And there was a man at Maon, whose business was at Carmel; and the man was very great, and he had three thousand sheep and a thousand goats; and he was shearing his sheep at Carmel.
David's story pauses here to introduce a rich man who kept everything for himself. The chapter sets him at shearing time beside the anointed king who had nowhere to live, and everything turns on how he treats that king.
The verse measures a man by what he owns. Commentators set him beside David, who was already anointed king and owned nothing.
This Nabal was an Israelite. He stands in sharp contrast with David. Though anointed king of Israel, David had nowhere to lay his head. He was a wanderer from mountain to mountain, and from cave to cave. Nabal was a selfish man, with no sympathy for David. If he had blessings, he had them for himself. If he was "great," he had no idea of sharing his greatness with anyone else — least of all with David and his companions.
The man's name is itself a verdict. Writers point to the same word in a well-known line of Scripture.
We are now introduced to a man of Israel. He lives in Maon, and his possessions are in Carmel. But he is Nabal, "a fool," and he is struck down for his folly... He is, as already said, Nabal — the word used where it is written, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" In Scripture, "folly" mostly connects with this, or is identified with it. In the same way, Scripture says, "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom."
The verse names two places, Maon and Carmel. One of them can still be located on the map today.
City in the hill-country of Judah, Joshua 15:55, the home of Nabal and Abigail the Carmelitess. 1 Sam. 25:2-40. Identified with el Kurmul.
The mention of shearing sets the season. This was the time when the flocks paid out.
In verse 2 we are introduced to Nabal, a man of great wealth... Having three thousand sheep as well as one thousand goats, the time had come for him to shear the sheep. This would be a great project with great monetary returns.
The verse counts the flocks as his. Commentators ask who really owns them.
Nabal had claimed full and absolute right and control over all that God had given him in His fruitful garden ("Carmel")... God gave him a chance to acknowledge His anointed, the future king, and to serve him — a chance that would not have gone unrewarded. But he had no faith. He was tested here and found wanting. He let the moment pass, and so lost everything, even his own life... God alone has absolute right over all things. He says, "The silver is mine, and the gold is mine," and, "The earth is the LORD's and the fullness thereof." Man is only a steward, and must give account of all to God.
One writer carries this picture forward into the New Testament.
He was full of what he considered his own, and he had no thought of the man of God's choice. So he gives us a striking picture of the condition of the church at Laodicea in Revelation 3 — "I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing" — and yet Christ was outside! Is this not a contributing cause of the unrest in Christendom today? ...let us hold right thoughts of our Lord Jesus Christ. He has fought and won "the battles of the LORD." He is the One who "though He was rich... became poor," so that we "by His poverty might become rich."
- Great — The verse measures him only by his flocks. The chapter measures him by how he treats the rejected king.
- Fool — His name means "fool" — Scripture's word for the man who lives as though there were no God. His conduct matched it.
- Carmel — A town in Judah's hill country, still identified on the map today; it was where Nabal's wealth grew and where he refused to share it.
- Steward — Nabal treated his wealth as his by right, but the earth belongs to the Lord, and every owner is a steward who must give account.
- Shearing — The season of greatest return became the moment of his greatest test, and he was found wanting.
And the name of the man was Nabal, and the name of his wife Abigail; and the woman was of good understanding, and of a beautiful countenance; but the man was churlish and evil in his doings; and he was a Calebite.
One verse introduces two people, and the whole chapter grows out of the gap between them. A rich landowner behaves badly. His wife is discerning and beautiful. The verse also drops one loaded detail: he came from the house of Caleb. How did such a family line produce such a man?
The names in this chapter carry meaning. One commentator sets her name against his conduct:
Verse 3 tells us the contrast between Nabal and his wife. Her name Abigail means "father of joy." Her beautiful face also reflected a beautiful character. Nabal, however, was a harsh man whose actions were evil. He lived for himself and his pleasures. Yet he had descended from Caleb, a man of unusual godliness and devotion.
His name is not a mild insult. It belongs to a specific kind of folly in Scripture:
He is, as already said, Nabal — the word used where it is written, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" In Scripture this is what "folly" is mostly tied to, or identified with. And for Scripture, "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."
Caleb was known for unusual godliness. His descendant was not. One writer traces where the family resemblance really lay:
Nabal, verse 3 tells us, "was a Calebite." As a family trait these two men shared energy of nature. But this energy in the service of the flesh produces a Nabal, while in the service of faith it produces a Caleb. A person may give his members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness, or to God as instruments of righteousness (Rom. 6:13).
"Harsh and badly behaved" is God's verdict on a man his neighbours admired. One writer holds the two views side by side, using an older translation that reads "churlish" and "evil in his doings":
This Nabal had received such benefits from David and his men. He comes before us as a man of substance and high social position. In the eyes of the world he was a "very great" man — one who could entertain in royal style. In God's sight, however, he was a churlish man and "evil in his doings"; one who would put up with no interference from others. He claims to know nothing of David, for he asks, "Who is David? Who is the son of Jesse?" … to Nabal, David was only a runaway servant.
The verse calls her discerning. One writer says where that understanding came from, and what it saw:
She had evidently considered the people and events of her day, and the Lord had given her understanding… She hears from one of the young men about her husband's folly, and at once acts in faith… Nature could only see in David a runaway servant. Faith does not look at mere outward circumstances. It sees, in the hunted and needy David, the coming king.
The verse binds a woman of faith to a man of folly. One writer weighs what that cost her day by day, and what God was doing in it:
But being taught of God in this way must have made her place in Nabal's house very painful. Her connection with Nabal was a yoke. She was harassed every day. She met hindrances from the man she was bound to, and had no communion with him… She might have felt this to be a strange dealing of the Lord towards her. But her heart was being prepared for a service she did not yet know.
Another writer turns this into counsel:
The case of this remarkable woman is full of encouragement and instruction. It speaks to all who feel cramped and hindered by ties they cannot escape. To all such the history of Abigail says: Be patient. Wait on God. Do not think you have no opportunity for testimony. The Lord may be greatly glorified by quiet submission, and He will surely give relief and victory in the end. True, some may have to blame themselves for forming such ties in the first place. But even then, if the folly and evil are really felt, confessed, and judged before God, and the soul is brought into full submission, the end will be blessing and peace.
- Name — Nabal means "fool" — the man who says in his heart there is no God. Abigail means "father of joy," and her face matched her character.
- Line — Nabal descended from Caleb, a man of unusual godliness. The same natural energy served the flesh in one man and faith in the other. Godliness is not inherited.
- Ledger — The world called him a great man; God called him harsh and badly behaved. Both verdicts stand over the same life.
- Understanding — Abigail's discernment was faith. Where nature saw a runaway servant in David, faith saw the coming king — and acted at once.
- Waiting — A believer bound to a hard household still has opportunity for testimony. Patience under the yoke was Abigail's training for a service she did not yet know was coming.
And David heard in the wilderness that Nabal was shearing his sheep.
David is living as a hunted man in the wilderness. News reaches him there that a rich sheep owner nearby is shearing his flocks. One man has nothing, the other has plenty, and the next move belongs to the rich man.
One writer weighs the two men's positions, and traces each to what the man himself was.
David was in the wilderness; this was his place. Nabal was surrounded by all the comforts of life. David owed all his sorrows and hardships to what he was. Nabal owed all his possessions and enjoyments to what he was.
Nabal was not an outsider. He belonged to the same nation as the man he ignored.
