2 Samuel 21:10

THE QUICKENING OF DAVID’S CONSCIENCE BY RIZPAH’S EXAMPLE

‘And Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it for her upon the rock, … and suffered neither the birds of the air to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field by night.’

2 Samuel 21:10

I. Consider first the Divine dealings with the house of Saul and the people of Israel.—The famine was because Saul and his bloody house had slain the Gibeonites. It was a consequence of that act of his. But the famine was not the punishment of Saul, the most guilty of the offenders. Saul was punished even in this world. In spite of his elevation to the throne and his brilliant successes, he lived a miserable life and died a miserable death. Here was his punishment, but so far as his crime to the Gibeonites was concerned he did not live to share in the misery occasioned by that sinful act.

The thought of this fact, that our actions, independently of their good or evil desert, have inevitable consequences, should make us very circumspect and careful. There exists a mysterious sequence of events which evades our research and reaches beyond the things of this world.

II. The conduct of Rizpah was natural; it was also not without its use, if we look to the moral instead of the physical world.—She returned to her home with a softened though a saddened heart, with subdued affections, with a consciousness of having done what she could, and with the knowledge that her conduct had met with the approbation of David.

III. Notice the conduct of David.—In his generous heart a generous action was sure to find a ready response. He whose parental affections not even the rebellion of an ungrateful son could annihilate knew how to sympathise with the childless Rizpah, and Rizpah was doubtless consoled when, in a princely burial, she saw honour done to her husband’s house.

Justice first, and then mercy. This is the way of the Lord, and David, as the Lord’s vicegerent, walked in it.

—Dean Hook.

Illustrations

(1) ‘The way in which Rizpah’s conduct moved David to his duty affords a fine instance of what has been aptly called “unconscious influence.” She had no design upon the conscience of the king, but her right doing told with great effect. If she had lectured him about his duty to the sleeping dust of his friend, he might have resented her efforts as an impertinence; but he could neither resent nor resist the silent appeal of her actions. Words are often feeble and in vain, but deeds are seldom fruitless. The most eloquent preachers may have to cry out complainingly—“Who hath believed our report?” The success of example is far more certain, for its fragrance has never been a sweetness wholly “wasted on the desert air.” Susceptibility to its power is a universal possession. Birds that have become dumb and have forgotten their strains, have had their memories touched, and have been moved to melodious songs again, by being placed where they could hear the carols of other birds. Did any man ever yet, by the grace of God, set his life to holy music without stirring up the instinct of sacred song in some other human breast? No man liveth to himself! No man dieth to himself!’

(2) ‘Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, kept watch through day and night when the weather in Palestine is comparatively broken, but she knew no hardship, her love counted not the cost, and her love became contagious, and awoke up in David a desire to treat with similar honour the remains of Saul and Jonathan. Fire spreads itself without impoverishment, and love ignites and stirs love in others. Before now a voice raised in prayerful and passionate attachment to Jesus has made volcanic fire leap out where it had seemed extinct. Do not stint a child of God the alabaster boxes, for though they drive a Judas to desperation, they will lead a Peter or a David to take up the long-forgotten duty.’