_THE ARK BROUGHT UP TO JERUSALEM._
2 SAMUEL vi.
The first care of David when settled on the throne had been to obtain
possession of the stronghold of Zion, on which and on the city which
was to surround it he fixed as the capital of the kingdom and the
dwelling-place of the God of Israel. This being done, he next set
about bringing up the ark of the testimony from Kirjath-jearim, where
it had been left after being restored by the Philistines in the early
days of Samuel. David's first attempt to place the ark on Mount Zion
failed through want of due reverence on the part of those who were
transporting it; but after an interval of three months the attempt
was renewed, and the sacred symbol was duly installed on Mount Zion,
in the midst of the tabernacle prepared by David for its reception.
In bringing up the ark to Jerusalem, the king showed a commendable
desire to interest the whole nation, as far as possible, in the
solemn service. He gathered together the chosen men of Israel, thirty
thousand, and went with them to bring up the ark from Baale of
Judah, which must be another name for Kirjath-jearim, distant from
Jerusalem about ten miles. The people, numerous as they were, grudged
neither the time, the trouble, nor the expense. A handful might have
sufficed for all the actual labour that was required; but thousands
of the chief people were summoned to be present, and that on the
principle both of rendering due honour to God, and of conferring a
benefit on the people. It is not a handful of professional men only
that should be called to take a part in the service of religion;
Christian people generally should have an interest in the ark of
God; and other things being equal, that Church which interests the
greatest number of people and attracts them to active work will not
only do most for advancing God's kingdom, but will enjoy most of
inward life and prosperity.
The joyful spirit in which this service was performed by David
and his people is another interesting feature of the transaction.
Evidently it was not looked on as a toilsome service, but as a
blessed festival, adapted to cheer the heart and raise the spirits.
What was the precise nature of the service? It was to bring into
the heart of the nation, into the new capital of the kingdom, the
ark of the covenant, that piece of sacred furniture which had been
constructed nearly five hundred years before in the wilderness of
Sinai, the memorial of God's holy covenant with the people, and the
symbol of His gracious presence among them. In spirit it was bringing
God into the very midst of the nation, and on the choicest and most
prominent pedestal the country now supplied setting up a constant
memento of the presence of the Holy One. Rightly understood, the
service could bring joy only to spiritual hearts; it could give
pleasure to none who had reason to dread the presence of God. To
those who knew Him as their reconciled Father and the covenant God
of the nation, it was most attractive. It was as if the sun were
again shining on them after a long eclipse, or as if the father of
a loved and loving family had returned after a weary absence. God
enthroned on Zion, God in the midst of Jerusalem--what happier or
more thrilling thought was it possible to cherish? God, the sun and
shield of the nation, occupying for His residence the one fitting
place in all the land, and sending over Jerusalem and over all the
country emanations of love and grace, full of blessing for all that
feared His name! The happiness with which this service was entered on
by David and his people is surely the type of the spirit in which all
service to God should be rendered by those whose sins He has blotted
out, and on whom He has bestowed the privileges of His children.
But the best of services may be gone about in a faulty way. There may
be some criminal neglect of God's will that, like the dead fly in
the apothecary's pot of ointment, causes the perfume to send forth a
stinking savour. And so it was on this occasion. God had expressly
directed that when the ark was moved from place to place it should be
borne on poles on the shoulders of the Levites, and never carried in a
cart, like a common piece of furniture. But in the removal of the ark
from Kirjath-jearim, this direction was entirely overlooked. Instead of
following the directions given to Moses, the example of the Philistines
was copied when they sent the ark back to Bethshemesh. The Philistines
had placed it in a new cart, and the men of Israel now did the same.