This Nabal was an Israelite. He stands in sharp contrast with David. Though anointed king of Israel, David had nowhere to lay his head. He was a wanderer from mountain to mountain, and from cave to cave. Nabal was a selfish man, with no sympathy for David. If he had blessings, he had them for himself.
One writer counted every shearing scene in the Bible and found the same flaw in each.
Only four times in Scripture do we read of sheep shearing. Three of them are Genesis 38:13 (Judah), 1 Samuel 25:4 (Nabal), and 2 Samuel 13:23 (Absalom). In each case, something unpleasantly selfish is involved. Peter was not told by the Lord to "shear My sheep," but "shepherd My sheep" and "feed My sheep" (John 21:16-17).
(The ESV has "Tend my sheep" and "Feed my sheep.")
David sent ten young men with a respectful message and a request for food.
When David heard of Nabal's sheep shearing project, he felt it was the right moment to act. He sent ten young men to him to ask for some provisions of food (v.5). Of course Nabal was under no legal obligation to David. But no doubt he ought to have felt himself under moral obligation. David instructed the young men to show Nabal the fullest respect... The message was simple and respectful. Any right-minded man would have been considerate of them.
Another writer places the scene, and names what David's request rested on.
At this point David, in the wilderness of Paran, heard that Nabal, a rich sheep owner of Maon, was shearing his sheep in Carmel. So he sent and asked for a gift, as an acknowledgment of the kindness he had shown, and the protection his men had given, to Nabal's flocks and servants in the past... Most would think such services would normally call for some payment. But far beyond that, David, through his messengers, gave the sheep owner a chance to serve the Lord's anointed during his time of trial. That message sent to Nabal tested him in a double way. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart?
Commentators differ over David's action here. One sees the sending as a real cost to David's dignity.
This no doubt was a great trial to David. It takes, I need not say, much grace to ask a favour, especially from such a man as Nabal... it was no small humiliation for the anointed of the LORD.
Another reads the same step as a lapse — a man in need looking sideways instead of upward.
Human energy is good in itself. But if it is not used in dependence upon God, Satan can and will use it against God's revealed will. To those who wait upon the Lord, divine power comes in... This, then, was the lesson David was set down to learn in this chapter of his history, and God had His own way of teaching it. In a time of need David turns to man for help, instead of to God!
Nabal's refusal was not a small rudeness. It was a settled choice to know nothing of what God was doing.
His serious fault was pretended ignorance of the divine purposes, and of who David was... His heart was not interested in what God had already done for Israel, nor in the blessing yet in store for His people. Selfishness had closed his heart against the stranger. He was "willingly ignorant."
One writer turns this into a warning for anyone whose religion is profession only.
It is easy to claim the religion of Christ, while Christ Himself is unknown, and the cross of Christ is hated... All this is fully illustrated in Nabal. He was a mean-spirited man who had shut himself up among his luxuries and wealth. He cared nothing for God's anointed, and felt nothing for him in the season of his painful exile.
- Heard — the news reached David in the wilderness. His hardship and Nabal's comfort each flowed from what the man was.
- Sent — David had no legal claim, only a moral one, and the message he sent was simple and respectful.
- Tested — the request tried Nabal twice over: would he repay kindness, and would he care for God's chosen king?
- Refused — Nabal was "willingly ignorant." Selfishness had closed his heart against the stranger.
- Warned — the same test stands today: it is easy to claim the religion of Christ while Christ Himself is unknown.
Then David sent out ten young men; and David said to the young men, Go up to Carmel, and go to Nabal, and greet him in my name.
David is still a fugitive in the wilderness, and Nabal is a wealthy sheep owner enjoying the busy, festive season of shearing. David sends ten young men with a greeting. What happens next depends on what Nabal makes of a message carried in David's name.
David sends from the wilderness; the messengers go up to Carmel. One writer ties each man's place to what he was.
David was in the wilderness; this was his place. Nabal was surrounded by all the comforts of life. David owed all his sorrows and hardships to what he was. Nabal owed all his possessions and pleasures to what he was.
David tells the men to greet Nabal in his name. Notice who sends that greeting, and who receives it.
David's grace does not stop there. Like the Lord when He was here on earth, David is depending on man for some refreshment. Yet everything belongs to him by right. And in exchange he sends peace through his messengers to the sinner, to Nabal.
David and Nabal already had a history. But kindness given is not a contract signed.
When David heard of Nabal's sheep-shearing, he felt it was a good moment to send ten young men to ask him for food (v.5). Of course Nabal was under no legal obligation to David, though there is no doubt he ought to have felt himself under moral obligation. Nabal is reminded that while David's men were near his shepherds, they had protected them rather than stealing from them, as many armies would do. The message was simple and respectful, and any right-minded man would have been considerate of them.
Asking a favour was no light thing for the man God had already anointed king.
This no doubt was a great trial to David. It takes much grace to ask a favour, and above all from a man like Nabal. Even though Nabal might be little known — and David knew well what some men in Israel were like — it was no small humiliation for the anointed of the Lord.
Yet David asked without envying what Nabal had:
David did not grudge Nabal his prosperity. No doubt he felt he would not have exchanged his place for Nabal's. And it was no hard message that he sent: "I am not asking you to leave your riches and follow me. I say, Peace be to you, and peace be to your house, and peace be to all that you have. Only will you show kindness to me? Will you give me what I need?"… A heart in a gracious state will not grudge those around it, nor say, "See what I am, and what you are not." It will seek instead to build the link that joins it to another.
Because the messengers come "in my name," Nabal's answer will reveal what he thinks of the name. The request is small; the question underneath it is not.
That message sent to Nabal tested him in a double way. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart?
Nabal held all he had as his own. But the commentator points out how small David's request really was:
Nabal claimed full and absolute right and control over everything God had given him in His fruitful garden ("Carmel")… God gave him an opportunity of owning His anointed, the future king, and of ministering to him — and it would not have gone unrewarded. But he had no faith. He fell short here, and failed to seize the moment, and so lost everything, even his own life… Man is only a steward, and must give account of everything to God. David asks for only a small part of what will all be at his disposal by and by… Everything depended on his estimate of the one who asked the favour.
Nabal is more than one rude man in an old story. One writer sees a religion many people still hold.
It is easy to profess the religion of Christ while Christ Himself is unknown and His cross is hated… All of this is pictured in full by the rude, ungracious Nabal. He had shut himself up among his luxuries and wealth. He cared nothing for God's anointed, and felt nothing for him in his time of painful exile and wandering in the wilderness.
- Sent — David is in the wilderness because of who he is; Nabal is comfortable because of who he is. The ten messengers cross that gap.
- Peace — David owns everything by right. Still he offers peace to Nabal, his house and all he has before he asks for anything.
- Claim — David's men had guarded Nabal's shepherds. No law required a gift. Every moral instinct did.
- Test — the errand asked two questions at once: will he repay kindness, and will he own God's chosen king?
- Estimate — everything hung on what Nabal made of the name the messengers carried. He got it wrong, lost his opportunity, and lost his life.
And thus shall ye say Long life [to thee]! and peace be to thee, and peace be to thy house, and peace be to all that thou hast!
David's men come to a rich man named Nabal with a greeting, not a demand — a blessing spoken over the man, his household, and everything he owns. Who sends peace like that from the wilderness, and what does it cost a man to refuse it?
David is the anointed king living in exile, and he sends not a bill but a blessing. One writer sees the pattern of Christ here: the owner of all things asks men for food, and gives peace in exchange.
