Israel’s Enemy
The first thing the text points out is that the battle lines
have been drawn between Israel and the Philistines. “The Philistines
gathered their armies for battle. And they were gathered at Socoh, which
belongs to Judah, and encamped between Socoh and Asekah, in Ephes-dammin. And
Saul and the men of Israel were gathered, and encamped in the Valley of Elah,
and drew up in line of battle against the Philistines. And the Philistines
stood on the mountain on the one side, and Israel stood on the mountain on the
other side, with a valley between them” (1 Sam 17:1-3). The
Philistines were a perpetual threat to the people of Israel, well-entrenched in
the area, and positioned to seize a main road away from Israel’s possession.
Check out these notes on the Philistines and their strategic position:
17:1 Philistines
“The group of Philistines that are known through the narratives
of 1 and 2 Samuel came into the Palestine area with the migration from the
Aegean region of the Sea Peoples about 1200 B.C. It is the Sea Peoples that are
generally thought to have been responsible for the fall of the Hittite Empire
and the destruction of many cities along the coast of Syria and Palestine, such
as Ugarit, Tyre, Sidon, Megiddo and Ashkelon, though the evidence for their
involvement in those areas is circumstantial. Their battles with the Egyptian
pharaoh Rameses III are depicted on the famous wall paintings at Medinet Habu. This
international upheaval is also reflected in the Homeric epic of the siege of
Troy. Coming from Crete, Greece and Anatolia, the Sea Peoples may have used
Cyprus as a base from which to launch their attacks. Following the repulsion of
the Sea Peoples from Egypt, the tribe that came to be known as the Philistines
settled on the southern coast of Palestine, where they established their five
capital cities of Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron (Tell Miqne), Gath (Tell es-Safi) and
Gaza. They had overrun Israelite territory in the battle in which the ark was
taken (1 Sam 4) and again will do so in the battle in which Saul and his sons
are killed (chap. 31). During the reign of Saul there is continual conflict as
Saul tries to rid the land of their presence and prevent further incursions.”
17:1 Location of Philistine Camp
“Socoh (modern Khirbet Abbad) was a town in the Shephelah
Valley about fourteen miles west of Bethlehem near Philistine territory. The
site has been surveyed and has produced ceramic remains dated to this time
period. Azekah (modern Tell ez-Zakariyeh) was a fortress three miles
northwest of Socoh, which controlled the main road across the Elah Valley. The
site was excavated earlier this century, uncovering a rectangular fortress with
four towers that was dated to this period. This area was of strategic
importance to both sides as the main pass between the Philistine plain and the
Judean hills. The main road through the Shephelah region heads north from
Lachish to Azekah, but about a mile south of Azekah a road goes east following
the Wadi es-Sant that opens into the Elah Valley. Ephes-Dammim has not been
positively identified but would logically be looked for in this area.”
At this point, with the two armies encamped opposite one
another, the Philistine warrior-champion Goliath approaches the Israelite army
and issues a challenge. “And there came out from the camp of the Philistines a
champion named Goliath of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. He had
a helmet of bronze on his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail, and the
weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of bronze. And he had a bronze
armor on his legs, and a javelin of bronze slung between his shoulders. The
shaft of his spear was like a weaver’s beam, and his spear’s head weighed six
hundred shekels of iron. And his shield-bearer went before him. He stood and
shouted to the ranks of Israel, ‘Why have you come out to draw up for battle?
Am I not a Philistine, and are you not servants of Saul? Choose a man for
yourselves, and let him come down to me. If he is able to fight with me and
kill me, then we will be your servants. But if I prevail against him and kill
him, then you shall be our servants and serve us’” (1 Sam 17:4-9). Notice the
details about Goliath’s size:
17:4 Goliath’s Size
Goliath’s height is given in the text as about nine and a half
feet. It is suspected that he is of the same stock as the Anakim, the giant
inhabitants of the land that the Israelite armies were able to defeat in the
conquest. The descendants of Anak are generally considered “giants,” though
the description “gigantic” may be a more appropriate line of
thinking. Champions of this size are not simply a figment of Israelite
imagination or the result of embellished legends. The Egyptian letter on
Papyrus Anastasi I (thirteenth century B.C.) describes fierce warriors
in Canaan who are seven to nine feet tall. Additionally, two female skeletons
about seven feet tall from the twelfth century have been found at Tell
es-Sa’ideyeh in Transjordan.
