1 Samuel 24

because he was too old, and they didn’t want his sons to succeed him because they accepted bribes and perverted justice (8:3). But King Saul was guilty of disobeying God’s clear commandments and also of lying about what he had done, and because of these sins, he had forfeited his throne. He was still in office and yet was unfit to lead the nation, and Samuel had broken fellowship with him (15:34–35). In his grief, Samuel must have felt like a dismal failure as a father, a spiritual leader, and a mentor to the new king. The word translated “mourn” means “to mourn for the dead” and reveals the depths of Samuel’s sorrow.

There is a time to mourn (Eccl. 3:4), but there is also a time to act (Josh. 7:10), and for Samuel, that time had arrived. In spite of how he felt about himself, Samuel’s work wasn’t over yet, for God wanted him to anoint the new king, David, the son of Jesse. If Saul was “the people’s king,” then David was God’s king, and the events recorded in these two chapters indicate clearly that God’s hand was unquestionably on David, the leader of His choice.

In the second chapter of his book Up from Slavery, Booker T. Washington wrote, “I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome while trying to succeed.” Measured by this standard—and it’s a valid one— David was a very successful man. For ten years he was considered an outlaw, yet he fought the Lord’s battles and delivered Israel from her enemies. He lived with his faithful men in the forsaken places of the land and often had to flee for his life, yet he knew that the Lord would finally deliver him and give him the promised throne. David’s coronation was not only important to the people of Israel; it was important to all the people of God of every age. For out of David’s family the Redeemer would ultimately come, Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of David, the Son of God.

David had prayed in Psalm 54 that the Lord would vindicate him and give him opportunity to prove to Saul that he wasn’t an outlaw who was trying to kill him and seize the throne. After all, Saul was not only David’s king, but he was also his commander and his father-in-law, and regardless of Saul’s evil attitude, David never considered Saul to be his enemy. God answered David’s prayer when Saul and his troops came to find him at Engedi.

David’s temptation (vv. 1–4). David and his men were hiding in a large cave, of which there were many in that area, and Saul chose to use that very cave as a place where he could relieve himself. The law of Moses was very strict when it came to matters of sanitation, especially in the army camp (Deut. 23:12–14). Each soldier was required to leave the camp to relieve himself, and he had to carry a small shovel or trowel among his weapons so he could dig a hole and cover his excrement. This meant that Saul was away from the camp and therefore quite vulnerable. He naturally wanted privacy and he felt that he was not in danger. The fact that he walked right into David’s hiding place not only proved that his spies were incompetent but also that the Lord was still in control.

As David and his men pressed to the walls in the back of the cave, they quietly discussed the meaning of this remarkable occurrence. The men assured David that Saul’s presence in the cave was the fulfillment of a promise God gave him that He would deliver Saul into David’s hands. But when did God say this? Were they referring to Samuel’s words to Saul in 1 Samuel 15:26–29, or to God’s message to Samuel in 16:1? Perhaps the idea came from Jonathan’s words in 20:15, which some of the men might have heard personally. It’s likely that the leaders of the 600 men discussed these matters among themselves, for their future was wrapped up in David’s future, and obviously they came to some false conclusions. David never planned to kill Saul, for he was sure that the Lord would remove him from the scene in His own way and His own time (26:9–11).

To David’s men, it seemed providential that Saul was at their mercy (24:4; Ex. 21:13), and both David and Saul agreed with them (1 Sam. 24:10, 18). But that wasn’t the issue. The major question was, “How does the Lord want us to use this occasion?” David’s men saw it as an opportunity for revenge, while David saw it as an opportunity to show mercy and prove that his heart was right. God was giving him an opportunity to answer his own prayer for vindication (Ps. 54:1). David stealthily crept up to the garment that Saul had laid aside, cut off a corner of the robe, and went back into the cave. Saul left the cave not realizing what had happened.

David’s conviction (vv. 5–7). David was too wise in the truth of God’s word to interpret this event as a signal for him to kill Saul, for the law says, “You shall not murder” (Ex. 20: niv). Slaying an enemy on the battlefield or an attacker in self-defense was one thing, but to assassinate an unsuspecting king was quite something else. David reminded his men that Saul was the anointed of the Lord, and that no Jew had the right to attack him. The Jews were not even to curse their rulers, let alone kill them, for cursing a ruler was in the same category as blaspheming the name of the Lord (22:28).