If, like the Lord when He was here on earth, he depends on man for some refreshment, he sends peace back in exchange. Everything belongs to him by rights, yet he brings this peace to the sinner, to Nabal, through his messengers: "Peace be to you, and peace be to your house, and peace be to all that you have!" Did Nabal want this peace, after such obvious protection of his men and his flocks?
The greeting travels from scarcity to plenty. Each man's position came from who he was.
David was in the wilderness; this was his place. Nabal was surrounded by all the comforts of life. The first owed all his sorrows and hardships to what he was. The second owed all his possessions and enjoyments to what he was.
David asks for food, but he has no legal claim on Nabal. His men had guarded Nabal's shepherds, and the message only asks him to weigh that.
Of course Nabal had no legal obligation to David. Yet without doubt he ought to have felt a moral one. David told the young men to show Nabal the fullest respect. They were to greet him with peace toward himself, his house and all that he had… The message was simple and respectful, and any right-minded man would have been considerate of them.
To send this message at all was hard. The man God had chosen as king had to stand at a rich man's gate with his hat in his hand.
This was no doubt a great trial to David. It takes much grace to ask a favour, above all from a man like Nabal. David may have been little known, and he knew well what some men in Israel were like. Even so, it was no small humiliation for the anointed of the Lord.
Notice what the message does not say. David never resents Nabal's wealth and never compares the two lives.
David was in need — here was another who was not in need… David did not grudge him his prosperity. He surely felt he would not have swapped his place for Nabal's. It was no hard message that he sent… David's heart was large enough to have rejoiced in anything that would have joined Nabal's place to his own. And so it always is. When a believer's heart is in a gracious state, there will be no grudging of those around, and no wish to say, "See what I am, and what you are not."
Nabal's reply asks who David is. One writer finds the cause of his rudeness in that question.
Here was the secret of this worldly man's coldness of heart: he did not know him. Had he known him, it would have been a very different matter. But he knew neither who he was nor where he came from. He did not know that he was insulting the Lord's anointed. In his selfish folly he was throwing away the privilege of meeting the need of the future king of Israel.
Nabal refused the peace. His wife Abigail went out to David herself.
David sends her back to her house with the peace which Nabal had not wanted, and with the assurance of his favour (vv. 6, 35). There she will patiently wait for the message of the beloved one calling her to himself.
- Peace sent. The rejected king's first word to a rich stranger is a threefold blessing — on him, on his house, on all he owns. Grace moves from the wilderness toward the wealthy.
- Peace earned nothing. Nabal owed David no legal debt, only a moral one. The message was respectful, and any right-minded man would have honoured it.
- Peace costs the sender. It took much grace for the anointed of the Lord to ask a favour of such a man — no small humiliation.
- Peace without envy. David does not begrudge Nabal his wealth; a heart in a gracious state never says, "See what I am, and what you are not."
- Peace refused, peace received. Nabal's coldness came from not knowing who David was. The peace he threw away, Abigail carried home instead.
And now I have heard that thou hast shearers; now thy shepherds who were with us, we hurt them not, neither was there aught missed by them, all the while they were in Carmel.
David is an exile in the wilderness with a band of followers. At shearing time he sends ten young men to Nabal, a rich sheep owner at Carmel. His claim is simple: Nabal's shepherds had been with him, and they had lost nothing. Two questions follow. What was David like in the years men rejected him? And what do you owe a man who guarded you and never asked for anything?
David had no legal hold over Nabal. His claim rested on a fact anyone could check.
Of course, Nabal was under no legal obligation to David, though he should have felt himself under a moral one. David's messengers are to remind him of one thing. While David and his men were near Nabal's shepherds, they protected them instead of robbing them, as many armies would do. No one was hurt, and no sheep went missing. They suggest that Nabal ask his own shepherds to confirm it. So they ask Nabal to give them whatever food he has to hand.
The protection was real, not passive. Out in the fields, flocks faced danger from more than one direction.
While hiding in the area where Nabal kept his flocks, David and his men had not intruded on his rights. Instead, they had acted as a wall. They protected his flocks from attacks by wild beasts, and from men even more savage.
David invites Nabal to check the story with his own workers. Their account goes further than David's own.
Had David overstated what he and his band had done? What could the shepherds say? "Yet the men were very good to us, and we suffered no harm, and we did not miss anything when we were in the fields, so long as we went with them. They were a wall to us both by night and by day, all the while we were with them keeping the sheep" (verses 15-16). Most would think that such service normally deserved repayment. But there was more to it than that. Through his messengers, David gave the flock owner a chance to serve the Lord's anointed in his time of trial. That message sent to Nabal tested him in a double way. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart?
David was already God's anointed king when he did this. He had no house and no throne.
David is the anointed of the Lord — the coming king, and the man of God's heart. Yet here he is a hunted man in the place of reproach. He hides in the caves of the earth, a needy wanderer in desert places, surrounded by a band of faithful followers who had gathered to him (1 Sam. 22:1-2). And as he wandered, he and his followers went about doing good.
Waiting on God did not make David idle. The wilderness itself gave him the work.
David and his companions still live in the wilderness of Judah. They wait on God for the hour and the signal of their deliverance. But there David has the chance to prove himself the protector of the weak, in the face of a thousand dangers through the night watches. "They missed nothing" as long as they were with him.
Nabal had enjoyed every bit of this. What he would not do was value the man who gave it.
This was just how Nabal acted. He took every advantage he could from David. But the moment David asked him for sympathy and help, his worldly spirit showed itself... Nabal could well understand the value of David's protection, though he cared nothing for David's person. While David's men were a wall around his possessions, he would put up with them. But once they became a burden, he rejected them and insulted them.
One writer reads the scene as a picture of how the world treats Christ. He also marks the limit of that picture.
Applying this in a spiritual way — how the world has copied Nabal in his rude refusal of David's request! It too has its sheep-shearing, its time of gathering in rich results to which it has contributed little or nothing. It has not realized that every earthly mercy it enjoys was bought by the death of Christ, and that He has been their unseen protector and provider... We are not speaking here, of course, about the gospel. The gospel makes no claim on the sinner. It confronts him with his guilt and lost condition. It does not ask him for a present. It asks him to admit his sin and to accept the gift of God.
- Wall — David's men stood between Nabal's flocks and both wild animals and violent men, night and day.
- Nothing missing — an armed band that could have robbed them took nothing. The shepherds confirmed every word David said.
- Doing good — hunted and homeless, David spent his wilderness years protecting the weak as he waited on God.
- Double test — David's message asked Nabal two things. Would he repay kindness? Would he care for God's anointed king?
- The Nabal spirit — value the protection, despise the protector. The world still does it, enjoying mercies bought by the death of Christ and giving Him nothing back.
Ask thy young men, and they will tell thee. Therefore let the young men find favour in thine eyes; for we come in a good day give, I pray thee, what thy hand may find to thy servants, and to thy son David.
David and his men are living in the wilderness. Nabal, a rich sheep owner, is holding a feast at shearing time. David sends ten messengers to ask him politely for whatever food he can spare. The verse is a request, but it is also a test. What will a rich man do when God's anointed king, in exile and need, asks for a share of his plenty?
David gives his young men careful words. They make no threat and claim no legal right. They point to a service done, tell Nabal to check the facts with his own shepherds, and leave the amount to him.
