More on David

We looked at David’s Psalm to his little rescued lamb last time. Further meditation on that story brought up another line of thought. We commented that David cited his rescue of the lamb to Saul when he, David was attempting to convince the King to allow him to challenge the Giant.

Just before this encounter, David’s brother had rebuked him, charging that David was merely curious, looking for some entertainment. (1 Samuel 17:28) He belittled David’s contribution to the family by asking what had happened to the “few sheep in the wilderness.” Actually, David had responsibly left them in the care of another keeper, so he was “doing his job.”

The ironic thing is, that Eliab, the elder brother, was not “doing his job.” Goliath had come out and challenged the men of Israel to battle for 40 days. No one, including David’s soldier brothers, had responded. Then David arrived and was anxious to confront the Philistine who was belittling Israel and berating the God of Israel. This is the point at which Eliab charged David with dereliction of his duties in caring for those “few sheep.”

Based upon Eliab’s response to Goliath, we can surmise that had Eliab been the one in the wilderness with the sheep when the lion and bear attacked, the “few” would have been a couple less in number. David was not a coward. He did not run from lion, bear, or giant. His father Jesse may have not sent him to keep the sheep based only on his being the youngest and thus assigned the more menial tasks, but the father may have recognized the bravery inherent in his youngest son.

Whether David felt fear in his encounters is not known, but bravery is not a lack of fear. Rather it is acting in spite of fear. David not only “acted,” it says that he ran toward the encounter with Goliath. (V. 48) This is an interesting tactic and it possibly unnerved Goliath, causing him to hesitate just a second. A second too long, that is. And you know the rest of the story.

One other interesting sidelight is that this battle tactic was employed by Alexander the Great when he conquered the known world. His soldiers ran toward the enemy, again unnerving them and contributing to the successful defeat of enemy armies. This was even prophesied by Daniel in his dreams. (Daniel 7:6)
After this I kept looking, and behold, another one, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird; the beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it.

Daniel’s vision was of four beasts that would conquer the world. First was Babylon, the nation in power as he lived. His vision occurred during the reign of Belshazzar, before Daniel saw and interpreted the “handwriting on the wall.” Babylon was overthrown by Medo-Persia which, in turn, fell to Greece represented by the leopard. Then a fourth, a “dreadful and terrifying” beast gained power, and we know that as Rome.

Greece, under Alexander, had overcome enemies by the tactic of running into battle, represented by a leopard with wings. This was reinforced by another vision two years later in chapter 8. This time, the kingdom of Babylon was not represented, but the successor, Medo-Persia characterized by a ram with two horns, one more prominent and larger than the other. (“Medo,” the lesser country and “Persia” the greater.) It “butted” west, north, and south, taking control of all of the land around it. History now identifies this entity as Medo-Persia, the consortium that overthrew Babylon.

Then in v. 5, we find the successor: a goat from the west.
While I was observing, behold, a male goat was coming from the west over the surface of the whole earth without touching the ground; and the goat had a conspicuous horn between his eyes.

Note that the conquering force was “flying,” or moving rapidly. Again a leader is identified by a “conspicuous horn.” The confrontation between the two forces follows in v. 6. (The goat...)
He came up to the ram that had the two horns, which I had seen standing in front of the canal, and rushed at him in his mighty wrath. 7 I saw him come beside the ram, and he was enraged at him; and he struck the ram and shattered his two horns, and the ram had no strength to withstand him. So he hurled him to the ground and trampled on him, and there was none to rescue the ram from his power.

The specific detail of “charging or rushing” the enemy is specified. And the kingdom of Persia was completely destroyed, just as Daniel had predicted about 300 years earlier. (A summary of the decisive battle may be found here. The final analysis was that Alexander lost about 100 men while killing over 300,000 and capturing many more. 301 BC)

David’s and Alexander’s strategy was also seen in the “blitzkrieg” unleashed by Hitler in WWII. Back to David. This teenager, of 16 or 17 as far as we know, began his career by protecting sheep from predators, then battling to the death, a nine-foot-tall opponent. He inaugurated a battle plan that led to many successful campaigns throughout history. And his brother had the temerity to challenge him and his courage.

Seems like the obvious is not always so obvious.