Pastor Brandon, there is a query on Day 68's SOAP :) So I have posted it here too for people to see...Thanks for helping us with this!
1 Chronicles 7-11
Scripture: 11 19 “God forbid that I should do this!” he said. “Should I drink the blood of these men who went at the risk of their lives?” Because they risked their lives to bring it back, David would not drink it.
Such were the exploits of the three mighty warriors.
ok so I don’t know if this is really a verse meant for me or if it is just because I don’t really understand what happened here that it keeps popping up for me. Even when we read about it in earlier chapters this struck me as funny…so David said he was thirsty and someone should get him some water..they went got him water but when they brought it back to him the above were his words to them…now I’m thinking hang on you asked someone to bring it and now they did and now you refuse to drink it! what’s that all about? ok so it was dangerous but they have already done it so surely you could drink the water but tell them to never do this again…because they kind of put their lives on the line for nothing now…or is it because it was soooo dangerous and he thought if he drunk the water they would do it again and he didn’t want that? Or did I miss the whole reason and got it totally wrong?hahah Please help me with this pastor Brandon?!?!
Next reading: 1 Chronicles 12-18
Read the blog here: 180 days Posted by ilani at 19:01 Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook 2 comments:
RyanMar 16, 2012 09:56 PM
I felt the same way Ilani - if I risked my life to go get something and they rejected it, I would probably be mad, but his men didn't seem to mind (well we actually don't see their reactions). I assume it's more the second thing you said - that David didn't want to condone crazy actions just because he was king and didn't want to encourage more people to risk their lives just for water for him. But I too was a little confused with this passage! ReplyDelete LoriMar 18, 2012 07:12 PM
Yes, please help us with the Pastor Brandon!! I have read and re-read this because I thought I was missing something. ReplyDelete
I think much of what is going on here is an Eastern culture thing. As you may have noticed, there is a lot more symbolic interaction in Eastern culture and honor is seen very differently than our western-practical thinking. So where we would be like, "David, I just risked my life for that and you just spilled it out on the ground?! Is my life trivial to you?!", these guys would be like, "What an honorable leader who will not set his own desires above our lives." So David having realized the absurdity of his original request seeks to make the situation right by pouring the precious water which now represents their blood out before the Lord as a drink offering. This would have likely increased his warriors' loyalty to him all the more.
Because he realized the risk they undertook meant the water represented their blood, perhaps he felt drinking it would violate God's many commands to not eat blood; Leviticus 17:10 "'Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood--I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people."
The general context also is speaking to the loyalty, bravery, and unstopableness of the men God had surrounded David with, and this story speaks powerfully of all those characteristics.
Mathew Henry writes: "Among all the great exploits of David's mighty men, here is nothing great mentioned concerning David himself but his pouring out water before the Lord which he had longed for, v. 18, 19. Four very honourable dispositions of David appeared in that action, which, for aught I know, made it as great as any of the achievements of those worthies. 1. Repentance for his own weakness. It is really an honour to a man, when he is made sensible that he has said or done any thing unadvisedly, to unsay it and undo it again by repentance, as it is a shame to a man when he has said or done amiss to stand to it. 2. Denial of his own appetite. He longed for the water of the well of Bethlehem; but, when he had it, he would not drink it, because he would not so far humour himself and gratify a foolish fancy. He that has such a rule as this over his own spirit is better than the mighty. It is an honour to a man to have the command of himself; but he that will command himself must sometimes cross himself. 3. Devotion towards God. That water which he thought too good, too precious, for his own drinking, he poured out to the Lord for a drink offering. If we have any thing better than another, let God be honoured with it, who is the best, and should have the best. 4. Tenderness of his servants. It put him into the greatest confusion imaginable to think that three brave men should hazard their lives to fetch water for him. In his account it turns the water into blood. It is the honour of great men not to be prodigal of the blood of those they employ, but, in all the commands they give them, to put their own souls into their souls' stead."
Maybe this was something I should have noticed earlier and missed (which could be why they have Chronicles - in case we missed something before), but was Molech the king of Rabbath? Or was he a "god"? Or was he the king and people just worshiped him? I think it's the latter, but I wanted to make sure. Oh and I got that from 1Chron.20:2 Thanks!
Molech was the god of Ammonites. The question of translation is this verse supposed to be taken as the crown from the idol or the crown from the king (who's name was Hanun). The word for king and the name of the idol are similar (vowels were not written) so it is unclear. Here are two views:
From Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary: "Some think that Malcom, rendered in our version "their king," should be taken as a proper name, Milcom or Molech, the Ammonite idol, which, of course, might bear a heavy weight. But, like many other state crowns of Eastern kings, the crown got at Rabbah was not worn on the head, but suspended by chains of gold above the throne."
From Barnes' Notes on the Bible: Their king's crown - The word rendered their king (Malcham) is also the name of the national idol of the Ammonites (Jeremiah 49:1, Jeremiah 49:3 margin; Amos 1:15; Zephaniah 1:5). Moreover, the weight of the crown, which is calculated to be equal to 100 or 125 pounds weight, is far too great for a man to wear. On the whole, it seems most probable that the idol Malcam is here meant.