Nabal was under no legal obligation to David, though he certainly ought to have felt himself under moral obligation. David told the young men to show Nabal the fullest respect, greeting him with peace toward himself, his house and all that he had... So they ask Nabal to give them whatever food he has on hand. The message was simple and respectful, and any right-minded man would have been considerate of them.
The messengers speak peace over Nabal, his house, and all he owns before they ask for anything. One writer sees a reversal here. The man who by right owns everything comes needing help, and gives a blessing in return for bread.
Like the Lord when He was here on earth, David is depending on man for some refreshment. Yet everything belongs to him by right, and through his messengers he brings peace to the sinner, to Nabal, in exchange for this. "Peace be to you, and peace be to your house, and peace be to all that you have." Does Nabal want this peace, after such clear protection of his men and his flocks? For such grace and courtesy, did David not have the right to ask for some proof of thankfulness?
David asks only for a share of what is at hand. Even that was no small thing for a man already anointed as king to ask.
This no doubt was a great trial to David. It takes much grace, I need not say, to ask a favour, especially from a man like Nabal. And little known as such a man might be — David well knew what some men in Israel were like — it was no small humiliation for the Lord's anointed.
There is no envy in the appeal. David wants Nabal joined to him, not stripped of anything.
David was in need — here was another not in need... the message he sent was not a hard one. "I do not ask you," he says, "to leave your riches and follow me... only will you show kindness to me; will you give me what I need?" The heart of David was large enough to have rejoiced in anything that would have identified Nabal's place with his.
"We come on a feast day" points to a day of plenty in Nabal's house. The request put two things to Nabal at once.
Most would think that services like these normally called for some repayment. But David did more than that. Through his messengers he gave this sheep owner a chance to serve the Lord's anointed in his time of trial. That message tested Nabal in two ways. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart?
David asks for whatever is at hand. One writer points out that none of it was ever Nabal's own, and that the man whose name the messengers carry will one day own it all.
God gave him a chance to acknowledge His anointed, the future king, and to serve him — a chance that would not have gone unrewarded. But he had no faith. He was proved wanting here. He let the moment slip, and so lost everything, even his own life... Man is only a steward, and must give account of everything to God. David asks for just a small part of what will one day all be at his disposal... Everything depended on what Nabal thought of the one who asked the favour.
One writer sees today's world in Nabal's shearing feast. It gathers in a rich harvest without knowing who protected it.
It too has its sheep-shearing, its time of gathering in rich results to which it has contributed little or nothing. It has not realized that every earthly mercy it enjoys was bought by the death of Christ, and that He has been their unseen protector and provider. He makes His claim — not a harsh nor an unjust one — that of their abundance they give freely to Him.
- Protection — David's men guarded Nabal's shepherds and took nothing. The claim was moral, not legal, and Nabal's own servants could confirm it.
- Peace — David blesses Nabal's whole household before asking, and leaves the amount to him.
- Humbling — it took grace for the anointed king to ask a favour of such a man. Sending the message cost David something.
- Opportunity — a day of plenty made the test double. Repay the kindness, and own God's chosen king while he is still rejected.
- Estimate — all hung on what Nabal thought of David. Misjudge the one who asks, and you throw away the blessing of giving to him.
And David's young men came, and spoke to Nabal according to all those words in the name of David, and ceased.
David's ten young men reach Carmel at sheep-shearing time and repeat his message word for word. Then they stop — and everything now rests on how one rich man answers the king God has chosen.
David is the anointed of the Lord. Yet here he must ask a stranger for food, and the asking costs him something:
This was no doubt a great trial to David. It takes much grace, I need not say, to ask a favour, above all from a man like Nabal. David may have been little known, and he knew well what some men in Israel were like. Still, it was no small humiliation for the anointed of the Lord.
The message opens with a blessing, not a demand. One writer sees a king who gives more than he asks:
Like the Lord when He was here on earth, he depends on man for some refreshment. Yet everything belongs to him by right. And in exchange he sends peace to the sinner, to Nabal, through his messengers. "Peace be to you, and peace be to your house, and peace be to all that you have!" (v. 6). Did Nabal want this peace, after such obvious protection of his men and his flocks?
David's claim could be checked. Nabal's own shepherds were there, and this is what they said:
Had David exaggerated the service that he and his band had rendered? What could the shepherds say? "The men were very good to us, and we suffered no harm... They were a wall to us both by night and by day, all the while we were with them keeping the sheep" (vv. 15-16). Most would think such service called for some return. But David gave more than that. Through his messengers he offered the sheep owner a chance to serve the Lord's anointed in his time of trial. That message sent to Nabal tested him in two ways. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart?
The young men add nothing of their own. They say all that David said, in David's name, and then leave the matter with Nabal:
The young men were instructed to show the fullest respect to Nabal, greeting him with peace toward himself, his house and all that he had... In view of this they ask that Nabal should give them whatever provisions he may have readily available (v. 8). The message was simple and respectful, and any right-minded man would have been considerate of them.
Messengers sent in another man's name are never refused alone:
Nabal rejects the messengers without a second thought. He never sees that this means rejecting David himself. "The one who rejects you rejects Me, and the one who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me" (Luke 10:16). Their master had sent them to bless, and Nabal insults them (v. 14).
Nabal asks, "Who is David?" One writer traces the refusal back to one fact:
Here was the secret of this worldly man's estrangement of heart: he did not know him. Had he known him, it would have been a very different matter. But he neither knew who he was nor where he came from. He did not know that he was insulting the Lord's anointed. In his selfish folly he was throwing away the privilege of meeting the need of the future king of Israel.
One writer applies the scene to a world that lives on mercies it never traces to their source:
Applying this briefly in a spiritual way, how the world has imitated Nabal in his rude refusal of David's request! It too has its sheep-shearing, its time of gathering in rich results to which it has contributed little or nothing. It has not realised that every earthly mercy it enjoys was bought by the death of Christ. He has been their unseen protector and provider... We are not speaking here, of course, of the truth of the gospel. There God makes no claim on the sinner. The gospel confronts him with his guilt and lost condition. It does not ask him for a present. It asks him to acknowledge his sin and accept the gift of God.
- Sent — the words are David's, spoken in David's name. The messengers carry both the honour and the cost of a king who must ask, not seize.
- Peace — what reaches Nabal first is not a bill but a blessing on him, his house and all he has.
- Proof — the claim could be checked. Nabal's own shepherds said David's men were a wall around the flocks day and night.
- Pause — the messengers say everything and add nothing. Then they stop, and a simple, respectful message waits on one man's will.
- Answer — "Who is David?" exposes a heart that never knew him. Nabal turned away the messengers — and with them the king who sent them.
And Nabal answered David's servants and said, Who is David? and who is the son of Jesse? there are many servants now-a-days that break away every man from his master.
David asked a rich sheep owner for food, after his men had guarded that owner's flocks. The reply was a sneer, and it shows what Nabal thought of God's anointed king and of the goods he called his own.
Nabal's opening words sound like an honest question. Commentators read them as a refusal to know what he already knew.
He claims to know nothing about David, since he asks, "Who is David? Who is the son of Jesse?" No doubt he knew of David's great victory over the giant, and how the women had sung his praises. But he probably saw David as a man whose head his great deeds and the songs of women had turned. In his eyes David was after the throne, and so was a rebellious servant who had broken away from his master, King Saul. If he had heard any rumour that Samuel anointed David king, he plainly treated it as a matter of no interest at all.
Nabal was not simply out of the loop. He had shut a door.