And his armor:
17:5–7 Goliath’s Armor
“Goliath’s helmet was likely the typical Philistine feathered
headdress known from Palestinian and Egyptian art. His body armor (“plaited
cuirass”) was probably of a well-known Egyptian style of bronze scale armor
that covered the entire body, weighing over 125 pounds. One of the best
descriptions of scale armor comes from the Nuzi texts, where a mail coat was
comprised of anywhere from seven hundred to over one thousand scales of varying
sizes. These scales were sewn onto a jerkin of leather or cloth. The front and
back were sewn together at the shoulders (with a space for the head) and
probably reached to the knees. His greaves were probably made of molded bronze
around the entire calf, padded inside with leather, a type known from Mycenaean
Greece. His scimitar (NIV: bronze javelin) was probably a heavy, curved,
flat sword with a cutting edge on the outer side of the blade. His spear was
something like a javelin, with an iron spear point that weighed over fifteen
pounds. It may have been equipped with a ring for slinging, a type known both
in contemporary Greece and Egypt. Although most of the weapons were made of
bronze, the spear point was made of iron. Goliath’s shield was most likely a
standing shield, which would have been larger that a round shield.”
And his challenge:
17:8–10 Champion Warfare
“At times individual combat was used, with the individuals
viewed as representatives of their respective armies, so that the divine will
could be expressed. Examples of individual combat are known in Egypt on the
Beni Hasan wall painting (early second millennium) and in the Egyptian
Tale of Sinuhe. It is likewise depicted on a Canaanite vase from the first half
of the second millennium. Nearer in time, parallels can be found in the Iliad (Hector
against Ajax, Paris against Menelaus) and the Hittite Apology of Hattusilis
III. A relief from the tenth century found at Tell Halaf depicts two combatants
grabbing at one another’s heads and thrusting with short swords.”
Clearly, this gigantic enemy couldn’t get any bigger, nor better
equipped for battle, nor could the stakes be higher for Israel. Win and the
Philistines will be their slaves. Lose, which seems likely against such a foe,
and they will be enslaved. It is no wonder that “when Saul and all Israel
heard these words of the Philistine, they were dismayed and greatly afraid” (1
Sam 17:11). This is something the reader should be keen on as well. Who should
represent Israel and meet the challenge of this Philistine face-to-face? Well,
Israel’s king seems like the obvious choice! Saul is head and shoulders above
the rest of Israel (1 Sam 9:2) and an accomplished warrior in his own right (1
Sam 11:11; 14:47-48). That’s what we should be thinking but the text wants us
to see something else. Saul’s failures have come to define him, and this is
clearly evident in this critical moment.
17:11 Role of King
“The text undoubtedly wants to display Saul’s incompetence. The
people had sought a king to lead their armies into battle. It was not odd,
however, for a king to send out a champion rather than going himself. Even in
the event that the king was a great warrior, others would be given the
opportunity to prove their skills first. In some senses it would resemble all
of the preliminary bouts that precede the “main event” in
boxing. As early as the Sumerian epic Gilgamesh and Aka, the practice is seen
of the real champion holding back while he sends a capable fighter under his
command to engage the enemy. This is also evident in the Iliad, where Patroclus
dons the armor of Achilles in order to go out and challenge Hector.
Nevertheless, given the amount of time that had gone by, Saul should by now
have been willing to take up the challenge himself.”
Israel’s Champion
The narrative changes scenes from the battlefield to the country
farm. The reader is (re)introduced to David (see 1 Sam 16:1-13), who, at this
point, is nothing but an errand boy for his father. David is sent by his father
to deliver some food for his brothers and their commanders on the frontlines. “Jesse
said to David his son, ‘Take for your brothers an ephah of this parched grain,
and these ten loaves, and carry them quickly to the camp to your brothers. Also
take these ten cheeses to the commander of their thousand. See if your brothers
are well, and bring some token from them’” (1 Sam 17:17-18).
17:17–18 Food Supplies
“David came to the camp with about half a bushel of roasted
grain (either wheat or barley), loaves of bread and cuts of cheese, all
of which were favorites for common people. The grain would typically be
fashioned into loaves for consumption, and some would likely be made into beer.
In Egyptian texts ten loaves of bread, a half a pound of barley and a jug of
beer represented a standard daily wage. The Assyrian annals describe soldiers traveling
with grain and straw for their horses. Local governors in Assyria were required
to open granaries for armies that were traveling through the region. Since the
army is in the vicinity of the Judean hills, it is likely that the people from
the area were expected to provide supplies.”
