Verses: 31
Is It Read At Synagogue?: No.
Famous Quotes/Phrases: No phrase really stands out, but every once in a while, it’s fun to catch brief references to the intricacies of biblical life. For instance, in Verse 12, a man is fed “a piece of pressed fig cake and two cakes of raisins” in addition to basic food and drink.
Basic Plot: David and his men arrive at Ziklag to discover that Amalekites had gotten there first, burning the city and taking women captive — including David’s two wives. By using the ephod (more on that in a moment), David seeks and receives permission from God to pursue the Amalekites, and sets out with only two-thirds (400) of his men; the other one-third (200) feel too faint to fight. On the road, David and his soldiers encounter a starving Egyptian man who says he is an Amalekite slave abandoned by his master.
The Egyptian leads David to the Amalekites. David recovers everything the Amalekites had taken, including his two wives, plus the Amalekite flocks and herds. When David brings the spoils of battle to his men, some argue that they shouldn’t be shared with the 200 soldiers who hadn’t fought, but David insists that all of his soldiers should be included.
What’s Strange: As I mentioned previously, the ephod is understood to be a priestly garment that has within it the power to communicate with God. In this chapter, the ephod is a perfect symbol of Divine favor transferring from Saul to David. As Michael Carasik points out in his book The Bible’s Many Voices, Saul tries to use an ephod in Chapter 28 to no response. But when David uses it in this chapter, he is answered with an affirmative message.
What’s Spectacular: This chapter gives us a glimpse into David’s relationship with his soldiers. While the soldiers who object to sharing the Amalekite spoils with the entire army aren’t being especially generous, it’s understandable that they wouldn’t want to share with colleagues that hadn’t “earned” the rewards. And yet David is intent on spreading the good fortune to as many people as he can. This strikes me as a political risk — wouldn’t this decision cause only more resentment among the soldiers who actually do the fighting?
I suppose that David decides that rewarding the loyalty of even those who are sidelined is a better way to solidify his base of support; he bets that annoying his complaining allies is less dangerous than completely withholding rewards from other allies. Of course, it’s impossible to please everyone, but sometimes, even attempting to do so might win us appreciation in the long run.
Shabbat Shalom!