His serious fault was pretended ignorance of God's purposes and of who David was. The pretence was plain, because his own admissions gave him away and convicted him of contempt for God. His heart had no interest in what God had already done for Israel, nor in the blessing still in store for His people. Selfishness had closed his heart against the stranger. He was "willingly ignorant." Like those Paul writes about, he "refused to have God in his knowledge." In his case it was not innocence or ignorance, but hostility.
The second half of the verse turns evasion into slander. David was on the run because Saul hunted him, and Nabal lived close enough to know it.
To him, David was nothing but a runaway slave who had absconded from Saul, his master. Nabal probably knew something about the rights and wrongs of the case. He could well have known why David was away from Saul's court. He himself had likely watched the relentless hunt for David. For him, then, to speak as he did showed more than a misunderstanding. It was a deliberate refusal to recognise the rightful claims of a man who was suffering for no wrong of his own.
The next verse spells out what this one implies: everything Nabal owns, he owns absolutely. Writers see the refusal and the possessive pronouns as one attitude.
Nabal had claimed full and absolute right and control over everything God had given him in His fruitful garden ("Carmel"). God gave him a chance to acknowledge His anointed, the future king, and to serve him. That chance would not have gone unrewarded. But he had no faith. He was found wanting here, missed the moment, and so lost everything, even his own life. God alone has absolute right over all things. He says, "The silver is mine, and the gold is mine," and, "The earth is the LORD's and the fullness thereof." Man is only a steward, and must give account of it all to God.
Nabal's wife had no better sources of information than her husband. She reached the opposite conclusion.
Who David was, and what he was, was plain to her; there was nothing mysterious about it. She knew that he fought the LORD's battles, and that no evil had been found in him all his days. What folly, then, to be against him and to bring his righteous anger on yourself... A runaway servant he was in Nabal's eyes; a man fighting the LORD's battles he was in Abigail's eyes. In this she was right. To refuse him help, then, was to take sides against God.
The same dismissal turns up later, aimed at someone greater.
Later the chief men used the same words when faced with the Lord's work: "As for this man, we do not know where he comes from" (John 9:29). This is how man treated the rejected Jesus. He despises His sovereign grace. He does not grasp His power in judgment, and does not stop to think that this judgment is at the door.
What Nabal did with David, people still do with Christ.
It takes the clear sight of faith for anyone to see the true glory of Christ and hold to Him while He is rejected... It is hard to find anything more selfish than a heart that takes everything Jesus has to give and gives Him nothing back. "As long as I am saved, the rest doesn't matter." That is the secret thought of many a heart. Put more honestly, it would run: "If I am sure of salvation, the glory of Christ matters little."
- The question — "Who is David?" decides the whole chapter. All depended on what Nabal made of the man who asked the favour.
- The ignorance — he chose not to know. His own words exposed the pretence, and behind it lay hostility, not honest doubt.
- The slander — Nabal called David a runaway servant. He knew better, and refused on purpose to own the claims of a man suffering for no wrong of his own.
- The ownership — Nabal held his goods as his own. But man is only a steward, and must give account to God.
- The answer — Abigail knew no more than he did, yet she called David the man who fights the LORD's battles. The same question now asks who Christ is to us.
And shall I take my bread, and my water, and my flesh which I have killed for my shearers, and give [it] to men whom I know not whence they are?
Nabal met David's polite appeal with a question of his own: who is this man to me? Everything that follows in the chapter turns on his answer.
The refusal was not about food. It came from what Nabal thought of the man who asked.
Here was the secret of this worldly man's coldness of heart; he did not know him. Had he known him, it would have been a very different matter. But he neither knew who he was nor where he was from. He did not know that he was insulting the Lord's anointed. In his selfish folly he was throwing away the privilege of meeting the need of the future king of Israel.
Commentators differ on whether that ignorance was real. One writer reads it as deliberate:
Nabal probably knew something of the merits of the case. He could hardly have been unaware of why David was away from Saul's court. For him, therefore, to speak as he did showed more than a misunderstanding. It was a deliberate refusal to recognise the righteous claims of one who was suffering for no wrong of his own.
Four times over he says "my." But ownership is the one thing he gets wrong. (Where the ESV has "my meat," older translations read "my flesh.")
Nabal claimed full and absolute right and control over all that God had given him in His fruitful garden ("Carmel"). He spoke of it as "my bread," "my water," "my flesh," and so on. He had no faith. He missed the opportunity God gave him, and so lost everything, even his own life... God alone has absolute right over all things. He says, "The silver is mine, and the gold is mine" — yes, "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof." Man is only a steward, and must give account of it all to God.
His name and his words point the same way.
Nabal means "fool." He stands for the natural man, and especially for those who reject the Lord and His message of peace. His words "my bread" — "my water" — "my flesh" — "my shearers" and the whole story remind us of that other fool our Lord spoke of. He also spoke of "my barns" — "my fruits" — "my goods" (Luke 12:16-21).
Set David's identity aside for a moment. Israel's law had already settled how to treat a poor brother.
Deuteronomy chapter fifteen says, "If among you, one of your brothers should become poor... you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be." Precious grace! How like God. How unlike Nabal! Grace would keep the heart wide open to every case of need. Selfishness would close it against everyone who asks. Nabal should have obeyed the word regardless of whether he knew David. But his selfishness ran too deep to allow obedience to the Lord's word, or love to the Lord's anointed.
David's messengers did more than ask for food. They gave Nabal a test, and a chance that never came back.
That message sent to Nabal tested him in two ways. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart? His words are an index to his mind... God's interests on earth at that time meant nothing to Nabal. He lost his chance of taking God's side in his day, and lost it forever.
His own wife had the same facts and reached the opposite verdict.
We may suppose that Abigail's chances of forming a right judgment on this question were no better than Nabal's. But what a difference between them! In Nabal's eyes David was a runaway servant. In Abigail's eyes he was a man fighting the Lord's battles. In this she was right. To refuse him help, then, was to take sides against God.
Nabal's reply is not the only failure in this chapter.
It was so utterly uncalled for, so brutal, that perhaps most of us can only say we would have done what he did. But the question is not whether his resentment was natural. Was it an expression of the faith, patience and self-denial that had so beautified his life up to this time? There can be only one answer. David clearly failed here in his readiness to take his case into his own hands, rather than wait only upon God.
- Person. Everything hung on who Nabal thought David was. He did not know him, and so threw away the privilege of supplying the future king.
- Possession. His fourfold "my" claimed absolute right over what God had given. Man is only a steward, and must give account of it all.
- Precedent. Deuteronomy told him to open his hand to a poor brother. His selfishness broke that plain word, whoever David was.
- Proof. Abigail knew no more than her husband, yet she judged rightly. His ignorance was a choice, not a handicap.
- Peril. The story exposes David too. He took his case into his own hands instead of waiting on God.
And David's young men turned their way, and went back, and came and reported to him according to all those words.
David sent ten messengers to Nabal with a peaceful greeting and a small request. They came back with nothing but an insult to repeat. This short verse is the hinge of the chapter. What the young men carry home turns a quiet errand into a near-massacre.
Asking Nabal for a favour cost David something. One writer notes both the humbling and the temper of the man who refused:
This was no doubt a great trial to David. It takes, I need not say, much grace to ask a favour, especially from such a man as Nabal. He might be little known — and David knew well what some men were in Israel. Even so, it was no small humiliation for the anointed of the Lord. But Nabal valued nothing of God, and hated every thought of grace, as the natural man does.