Pastor Brandon, there is a query on Day 68's SOAP :) So I have posted it here too for people to see...Thanks for helping us with this!
ReplyDelete1 Chronicles 7-11
Scripture: 11 19 “God forbid that I should do this!” he said. “Should I drink the blood of these men who went at the risk of their lives?” Because they risked their lives to bring it back, David would not drink it.
Such were the exploits of the three mighty warriors.
ok so I don’t know if this is really a verse meant for me or if it is just because I don’t really understand what happened here that it keeps popping up for me. Even when we read about it in earlier chapters this struck me as funny…so David said he was thirsty and someone should get him some water..they went got him water but when they brought it back to him the above were his words to them…now I’m thinking hang on you asked someone to bring it and now they did and now you refuse to drink it! what’s that all about? ok so it was dangerous but they have already done it so surely you could drink the water but tell them to never do this again…because they kind of put their lives on the line for nothing now…or is it because it was soooo dangerous and he thought if he drunk the water they would do it again and he didn’t want that? Or did I miss the whole reason and got it totally wrong?hahah Please help me with this pastor Brandon?!?!
Next reading: 1 Chronicles 12-18
Read the blog here: 180 days
Posted by ilani at 19:01
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook
2 comments:
RyanMar 16, 2012 09:56 PM
I felt the same way Ilani - if I risked my life to go get something and they rejected it, I would probably be mad, but his men didn't seem to mind (well we actually don't see their reactions). I assume it's more the second thing you said - that David didn't want to condone crazy actions just because he was king and didn't want to encourage more people to risk their lives just for water for him. But I too was a little confused with this passage!
ReplyDelete
LoriMar 18, 2012 07:12 PM
Yes, please help us with the Pastor Brandon!! I have read and re-read this because I thought I was missing something.
ReplyDelete
I think much of what is going on here is an Eastern culture thing. As you may have noticed, there is a lot more symbolic interaction in Eastern culture and honor is seen very differently than our western-practical thinking. So where we would be like, "David, I just risked my life for that and you just spilled it out on the ground?! Is my life trivial to you?!", these guys would be like, "What an honorable leader who will not set his own desires above our lives." So David having realized the absurdity of his original request seeks to make the situation right by pouring the precious water which now represents their blood out before the Lord as a drink offering. This would have likely increased his warriors' loyalty to him all the more.
DeleteBecause he realized the risk they undertook meant the water represented their blood, perhaps he felt drinking it would violate God's many commands to not eat blood; Leviticus 17:10 "'Any Israelite or any alien living among them who eats any blood--I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people."
The general context also is speaking to the loyalty, bravery, and unstopableness of the men God had surrounded David with, and this story speaks powerfully of all those characteristics.
Mathew Henry writes:
"Among all the great exploits of David's mighty men, here is nothing great mentioned concerning David himself but his pouring out water before the Lord which he had longed for, v. 18, 19. Four very honourable dispositions of David appeared in that action, which, for aught I know, made it as great as any of the achievements of those worthies. 1. Repentance for his own weakness. It is really an honour to a man, when he is made sensible that he has said or done any thing unadvisedly, to unsay it and undo it again by repentance, as it is a shame to a man when he has said or done amiss to stand to it. 2. Denial of his own appetite. He longed for the water of the well of Bethlehem; but, when he had it, he would not drink it, because he would not so far humour himself and gratify a foolish fancy. He that has such a rule as this over his own spirit is better than the mighty. It is an honour to a man to have the command of himself; but he that will command himself must sometimes cross himself. 3. Devotion towards God. That water which he thought too good, too precious, for his own drinking, he poured out to the Lord for a drink offering. If we have any thing better than another, let God be honoured with it, who is the best, and should have the best. 4. Tenderness of his servants. It put him into the greatest confusion imaginable to think that three brave men should hazard their lives to fetch water for him. In his account it turns the water into blood. It is the honour of great men not to be prodigal of the blood of those they employ, but, in all the commands they give them, to put their own souls into their souls' stead."
Maybe this was something I should have noticed earlier and missed (which could be why they have Chronicles - in case we missed something before), but was Molech the king of Rabbath? Or was he a "god"? Or was he the king and people just worshiped him? I think it's the latter, but I wanted to make sure. Oh and I got that from 1Chron.20:2
ReplyDeleteThanks!
Molech was the god of Ammonites. The question of translation is this verse supposed to be taken as the crown from the idol or the crown from the king (who's name was Hanun). The word for king and the name of the idol are similar (vowels were not written) so it is unclear. Here are two views:
DeleteFrom Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:
"Some think that Malcom, rendered in our version "their king," should be taken as a proper name, Milcom or Molech, the Ammonite idol, which, of course, might bear a heavy weight. But, like many other state crowns of Eastern kings, the crown got at Rabbah was not worn on the head, but suspended by chains of gold above the throne."
From Barnes' Notes on the Bible:
Their king's crown - The word rendered their king (Malcham) is also the name of the national idol of the Ammonites (Jeremiah 49:1, Jeremiah 49:3 margin; Amos 1:15; Zephaniah 1:5). Moreover, the weight of the crown, which is calculated to be equal to 100 or 125 pounds weight, is far too great for a man to wear. On the whole, it seems most probable that the idol Malcam is here meant.