mh_parser/scraps/1Chr_20_1-1Chr_20_3.html
2023-12-17 15:08:46 -05:00

2 lines
1.9 KiB
HTML
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

<p>How the army of the Ammonites and their allies was routed in the field we read in the foregoing chapters. Here we have the destruction of Rabbah, the metropolis of their kingdom (<a class="bibleref" title="1Chr.20.1" href="/passage/?search=1Chr.20.1">1 Chron. 20:1</a>), the putting of their kings crown upon Davids head (<a class="bibleref" title="1Chr.20.2" href="/passage/?search=1Chr.20.2">1 Chron. 20:2</a>), and the great severity that was used towards the people, <a class="bibleref" title="1Chr.20.3" href="/passage/?search=1Chr.20.3">1 Chron. 20:3</a>. Of this we had a more full account in <a class="bibleref" title="2Sam.11.1" href="/passage/?search=2Sam.11.1">2 Sam. 11:1</a>-<a class="bibleref" title="2Sam.12.31" href="/passage/?search=2Sam.12.31">12:31</a>; and cannot but remember it by this sad token, that while Joab was besieging Rabbah David fell into that great sin in the matter of Uriah. But it is observable that, though the rest of the story is repeated, that is not: a hint only is given of it, in those words which lie here in a parenthesis—<i>But David tarried at Jerusalem</i>. If he had been abroad with his army, he would have been out of the way of that temptation; but, indulging his ease, he fell into uncleanness. Now, as the relating of the sin David fell into is an instance of the impartiality and fidelity of the sacred writers, so the avoiding of the repetition of it here, when there was a fair occasion given to speak of it again, is designed to teach us that, though there may be a just occasion to speak of the faults and miscarriages of others, yet we should not take delight in the repetition of them. That should always be looked upon as an unpleasing subject which, though sometimes one cannot help falling upon, yet one would not choose to dwell upon, any more than we should love to rake in a dunghill. The persons, or actions, we can say no good of, we had best say nothing of.</p>