Nabal's refusal was more than rudeness. One writer shows what he threw away, and what the whole scene turned on:
Nabal had claimed full and absolute right and control over everything God had given him in His fruitful garden ("Carmel"). He spoke of it as "my bread," "my water," "my flesh," and so on. God gave him a chance to acknowledge His anointed, the future king, and to serve Him. That chance would not have gone unrewarded. But he had no faith. He was proved wanting here, failed to seize the moment, and so lost everything, even his own life... Everything depended on his estimate of the one who asked the favour.
His question was not a real question:
Though Nabal asked who David was, he was not concerned to find out, for he was intensely self-centred.
The men went back and told David everything. What David does next shows why the report matters:
The young men return to David to report the way Nabal responded to their request (v.12). David does not think of consulting the Lord. He decides at once to retaliate against Nabal's insulting treatment, and he takes four hundred armed men with him. Nabal had not decided to kill David, as Saul had. Yet David is ready to kill Nabal, though he would not kill Saul when he had the chance. When people treat us in a proud, contemptuous way, we give way far too easily to our own feelings of outrage. We are ready to take revenge. Yet when we take these matters into our own hands, we almost always end up doing worse to the offender than he did to us.
The insult stung. But David's answer is not what we would expect from the man who had spared Saul:
No doubt it was deeply trying to meet such base ingratitude from a man he had guarded like a wall of defence. It stung, too, to be reproached on the very ground of the circumstances faithfulness had called him into. He was accused of breaking away from his master at the very time he was being hunted like a partridge through the mountains. All this was hard to bear. In the first outburst of feeling, David speaks words that would not stand the examination of the sanctuary. "Each of you strap on his sword." That was not quite the language we would have expected from one who had so far walked in such a meek and gentle spirit.
The report set a collision in motion. One writer names what was about to meet what — and who stopped it:
The flesh in David would meet the flesh in Nabal! Had such a conflict been allowed, who can tell how it would have ended? But God dealt graciously with David. He softened his heart and turned him from his purpose. He used an instrument prepared in secret and now brought forward at just the right moment.
David had guarded Nabal's men, and Nabal still would not acknowledge him. One writer draws the lesson out for anyone who claims Christ today:
The moral of all this is deeply instructive. It takes the clear vision of faith to discern the true glory of Christ and cling to Him in the time of His rejection. It is one thing to be a Christian, as people say, and another to confess Christ before men. Indeed, it is hard to find anything more selfish than a heart that takes all Jesus has to give and yields Him nothing in return.
- Request. David asked Nabal for a favour, and the asking itself was a humbling for God's anointed.
- Refusal. Nabal was not concerned to find out who David was. Everything was "my bread, my water, my flesh."
- Report. The messengers brought back Nabal's exact words. Everything hung on his estimate of the man who had asked.
- Revenge. David did not consult the Lord; he strapped on a sword, and the flesh in him rose to meet the flesh in Nabal.
- Rescue. God stopped the collision by an instrument prepared in secret. That spared David from the sword he had strapped on, and Nabal lost everything, even his own life.
And David said to his men, Gird ye on every man his sword. And they girded on every man his sword; and David also girded on his sword; and there went up after David about four hundred men; and two hundred abode by the baggage.
David's messengers come back empty-handed and insulted. His answer is instant: swords on, four hundred men behind him, two hundred left with the baggage. Commentators treat this one verse as a turning point. David had just spared a king who wanted him dead. Now he moves to destroy a man who only refused him food.
The command itself is the problem. David had taken years of hunting without striking back. Here, in one sentence, a different man speaks.
No doubt it was deeply trying to meet such base ingratitude from a man he had guarded like a wall. It stung, too, to be blamed for the very situation his faithfulness had put him in. He was accused of deserting his master at the very time Saul was hunting him through the mountains like a partridge. All this was hard to bear. In that first rush of feeling, David spoke words that could not stand examination in God's presence. "Every man strap on his sword!" was not quite the language we would expect from a man who had walked so meekly and gently until then.
The chapter before makes this jarring. Saul had hunted David, and David let him walk away alive.
Saul was clearly his enemy, and a very powerful one. At Saul's hand David had lost most of the things men count dear... Nabal, the man he now deals with, is proud and stingy and insolent. But he is not an enemy in the same sense; and even if he were, he is a contemptible one by comparison. David has no reason to fear him and never supposes he has. With such a man, how easy to show the generosity that cost him so much with Saul! Yet this is exactly where David fails... he flares into a rage that would sweep every male of Nabal's house into the slaughter with him!
Commentators turn the scene on the reader.
When people treat us in a proud, contemptuous way, we give way far too easily to our own outrage and are ready to take revenge. Yet once we take these matters into our own hands, we nearly always fall into the wrong of doing worse to the offender than he did to us.
The reason given is not that Nabal's rudeness was small. It is that David had stopped seeing God behind the man in front of him.
David's sword could never have cured Nabal's selfishness, and faith would never have taken such a course. David did not act like this toward Saul; he left him wholly to God... Why did he not act this way toward Nabal? Because he was not in communion. He was off his guard, and the enemy took advantage of him. Nature will always lead us to defend ourselves and resent every injury... but the man of faith rises above all such things at once. He sees God in everything. The jealousy of Saul, the folly of Nabal — he takes it all as coming from the hand of God.
The mistake was in the timing, and in whose hand the judgment belonged.
Before he received this teaching from godly Abigail, David had strapped on his sword and ordered his companions to do the same. He was running ahead of the time for vengeance. The hour of judgment had not yet struck. It would come through One greater than David. Of Him it is said: "Gird Your sword on Your thigh, O mighty one, in Your splendor and majesty" (Ps. 45:3); but as long as David was a stranger in his inheritance it was still the time of grace.
David's rejection often pictures Christ's. At this verse the picture fails, and the failure is instructive.
David may, in a rash moment, strap on his sword to take vengeance on his enemies. Peter, in the same spirit, will draw his sword to defend his Master. But Christ Himself, facing His enemies, says, "Put your sword back into its place." In every such picture there are these contrasts. They only show that no picture can fully set out the perfection of Jesus.
The sword never reached Nabal. Commentators credit that to God, not to David's second thoughts.
It is only a lapse, though, not the bent of his heart. In mercy God steps in to stop His servant from carrying out a vengeance that would have stayed the regret of his life. The instrument God chose is striking too — Abigail, the wife of Nabal.
- The insult — Nabal repaid protection with contempt. The provocation was real, and commentators admit we give way to outrage just as easily.
- The sword — his order was speech that could not stand in God's presence, from a man who had walked meekly until then.
- The contrast — he spared the king who hunted him, then moved to wipe out a household over food. He failed the easy test.
- The cause — lost communion, not the size of the offence. Faith traces every injury back to God's hand, and David had stopped.
- The rescue — the hour of judgment was not his to bring forward. God stopped him through Abigail and spared him a lifelong regret.
And one of [Nabal's] young men told Abigail, Nabal's wife, saying, Behold, David sent messengers out of the wilderness to bless our master; and he has insulted them.
One servant sees what his master has done and takes the news straight to Abigail. His report turns the whole story. It raises two questions: how can a man enjoy David's protection and still despise David himself? And who warns a household when nobody can speak to its head?
The servant tells Abigail what David's men had been in the fields: good to them, taking nothing, standing guard day and night. Nabal knew the value of what he had received. He would not pay for it.