What induced them to follow the example of the Philistines rather than
the directions of Moses, we do not know, and can hardly conjecture. It
does not appear to have been a mere oversight. It had something of a
deliberate plan about it, as if the law given in the wilderness were
now obsolete, and in so small a matter any method might be chosen that
the people liked. It was substituting a heathen example for a Divine
rule in the worship of God. We cannot suppose that David was guilty
of deliberately setting aside the authority of God. On his part, it
may have been an error of inadvertence. But that somewhere there was
a serious offence is evident from the punishment with which it was
visited (1 Chron. xv. 13). The jagged bridlepaths of those parts are
not at all adapted for wheeled conveyances, and when the oxen stumbled,
and the ark was shaken, Uzzah, who was driving the cart, put forth
his hand to steady it. "The anger of God," we are told, "was kindled
against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he
died by the ark of God." His effort to steady the ark must have been
made in a presumptuous way, without reverence for the sacred vessel.
Only a Levite was authorized to touch it, and Uzzah was apparently a
man of Judah. The punishment may seem to us hard for an offence which
was ceremonial rather than moral; but in that economy, moral truth
was taught through ceremonial observances, and neglect of the one was
treated as involving neglect of the other. The punishment was like the
punishment of Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, for offering strange
fire in their censers. It may be that both in their case, and in the
case of Uzzah, there were unrecorded circumstances, unknown to us,
making it clear that the ceremonial offence was not a mere accident,
but that it was associated with evil personal qualities well fitted to
provoke the judgment of God. The great lesson for all time is to beware
of following our own devices in the worship of God when we have clear
instructions in His word how we are to worship Him.
This lamentable event put a sudden end to the joyful service. It
was like the bursting of a thunderstorm on an excursion party that
rapidly sends every one to flight. And it is doubtful whether the
spirit shown by David was altogether right. He was displeased
"because the Lord had made a breach upon Uzzah, and he called the
name of the place Perez-uzzah to this day. And David was afraid of
the Lord that day and said, How shall the ark of the Lord come to
me? So David would not remove the ark of the Lord into the city of
David; but David carried it aside into the house of Obed-edom the
Gittite." The narrative reads as if David resented the judgment which
God had inflicted, and in a somewhat petulant spirit abandoned the
enterprise because he found God too hard to please. That some such
feeling should have fluttered about his heart was not to be wondered
at; but surely it was a feeling to which he ought not to have given
entertainment, as it certainly was one on which he ought not to have
acted. If God was offended, David surely knew that He must have had
good ground for being so. It became him and the people, therefore,
to accept God's judgment, humble themselves before Him, and seek
forgiveness for the negligent manner in which they had addressed
themselves to this very solemn service. Instead of this David throws
up the matter in a fit of sullen temper, as if it were impossible to
please God in it, and the enterprise must therefore be abandoned. He
leaves the ark in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite, returning to
Jerusalem crestfallen and displeased, altogether in a spirit most
opposite to that in which he had set out.
It may happen to you that some Christian undertaking on which you
have entered with great zeal and ardour, and without any surmise
that you are not doing right, is not blessed, but meets with some
rough shock, that places you in a very painful position. In the
most disinterested spirit, you have tried perhaps to set up in
some neglected district a school or a mission, and you expect all
encouragement and approbation from those who are most interested in
the welfare of the district. Instead of receiving approval, you find
that you are regarded as an enemy and an intruder. You are attacked
with unexampled rudeness, sinister aims are laid to your charge,
and the purpose of your undertaking is declared to be to hurt and
discourage those whom you were bound to aid. The shock is so violent
and so rude that for a time you cannot understand it. On the part of
man it admits of no reasonable justification whatever. But when you
go into your closet, and think of the matter as permitted by God,
you wonder still more why God should thwart you in your endeavour
to do good. Rebellious feelings hover about your heart that if God
is to treat you in this way, it were better to abandon His service
altogether. But surely no such feeling is ever to find a settled
place in your heart. You may be sure that the rebuff which God has
permitted you to encounter is meant as a trial of your faith and
humility; and if you wait on God for further light and humbly ask a
true view of God's will; if, above all, you beware of retiring in
sullen silence from God's active service, good may come out of the
apparent evil, and you may yet find cause to bless God even for the
shock that made you so uncomfortable at the time.
