe of Judah, and the inclination of the 
whole body of the people. Ithbofheth was, therefore, in 
every refpect, an ufurper, in prejudice of the right heir; 
nnd 