This was just Nabal's way of acting. He got all the advantage he could from David. But the moment David asked for sympathy and help, his worldly spirit showed itself... Nabal could see the value of David's protection, but he cared nothing for David himself. As long as David's men were a wall around his possessions, he would tolerate them; but when they became a burden, he rejected and insulted them.
Nabal's answer was not just ungracious. Commentators weigh it against Scripture itself.
As you would expect, Nabal's conduct went directly against Scripture, and his spirit went against the spirit of its divine Author. Precious grace! How like God. How unlike Nabal! Grace would keep the heart wide open to everyone in need. Selfishness would close it against every person who asks. Nabal ought to have obeyed the word, whatever he knew about David. But his selfishness ran too deep to allow obedience to the Lord's word, or love for the Lord's anointed.
Nabal had asked, "Who is David?" The servant's report shows the question was hollow. His household knew David's men well. Commentators read Nabal's claimed ignorance as blindness he chose.
His serious fault was that he pretended not to know God's purposes, or who David was. The pretence was clear, because his own admissions gave him away and convicted him of impiety. His heart had no interest in what God had already done for Israel, nor in the blessing still in store for His people. He was "willingly ignorant," and like those Paul writes of in Romans 1:28, he "refused to have God in his knowledge." In his case it was not simplicity or ignorance, but enmity. Knowledge, however unwelcome, fixes responsibility on the soul and exposes it to judgment.
The words quoted there from Romans 1:28 come from an older translation; the ESV reads, "they did not see fit to acknowledge God."
The verse reads like ordinary household news. Commentators see God's hand behind it, because nobody could speak to the master himself.
But the hand of God intervened in grace. He moved one of Nabal's young servants to tell Abigail how Nabal had treated David's servants... The servant knew people would expect David to avenge Nabal's insulting words. He saw that both Nabal and his whole household were in immediate danger. Some of the servants had tried to reason with Nabal. They found him such a son of Belial — a worthless man — that they could not speak to him.
The danger was real. Commentators fault David as well:
David does not think of consulting the Lord. He decides at once to hit back at Nabal's insulting treatment, taking four hundred armed men with him... When people treat us in a proud, contemptuous way, we give way far too easily to our own outrage. We are ready to take revenge. Yet when we take these matters into our own hands, we are almost always exposed to an unrighteous reaction. We end up doing WORSE to the offender than he did to us.
The same news reached two people in that house and produced opposite results. Abigail did not wait for her husband's consent. Commentators see faith in that, not disloyalty.
She hears about her husband's folly from one of the young men. She acts at once in faith, and so without consulting her husband. Nature could only see a runaway servant in David. Faith does not look at outward circumstances. In the hunted and needy David, faith sees the coming king.
Her move was open to misreading from every side, and commentators admit it:
The pathway of faith sometimes looks suspicious, and what Abigail did might have seemed to an outside observer quite open to blame, whether you think of David or of her husband. But Abigail saw the will and glory of God, and where faith sees what He is doing, all questions are settled. Whatever it might look like, whatever it might cost, her mind was made up: and God vindicated her, and judged Nabal.
- Taken. Nabal let David's men guard his possessions, then refused David himself. He kept the benefit and rejected the man.
- Pretended. "Who is David?" was not a real question. Commentators call it willing ignorance, and the knowledge he refused still fixed his responsibility.
- Reported. One servant carried the truth to the one person who could act. God's grace came through the lowest voice in the house.
- Threatened. Vengeance was already on the road. Commentators fault David too, for arming himself instead of consulting the Lord.
- Answered. Abigail heard the same report and acted in faith. She saw the coming king in the hunted man, where Nabal saw only a runaway.
And the men were very good to us, and we were not hurt, neither missed we anything, as long as we companied with them, when we were in the fields.
David's messengers told Nabal that his shepherds had come to no harm while David's men camped nearby. Nabal answered with insults. This verse is the reply of the shepherds themselves, the men who were there. It raises the question the whole chapter turns on: what do you owe someone whose kindness you have enjoyed?
David's claim could be tested. The shepherds who were there gave their answer.
Had David exaggerated the service that he and his band had rendered? What could the shepherds say? "The men were very good to us, and we suffered no harm, and we did not miss anything... They were a wall to us both by night and by day, all the while we were with them keeping the sheep." Most would think that service like this normally calls for repayment. But David did more than that. Through his messengers he gave the rich sheep owner a chance to serve the Lord's anointed in his time of trial. That message tested Nabal in two ways. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart?
What the shepherds remembered about David's men was not what they took, but what they gave.
In the course of his wanderings, he, and his followers, went about doing good; for the shepherds of one Nabal have to own that David and his men "were very good to us." They protected the shepherds and their flocks night and day; so that, as long as David and his men were in their neighbourhood, they lost nothing.
Another writer names what those flocks were guarded against.
While hiding in the area where Nabal kept his flocks, David and his men had not trespassed on his rights. Instead, they had acted as a wall to protect his flocks from attacks by savage beasts, and by men more savage still. So David makes a frank appeal for recognition by Nabal. Would he not give him a small portion of that which he had in such abundance?
No law required Nabal to give David anything. The claim on him was of another kind.
Of course Nabal was under no legal obligation to David, though there is no doubt he ought to have felt himself under a moral one. The message reminds Nabal that while David and his men were in the same area as his shepherds, they had protected them rather than stolen from them, as many armies would do. None were hurt, and no sheep were missing. They suggest that Nabal ask his shepherds about it, to confirm it.
Nabal had gained something real from these men. His answer shows what he valued.
This was just Nabal's way of acting. He took all the advantage he could from David. But the moment David put in his claim for sympathy and help, his worldly spirit showed itself. Nabal could understand the value of David's protection well enough, though he cared nothing for David himself. As long as David's men were a wall around his possessions, he would tolerate them. But once they became a burden, he rejected them and shouted abuse at them.
Commentators read this as more than an old quarrel over food. One applies it to the heart that wants the benefits of Christ and nothing more.
It is one thing to be a Christian, as people say, and another thing to confess Christ before men. It is hard to find anything more selfish than the state of heart that takes all Jesus has to give, and gives Him nothing in return. "Provided I am saved, all the rest is unimportant." This is the secret thought of many a heart.
Another turns it on a world that enjoys mercies it never traces to their source.
How has the world imitated Nabal in his churlish refusal of David's request! It too has its sheep-shearing, its time of gathering in rich results to which it has contributed little or nothing. It has not realized that every earthly mercy it enjoys was bought by the death of Christ, and that He has been their unseen protector and provider. He makes His claim — not a harsh or unjust one — that out of their abundance they give freely to Him.
- Verified. The shepherds confirm David's account. No harm, no losses, nothing missing — his claim rested on plain fact, not on a boast.
- Unpaid. David's men guarded the flocks from wild animals and violent men, night and day, and no one had paid them for it.
- Owed. No law made Nabal give anything. His debt was a moral one, and that is the kind a selfish heart ignores most easily.
- Kept, but only the useful part. Nabal valued David's protection but cared nothing for David himself. He put up with the wall while it cost him nothing.
- Repeated. The same sum is still worked out today. People take all Christ gives and return nothing, and a world enjoys mercies it never credits to its unseen protector.
They were a wall to us both by night and day, all the while we were with them feeding the sheep.
One of Nabal's servants goes past his master and tells Abigail, his master's wife, what really happened out in the fields. His plain words about the wall decide two things: whether David was right to ask Nabal for anything, and what Abigail will do next.