The Lord does not forsake His people, nor leave them for ever under
a cloud. It was not long before the downcast heart of David was
reassured. When the ark had been left at the house of Obed-edom,
Obed-edom was not afraid to take it in. Its presence in other
places had hitherto been the signal for disaster and death. Among
the Philistines, in city after city, at Bethshemesh, and now at
Perez-uzzah, it had spread death on every side. Obed-edom was no
sufferer. Probably he was a God-fearing man, conscious of no purpose
but that of honouring God. A manifest blessing rested on his house.
"The God of heaven," says Bishop Hall, "pays liberally for His
lodging." It is not so much God's ark in our time and country that
needs a lodging, but God's servants, God's poor, sometimes persecuted
fugitives flying from an oppressor, very often pious men in foreign
countries labouring under infinite discouragements to serve God. The
Obed-edom who takes them in will not suffer. Even should he be put to
loss or inconvenience, the day of recompense draweth nigh. "I was a
stranger, and ye took Me in."
Again, then, King David, encouraged by the experience of Obed-edom,
goes forth in royal state to bring up the ark to Jerusalem. The error
that had proved so fatal was now rectified. "David said, None ought
to carry the ark of God but the Levites, for them hath the Lord
chosen to carry the ark of God and to minister unto Him for ever" (1
Chron. xv. 2). In token of his humility and his conviction that every
service that man renders to God is tainted and needs forgiveness,
oxen and fatlings were sacrificed ere the bearers of the ark had
well begun to move. The spirit of enthusiastic joy again swayed the
multitude, brightened probably by the assurance that no judgment
need now be dreaded, but that they might confidently look for the
smile of an approving God. The feelings of the king himself were
wonderfully wrought up, and he gave free expression to the joy of his
heart. There are occasions of great rejoicing when all ceremony is
forgotten, and no forms or appearances are suffered to stem the tide
of enthusiasm as it gushes right from the heart. It was an occasion
of this kind to David. The check he had sustained three months before
had only dammed up his feelings, and they rolled out now with all the
greater volume. His soul was stirred by the thought that the symbol
of Godhead was now to be placed in his own city, close to his own
dwelling; that it was to find an abiding place of rest in the heart
of the kingdom, on the heights where Melchizedek had reigned, close
to where he had blessed Abraham, and which God had destined as His
own dwelling from the foundations of the world. Glorious memories
of the past, mingling with bright anticipations of the future,
recollections of the grace revealed to the fathers, and visions of
the same grace streaming forth to distant ages, as generation after
generation of the faithful came up here to attend the holy festivals,
might well excite that tumult of emotion in David's breast before
which the ordinary restraints of royalty were utterly flung aside.
He sacrificed, he played, he sang, he leapt and danced before the
Lord, with all his might; he made a display of enthusiasm which the
cold-hearted Michal, as she could not understand it nor sympathise
with it, had the folly to despise and the cruelty to ridicule. The
ordinary temper of the sexes was reversed--the man was enthusiastic;
the woman was cold. Little did she know of the springs of true
enthusiasm in the service of God! To her faithless eye, the ark
was little more than a chest of gold, and where it was kept was of
little consequence; her carnal heart could not appreciate the glory
that excelleth; her blind eye could see none of the visions that had
overpowered the soul of her husband.
A few other circumstances are briefly noticed in connection with the
close of the service, when the ark had been solemnly enshrined within
the tabernacle that David had reared for it on Mount Zion.
The first is that "David offered burnt-offerings and peace-offerings
before the Lord." The burnt-offering was a fresh memorial of sin, and
therefore a fresh confession that even in connection with that very
holy service there were sins to be confessed, atoned for, and forgiven.
For there is this great difference between the service of the formalist
and the service of the earnest worshipper: that while the one can
see nothing faulty in his performance, the other sees a multitude of
imperfections in his. Clearer light and a clearer eye, even the light
thrown by the glory of God's purity on the best works of man, reveal
a host of blemishes, unseen in ordinary light and by the carnal eye.
