Troublesome Topic: DAVID FOLLOWED THE RULES OF COMBAT

DAVID VS GOLIATH I Samuel 17

After King Saul was convinced that David should be allowed the chance to face off one-on-one against the Philistine champion, he offered David his armor and weapons. David quickly realized that he could not fight in such armor; he had to do things in the way he was accustomed to. We are told this part of the story to make clear to the reader that David did not have a sword with him in the conflict that ensued. He only had his shepherd’s staff and his sling (I Sam, 17:38-40).

Goliath’s armor bearer went ahead of him (I Sam 17:41). It is possible that it was done this way so that the armor bearer would have a chance to evaluate the situation first to make sure that no nefarious plan could be executed against his master, no bowmen hiding nearby, no trickery on the part of his opponent.

At this point, the two warriors made challenging statements to each other, confirming that each one was accepting the challenge of a fight to the death, man to man, even though one of them was only a boy in this case.

In Goliath’s challenge he said, “Am I a dog that you come to me with sticks?” 17:43. He saw that David had no traditional weapons of warfare. The shepherd’s staff and sling were not respected or feared. What’s more, David had no shield or armor.

In his challenge (I Sam 17:45), David made clear that he was not intimidated by the fact that Goliath was coming against him “with sword, spear and javelin …” This is where I gather that they could use the javelin in such contests, but it seems to have been associated with a low level of honor, because the sword seems to have been the preferred and most common weapon for such combat. Notice that a bow and arrows are not mentioned. David also said that he would cut off his enemy’s head (17:46), even though he had no sword of his own. The theme of David having no proper fighting weapon is a prominent one in this story.

After the challenges were spoken, the armor bearer gave his master his weapons and shield, and got out of the way so the two warriors could enter life-and-death combat.

In 17:48 the Biblical text says, “and it happened, when the Philistine rose and proceeded and drew near to encounter David, then David hurried and he ran toward the battleline, to encounter the Philistine.” The first part, “he rose”, indicates that he finished accepting his equipment from his armor bearer and putting everything in its place, then he rose to his full height and turned to face David before proceeding toward David. This verse also shows that their challenges were shouted from a bit of a distance from each other. It also describes a difference of attitude as Goliath made his way toward David without haste while David ran toward his opponent.

We all know the next part of the story – David made short work of Goliath by using his shepherd’s sling and implanting a large stone in Goliath’s forehead (the stones used in those slings were usually the size of a tennis ball or even a baseball). 17:50 repeats the theme that David brought down the famous Philistine challenger without a sword, i.e. without proper weaponry. The picture painted by the text is one in which an “unarmed” shepherd (we would say an improperly armed shepherd) was able to defeat a fully armed champion whose armor included a shield! Goliath’s servant is referred to as a “shield bearer”. This is a different word from an “armor Bearer”. So we know Goliath had a shield. In theory, all Goliath had to do was raise his shield and he would have been protected from David’s stones. But the narrative is told in such a way as to indicate that David’s quickness caught Goliath off guard. David ran toward him and launched his “missile” so quickly that Goliath did not have time to react defensively. Remember that Goliath didn’t see David as much of a threat, so he wasn’t mentally ready. Also, Goliath’s equipment was very heavy. While Goliath could handle his shield, maybe he could not move it quickly; simple split-second reactions were not enough to move that ponderous piece of protection into place in time to block the incoming projectile.

When Goliath fell, David ran and stood over him (in a stance of victory), unsheathed his opponent’s own sword and killed him. Then he cut off his head to take it to King Saul.

What does it mean that Goliath’s sword was still in its sheath? It could mean that he had a different weapon in his hand, such as the spear which is described in some detail, or that he was waiting to see what David would come at him with and then decide which weapon he wanted to use. He saw that David had two options, a staff which was for close contact conflict, and a sling with was for short distance combat. Usually things like bows and arrows were not permitted in one-on-one combat, but apparently a sling and stone were permitted because they were considered inferior options rather than proper weapons. In light of David’s use of a weapon that was for short distances rather than up close, Goliath could try to match David’s sling by throwing a javelin, which was also used for short distances, but it appears that David acted so quickly Goliath never launched even one of his javelins.

I Sam17:50 says that David killed the giant with a stone, but 17:51 says David killed him with his own sword. I think the first statement indicates that he proved victorious, or defeated his enemy with a stone. Goliath was still alive, but probably unconscious; David’s victory was already obvious. David finished the job by killing him and then cutting of his head with Goliath’s own sword.

Notice that Goliath’s shield bearer did nothing to help his fallen master. He only watched as David finished him off and then removed his head and held it up for all to see. Due to the common rules about man-to-man combat, the armor bearer could not intervene, even though he was probably armed, strong and close by. The one-on-one conflict between these two men could not be interrupted by anyone else.

DAVID’S RESPONSE TO SAUL’S ATTACKS

Even though Saul tried to kill David many times over a period of ten years, David always put his trust in God and never took matters into his own hands.

We are given two incidents in which David had the opportunity to take Saul’s life but he refused to lift a hand against the Lord’s anointed one. This shows us that he would never use trickery of stealth to gain an advantage over the king whom God had put on the throne. If God wanted David to be king, God would make it happen at the right time.

One would think that if there were a personal conflict between two men, they would settle it through one-on-one combat. But when one was the king, he seldom wanted to take the risks involved in such a conflict, so he used his army to eliminate such threats. Even if a one-on-one combat between David and Saul could have been arranged, it appears that David would not have fought against Saul, such was the honor and respect this young man showed to his king and the One who had made him king.