However, David’s conscience bothered him because he had cut off the corner of Saul’s robe. His action sent out three messages. First, it was an insolent act of disrespect that humiliated Saul, but it was also a symbolic gesture not unlike what Saul did to Samuel’s robe after the Amalekite fiasco (1 Sam. 15:27–28). By cutting off a part of the royal robe, David was declaring that the kingdom had been transferred to him. Finally, the piece of cloth was proof that David did not intend to kill the king and that the flatterers in the court were all liars. David’s men would have killed Saul in a moment, but their wise captain restrained them. Leaders must know how to interpret events and respond in the right way.

David’s vindication (vv. 8–15). When Saul was far enough away from the cave that it was safe, David left the cave and called to him. By using the title “my lord the king” and bowing to the earth, David emphasized what he had said to his men and let Saul know that he was not a rebel. Even if you can’t respect the man or woman in office, you must show respect to the office (Rom. 13:1–7; 1 Peter 2:13–17). David showed his respect by calling Saul “my master” (1 Sam. 24:6), “the Lord’s anointed” (vv. 6, 10), “my lord” (vv. 8, 10), “the king” (vv. 8, 14) and “my father” (v. 14). David’s bold public appearance also let Saul and his army know that their official spy system was most ineffective.

Using the piece of Saul’s robe as evidence, David opened his defense by exposing the deception of the courtiers who slandered David to Saul. The logic was irrefutable: David had an opportunity to kill Saul and refused to do so. David even admitted that some of his men urged him to slay the king, but he rebuked them. David was not guilty of any evil against Saul or any transgression against the Lord, but Saul was guilty of trying to kill David. “The Lord will judge between us,” said David, “and prove that your officers are liars, but I will not lift my hand against you.” Saul had hoped that the hand of the Philistines (18:17) or the hands of David’s soldiers (19:20–21) would kill David, but they failed. Ultimately, Saul died by his own hand on the battlefield (31:1–6).

David quoted a familiar proverb to prove his point: “Wickedness proceeds from the wicked” (24: nkjv), which simply means that character is revealed by conduct. The fact that David did not slay the king indicated that David did not have the character of a rebel or a murderer. But at the same time, David was strongly suggesting that Saul’s character was questionable because he wanted to kill his son-in-law! But what was the king really doing as he pursued David? Only chasing a dead dog and a flea that was jumping from one place to another! (Fleas and dogs go together.) The phrase “dead dog” was a humiliating term of reproach in those days (17:43; 2 Sam. 3:8; 9:8; 16:9), so David was humbling himself before the Lord and the king. David closed his defense by asserting a second time (1 Sam. 24:12, 15) that the Lord was the righteous judge and would plead the cause of His faithful servant (Ps. 35:1; 43:1; see 1 Peter 2:23).

David’s affirmation (vv. 16–22). King Saul once again revealed his confused mental state by lifting up his voice and calling to David, who had certainly spoken long enough for Saul to discern that it was indeed his son-in-law. As for Saul’s weeping, he had manifested temporary emotional reactions like that before, but they never brought about repentance or a change of heart.

Saul described three possible levels of life: the divine level, where we return good for evil; the human level, where we return good for good and evil for evil; and the demonic level, where we return evil for good. Saul admitted that David was a godly man who, by not slaying him, returned good for evil. But Saul was possessed by demonic forces and did evil to the one man who could have destroyed him. Now Saul openly confessed that he knew David would be the next king (23:17) and would consolidate the nation of Israel that Saul had torn apart. Even then, Saul’s major concern was his own name and descendants, not the spiritual welfare of the people; he made David swear that he wouldn’t wipe out his family when he became king. David had made a similar covenant with Jonathan (20:14–17, 42) and he was willing to make the same promise to Saul. How tragic that Saul’s own sins destroyed his family, all but Jonathan’s crippled son, Mephibosheth, whom David adopted (2 Sam. 9).

Because David knew God’s calling and believed God’s promise, he was able to be so bold before Saul and his army. It was indeed a holy boldness that came from a heart that was right with God. The day would come when David and his cause would be vindicated and the Lord would judge those who had opposed him. Saul went back home to Gibeah, but in spite of his tears and emotional speech, he took up his pursuit of David again (1 Sam. 26:2, 21).

David had won many battles, but one of his greatest victories occurred in that cave when he restrained himself and his men from killing Saul. “He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit than he who takes a city” (Prov. 16: nkjv). This is a good example for all of us to follow, but especially those to whom the Lord has entrusted leadership.