17:18 What David is Getting from Them
“David was told to ask how his brothers were doing and to 'pick
up their assurance.’ This was likely some sort of token returned with
David to confirm that the goods had been provided. This would be proof that
Jesse had met his obligations to supply the army and would be the brothers’ way
of collecting their rations. An Akkadian (a language from Mesopotamia
related to Hebrew) pledge was often a cased clay tablet sent with a
messenger.”
While David is delivering these goods to his brothers his
curiosity gets the best of him. He sees some of the soldiers heading out to the
battle line and, perhaps wanting to see a little action himself, heads out to
greet his brothers. Precisely at this moment Goliath comes forward and issues
his challenge, something he has been doing twice a day going on forty days (1
Sam 17:16). David hears Goliath and hears the men of Israel speaking of Saul’s
promise to reward the soldier who kills Goliath. He seeks clarification. “David
said to the men who stood by him, ‘What shall be done for the man who kills
this Philistine and takes away the reproach of Israel? For who is this
uncircumcised Philistine, that he should defy the armies of the living God” (1
Sam 17:26)? The reward is handsome and the notes from the IVP Bible
Background Commentarydescribe it like this:
17:25 Reward for Killing Goliath
Ancient kings were often interested in procuring the allegiance
of those who had demonstrated military prowess. Marriage agreements in the
ancient Near East would often function as political or social alliances between
families and thus benefit both parties. Thus the champion’s family would
receive important recognition from being connected to the crown, while the king
would be allied to the renowned hero who had killed Goliath. The Hebrew says
nothing about taxes, only that his father’s house will be free in Israel. Some
have compared the Hebrew word to its Akkadian cognate, which sometimes
designates a social class. This then would probably describe a family that had
become clients of the crown, supported by allocations of plots of land and
supplies, which is implied in 1 Samuel 22:7. This type of client class is well
known from Mari texts, the Code of Hammurabi and the Laws of Eshnunna. In these
texts, individuals received land grants from the crown, likely based upon
service rendered to the king. Perhaps more likely is the comparison to another
term in Ugaritic texts that refers to a reward for an act of bravery. It exempts
the recipient from mandatory service to palace.
Saul hears of David’s verbal response to Goliath’s challenge and
summons him to speak with him. After attempting to discourage David from
fighting Goliath, David recounts his previous successes in defending his sheep
from lions and bears. David is confident. “‘Your servant has struck
down both lions and bears, and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be like one
of them, for he has defied the armies of the living God.’ And David said, ‘The
Lord who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear
will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine’” (1 Sam 17:36-37).
Saul encourages him on his way and even offers his own armor for David’s use.
However, in a slightly humorous part of the passage, David determines that the
armor would only hamper his ability to fight. Here’s some notes on Saul’s
armor:
17:38–39 Saul’s Armor
“The use of protective armor (shields, helmets, coats and
greaves) is attested in Egypt and Mesopotamia by the early third millennium
B.C. Though rarely found in archaeological contexts, even early portrayal of
soldiers depict them wearing heavy armor (for example on reliefs from the
Sumerian city of Lagash and from murals from Hierakonopolis in Pre-Dynastic
Egypt). The palace of the Assyrian king Sennacherib (seventh century
B.C.) exhibits numerous wall reliefs portraying Assyrian military dress and
tactics. The king’s tunic and armor would have been very distinctive. If David
went out dressed in them, many would have thought that the king himself was
going out. Perhaps such a misidentification would have seemed attractive to
Saul, who had been sought out by the Israelites to lead them forth in battle.
In the Iliad a similar switch occurred when Patroclus went out in the armor of Achilles,
hoping to intimidate the Trojans. David’s refusal would have reflected his
recognition that without being trained on how to use the armor and weapons to
his advantage, they would become a detriment.”
Instead, David sticks with the tried-and-true. He keeps his
staff and grabs five stones for his sling from a nearby brook. In case our
initial impression is that the sling is just a “child’s toy,” here
is a description of the sling and its potential in ancient times.
17:40 Sling
“Although described simply as a shepherd’s weapon here, the
sling was also used in organized warfare, and Goliath would have been well
aware of its deadly potential. Assyrian slingers are depicted on the walls of
Sennacherib’s palace at Nineveh. In the Babylonian Wisdom composition entitled
Ludlul Bel Nemeqi the sufferer reports his deliverance by a variety of
metaphors, one of which claims that Marduk took away his enemy’s sling and
turned aside his sling stone. Assyrian sling balls were found at Lachish, an
Iron Age Judean fortress town. These were the size of a human fist (two to
three inches in diameter) and had been used for the successful Assyrian
siege of Lachish in 701 B.C. (possibly also by the Babylonians in their
siege of Lachish in 587 B.C.). The Benjaminites were known to be deadly
accurate with their slings (Judg 20:16), and it is estimated that a skilled
slinger could hurl the rocks at more than one hundred miles per hour. The
effective range would probably not exceed one hundred yards. The stone was held
in a leather pouch with cords attached at opposite ends. The sling was whirled
over the head until the person let go of one of the ends.”