Our very prayers need to be purged, our tears to be wept over, our
repentances repented of. Little could the best services ever done by
him avail the spiritual worshipper if it were not for the High-priest
over the house of God who ever liveth to make intercession for him.
Again, we find David after the offering of the burnt-offerings and the
peace-offerings "blessing the people in the name of the Lord of hosts."
This was something more than merely expressing a wish or offering a
prayer for their welfare. It was like the benediction with which we
close our public services. The benediction is more than a prayer. The
servant of the Lord appears in the attitude of dropping on the heads
of the people the blessing which he invokes. Not that he or any man can
convey heavenly blessings to a people that do not by faith appropriate
them and rejoice in them. But the act of benediction implies this:
These blessings are yours if you will only have them. They are
provided, they are made over to you, if you will only accept them. The
last act of public worship is a great encouragement to faith. When the
peace of God that passeth all understanding, or the blessing of God the
Father, Son and Holy Ghost, or the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and
the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost are invoked over
your heads, it is to assure you that if you will but accept of them
through Jesus Christ, these great blessings are actually yours. True,
there is no part of our service more frequently spoiled by formality;
but there is none richer with true blessing to faith. So when David
blessed the people, it was an assurance to them that God's blessing
was within their reach; it was theirs if they would only take it. How
strange that any hearts should be callous under such an announcement;
that any should fail to leap to it, as it were, and rejoice in it, as
glad tidings of great joy!
The third thing David did was to deal to every one of Israel, both
man and woman, a loaf of bread, and a good piece of flesh, and a
flagon of wine. It was a characteristic act, worthy of a bountiful
and generous nature like David's. It may be that associating bodily
gratifications with Divine service is liable to abuse, that the taste
which it gratifies is not a high one, and that it tempts some men
to attend religious services for the same reason as some followed
Jesus--for the loaves and fishes. Yet Jesus did not abstain on some
rare occasions from feeding the multitude, though the act was
liable to abuse. The example both of David and of Jesus may show us
that though not habitually, yet occasionally, it is both right and
fitting that religious service should be associated with a simple
repast. There is nothing in Scripture to warrant the practice,
adopted in some missions in very poor districts, of feeding the
people habitually when they come up for religious service, and there
is much in the argument that such a practice degrades religion and
obscures the glory of the blessings which Divine service is designed
to bring to the poor. But occasionally the rigid rule may be somewhat
relaxed, and thus a sort of symbolical proof afforded that godliness
is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is
and of that which is to come.
The last thing recorded of David is, that he returned to bless his
house. The cares of the State and the public duties of the day
were not allowed to interfere with his domestic duty. Whatever may
have been his ordinary practice, on this occasion at least he was
specially concerned for his household, and desirous that in a special
sense they should share the blessing. It is plain from this that,
amid all the imperfections of his motley household, he could not
allow his children to grow up ignorant of God, thus dealing a rebuke
to all who, outdoing the very heathen in heathenism, have houses
without an altar and without a God. It is painful to find that the
spirit of the king was not shared by every member of his family.
It was when he was returning to this duty that Michal met him and
addressed to him these insulting words: "How glorious was the king
of Israel to-day, who uncovered himself to-day in the eyes of the
handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamefully
uncovers himself." On the mind of David himself, this ebullition
had no effect but to confirm him in his feeling, and reiterate his
conviction that his enthusiasm reflected on him not shame but glory.
But a woman of Michal's character could not but act like an icicle
on the spiritual life of the household. She belonged to a class
that cannot tolerate enthusiasm in religion. In any other cause,
enthusiasm may be excused, perhaps extolled and admired: in the
painter, the musician, the traveller, even the child of pleasure;
the only persons whose enthusiasm is unbearable are those who are
enthusiastic in their regard for their Saviour, and in the answer
they give to the question, "What shall I render to the Lord for all
His benefits toward me?" There are, doubtless, times to be calm,
and times to be enthusiastic; but can it be right to give all our
coldness to Christ and all our enthusiasm to the world?