David had claimed that Nabal's shepherds lost nothing while his men were nearby. The shepherds' own answer settles that, and turns his request into a test.
Had David exaggerated the service that he and his band had given? What could the shepherds say? … Most people would think that services like these called for some repayment. But David's message did far more. Through his messengers he gave the flock owner a chance to serve the Lord's anointed in his time of trial. That message sent to Nabal tested him in two ways. Would he repay kindness, and would he care for the king after God's own heart? … God's interests on earth at that time meant nothing to Nabal. So he lost his chance to take God's side in his day, and lost it for ever.
A wall keeps danger out. Here the danger was wild animals, and men who were worse.
David and his men were hiding near the place where Nabal kept his flocks. They had not trespassed on his rights. Instead, they had acted as a wall to protect his flocks from savage beasts, and from men more savage still. So David makes a frank appeal to Nabal for recognition. Would he not give him a small portion out of what he had in such abundance?
The servant does not argue with Nabal — others had tried and failed. He speaks to the one person in the house who will act. God's hand was behind it.
But the hand of God stepped in with grace. He moved one of Nabal's young servants to tell Abigail how Nabal had treated David's men. They had never oppressed the shepherds or taken anything from them. Instead they had acted as a wall of defence for them by night and day (v. 16). He knew people would expect David to avenge Nabal's insulting words. He saw that both Nabal and his whole household were in immediate danger. Some of the servants had clearly tried to reason with Nabal. They found him such a son of Belial — such a worthless man — that they could not speak to him.
What the servant hands Abigail is information; what she does with it is faith.
The pathway of faith sometimes looks suspicious. To an outsider, what Abigail did might have seemed quite blameworthy — whether you think of David or of her husband. But Abigail saw the will and glory of God. Where faith sees what He is doing, all questions are settled.
Nabal had enjoyed every benefit the wall gave him. His anger flares only when the men who provided it ask for something back.
This was exactly Nabal's way of acting. He took all the advantage he could from David. But the moment David made his claim for sympathy and help, his worldly spirit showed itself… Nabal could well understand the value of David's protection, though he cared nothing for David's person. As long as David's men were a wall around his possessions, he would tolerate them. But as soon as they became a burden, he rejected them and abused them.
Nabal is not the last to enjoy a harvest he did not protect.
Apply this in a spiritual way. How the world has copied Nabal in his rude refusal of David's request! It too has its sheep-shearing, its time of gathering in rich results to which it has contributed little or nothing. It has not realised that the death of Christ purchased every earthly mercy it enjoys. It has not seen that He has been their unseen protector and provider.
The problem goes deeper than bad manners. It is a failure to see who Christ is.
It takes the clear sight of faith to see the true glory of Christ, and to hold to Him in the time when He is rejected… You can hardly find a state of heart more selfish than this: taking everything Jesus has to give, and giving Him nothing in return.
- Wall — David's men guarded Nabal's shepherds night and day, from wild animals and from worse men. They took nothing.
- Witness — the shepherds confirm that David told the truth. Nabal cannot plead ignorance.
- Test — the request tested Nabal twice: would he repay kindness, and would he honour God's chosen king?
- Verdict — Nabal valued the wall and despised the man who built it. He welcomed David's men until they cost him something.
- Warning — the world still lives behind a wall it did not build. Faith sees the Protector, not just the protection.
And now know and consider what thou wilt do, for evil is determined against our master, and against all his household; and he is such a son of Belial, that one cannot speak to him.
A servant runs to Abigail with a warning her husband will never hear. David is coming, the whole household is in danger, and the one man who could stop it is the one man nobody can talk to.
The warning comes from one of Nabal's young servants. One commentator traces his speaking up to God's own working.
But the hand of God intervened in grace. He influenced one of Nabal's young servants to tell Abigail how Nabal had treated David's servants. He knew everyone would expect David to do something to avenge Nabal's insulting words. He saw that both Nabal and all his household were in immediate danger. Some of the servants had clearly tried to reason with Nabal, but found he was such a son of Belial (a worthless man) that they could not speak to him.
The ESV reads "such a worthless man"; older translations render it "a son of Belial." The phrase is not a name but a description of character.
The Hebrew word means 'worthless, lawless.' It is not a proper name. It stands as a picture of evil, so we read of a 'son of Belial' and a 'daughter of Belial' (Deut. 13:13; Judges 19:22; 1 Sam. 1:16; 1 Sam. 25:17, 25). In the New Testament it is set in contrast with Christ, as if it meant Satan (2 Cor. 6:15).
The man's own name pointed the same way. Abigail later admits it openly to David:
Nabal was a man of Belial (that is, a worthless fellow). As his name was, so was he; Nabal (that is, a fool) was he, and folly was with him.
Nabal had brushed aside the question of who David was. That one blind spot cost him everything.
God gave him a chance to own His anointed, the future king, and to serve him — a chance that would not have gone unrewarded. But he had no faith. He was tested here and found wanting. He failed to take the opportunity, and so lost everything, even his own life... Everything depended on what he thought of the one who asked the favour. Blind to this, Nabal laid himself open to God's righteous judgment. But the Spirit of God shows the truth to Abigail and moves her to act at once, turning away the threatened judgment from the whole household — except its guilty head, on whom destruction fell very soon after.
One writer sees in Nabal a picture reaching beyond his own day:
Nabal means "fool." He is a picture of the natural man, and especially of those who reject the Lord and His message of peace. His words — "my bread," "my water," "my flesh," "my shearers" — and the whole story remind us of that other fool our Lord spoke about. He also spoke of "my barns" - "my fruits" - "my goods" (Luke 12:16-21).
The household was not the only one in danger. One writer shows David slipping into danger of another kind.
This was terrible! And David was rashly taking himself out of the place of dependence — the only happy, the only holy place. Nor was it on behalf of the congregation of the Lord. No, it was to avenge himself on one who had treated him badly. Sad mistake! It was a happy thing for him that there was an Abigail in Nabal's house. God was about to use her to keep David from answering a fool according to his folly. This was just what the enemy wanted. Satan used Nabal's selfishness to trap David, and Abigail was the Lord's instrument to deliver him.
The servant hands Abigail a decision, not a discussion. The clock is the point.
Now Abigail's opportunity had come. Would she use it? Or would she hide behind her husband, let the precious moments pass, and so be caught in the destruction that Nabal in his folly was inviting? She had only a short time to decide. Putting it off for a day would have been fatal.
Stepping past her husband could look like disloyalty. One writer answers that charge:
The path of faith sometimes looks suspicious. To an outsider, what Abigail did might have seemed worth blaming, whether you think of David or of her husband. But Abigail saw the will and glory of God, and where faith sees what He is doing, every question is settled. Whatever it might look like, whatever it might cost, her mind was made up. God vindicated her, and judged Nabal.
- Refused. God gave Nabal the chance to own His anointed king, and Nabal threw it away. Everything turned on what he thought of the one who asked.
- Unreachable. "Worthless" is not a name but a character — lawless, and so closed that his own servants could not get a word through to him.
- Endangered. One man's folly put a whole household under sentence, and Satan used that same folly to pull David out of dependence on God.
- Decided. The warning demanded action within hours. If Abigail had hidden behind her husband, she would have shared his ruin.
- Delivered. Abigail acted on what faith saw God doing. It looked questionable from outside, but God vindicated her, judged Nabal, and kept David from avenging himself.