Though David had experience in fighting off bears and lions and
was skilled in using his weapons, his trust was ultimately in the Lord. Unlike
Saul, who took matters into his own hands when he shouldn’t have and didn’t
when he should have, David was both skilled in his abilities and humble in his
faith. This attitude plays a part in his showdown with Goliath as well. After
enduring Goliath’s anticipated insults, David counters: “You come to me with a
sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the
Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. This day
the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down and cut off
your head. And I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this
day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth, that all the
earth my know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may
know that the Lord saves not with sword and spear. For the battle is the
Lord’s, and he will give you into our hand” (1 Sam 17:45-47). The Lord
is the basis of David’s boast.
17:45–47 Foundation of David’s Boast
“David’s claim would have been acknowledged within the broad
theological framework of the ancient world. There are two concepts in tension
here. The first is that the stronger, better-equipped warrior is a more
effective agent for the gods who are battling. This would be the basis for
Goliath’s presumed superiority. David is simply following the logic to its
inevitable end to arrive at the second concept. If the gods are, in actuality,
doing battle with one another through the human agents, then the strength and
weapons of the human combatants are irrelevant. Thus Yahweh is described as
Yahweh of Hosts, paraphrased with a military description, “the God of
the battle ranks of Israel” (author’s translation), and David’s boast
is based on Yahweh’s abilities, not his own. This claim would perhaps be
psychologically sufficient to undermine Goliath’s confidence. Similarly in the
Iliad Hector acknowledges the superiority of Achilles but suggests that the
gods may be on his side and allow him to kill Achilles. In another example, when
Hector and Telamonian Aias have fought to a draw, Hector suggests they desist
until another day, when the gods will have decided which should win.”
After all the hype, the battle is over in an instant. This one
doesn’t even get out of the first round. Goliath approaches David probably
annoyed and overly confident, while David “ran quickly toward the
battle line to meet the Philistine. And David put his hand in his bag and took
out a stone and slung it and struck the Philistine on his forehead. The stone sank
into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the ground” (1 Sam
17:48-49). Here’s what the IVP Bible Background Commentaryhas to
say about “the shot.”
17:49 David’s Shot
“The text offers no information concerning the range between
David and Goliath when David took his shot. A stone from a slingshot is capable
of delivering a killing blow but only when striking a few strategic areas of
the head (which was protected). David’s shot targeted one of the few
vulnerable areas that could render his opponent unconscious. This allowed him
to approach and secure Goliath’s sword, which he then used to kill his
unconscious victim (despite the NIV’s implication that the shot killed
Goliath).”
After this, there remained only one thing left for David to do
and that was to remove Goliath’s massive head from his equally massive
body. “David ran and stood over the Philistine and took his sword and
drew it out of its sheath and killed him and cut off his head with it. When the
Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled.” (1 Sam
17:51). It is interesting that David had to remove the sword from its sheath,
as if Goliath thought he wouldn’t need it. Maybe he thought the sword would be
overkill in a fight against a swordless boy. But it is ironic that Goliath was
killed in this way with his own sword.
17:51 Cutting Off the Enemy’s Head
“Killing the enemy with his own weapon was not an unprecedented
feat. Similarly, Benaiah took the Egyptian’s spear out of his hand and killed
him (2 Sam 23:21). In Egyptian literature, Sinuhe killed a soldier from Retenu
with his own battle-axe. It can be assumed that Goliath’s head was a trophy
that was to be put on display. Assyrian king Ashurbanibal was reported to have
dined with his queen in the garden with the head of the king of Elam on display
in a nearby tree.”
However gruesome this battle scene may appear to our modern
sensibilities, we can rejoice in the Lord who works through unexpected people
and in very unexpected ways to deliver his people. More than that, we can
rejoice in the Lord who established the house of David, from whose offspring
comes a greater David, who engages in an even greater battle against a greater
foe than Goliath and triumphs in a very unexpected way. May we rejoice in the
victory that the Lord has given us in his Son, Jesus Christ, the greater Son of
David.
Credit: IVP Bible Background Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment