Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
DAVID'S FIRST OPPOSITIONS FROM SAUL—
TYPE AND ANTITYPE.
1 Sam. 18—20.
THE CAUSE. THE FIRST FORMS. JONATHAN INTERCEDES FOR DAVID. FURTHER INJURIES. DAVID ESCAPES. FOUR FURTHER ATTEMPTED INJURIES. DAVID AND JONATHAN'S PERTINENT INTERVIEW. THEIR PARTING.
SO FAR we have studied David, type and antitype, as set forth in 1 Sam. 16 and 17; and herein we propose to study 1 Sam. 18, 19 and 20, praying the Lord to bless the study to all of us. Chap. 18 begins with a description of events following David's conversation with Saul after his slaying Goliath. We saw that the antitypical conversation was carried on by our Pastor's speaking through his pertinent writings and on antitypical Saul's part by their studying those writings. The main, but not exclusive, representative of antitypical Saul in this matter was Dr. Joseph Cook, who read pertinent writings of our Pastor before, during and after his world tour from Sept., 1880, to Dec., 1882. Dr. Joseph Seiss was another member of antitypical Saul who acted in certain features of the antitype of 1 Sam. 17. Besides these there were other members of antitypical Saul more or less active in the antitype of matters set forth in that chapter. These same brethren continued to act as antitypical Saul in chapters 18, 19 and 20, with Dr. Cook acting as the chief representative of antitypical Saul. The close connection between the end of chap. 17 and the beginning of chap. 18 would suggest this, even as the antitypical facts themselves prove it. So close is this connection that in the Hebrew 1 Sam. 17: 55—18: 5 together forms a paragraph, a thing that our chapter division here obscures in the A.V. The more thoroughly consecrated and Truth-loving of the crown-losers (Jonathan, Jehovah gave, v. 1) gave our Pastor (David)
especial appreciation and love for his refutation of evolution (soul of Jonathan … loved him). The crown-lost princes, not desiring to lose from their service so able a warrior against infidelity as our Pastor was, numbered him among their supporters in the pertinent warfare (Saul took him), desiring him no more to go back to the Truth people to serve, but to give his service in their warfare against infidelity (would let him go no more home to his father's house). Antitypical Jonathan and David became especially bound to each other in the best of bonds (made a covenant, v. 3). The former, recognizing the latter's superiority, gladly and fully subordinated themselves (stripped himself of his robe, v. 4) to antitypical David in their equipment (garments, i.e., armor), discourses (sword), creed (bow) and service (girdle).
(2) Against every form of infidelity that the crown-lost princes desired him to oppose Bro. Russell fought (David went … Saul sent him, v. 5) and was victorious (prospered, see margin), as can be seen in pertinent Tower articles from the outstart onward. This made the crown-lost princes esteem him as an anti-infidelity warrior above all others of their warriors (Saul set [esteemed] him over [above] the [other] men of war). His pertinent course was pleasing to church members and fellow-warriors (accepted … people and … Saul's servants). Each time his writings against evolution added to his refutations of it, he was hailed with the acclamations of church members (when David was returning from the slaughter of the Philistine … women … of all cities of Israel, v. 6), heralding the victory (singing) and acting concordantly (dancing) with testimonies in their gatherings (tabrets [timbrels]) and conversations (three-stringed instruments, see margin). They acclaimed Bro. Russell in this matter as abler than the crown-lost princes (Saul … thousands; and David his ten thousands, v. 7). This was too much for the double-minded crown-lost
leaders to endure, since they had always been regarded as highest in ability and achievement in nominal-church circles; hence in envy they resented this esteem and praise for Bro. Russell (Saul was very wroth and … displeased … ascribed unto David ten thousands … me … thousands, v. 8). Their love for honor made them think that only in office were they being esteemed above Bro. Russell (can he have more but the kingdom?). Henceforth with envious eyes they regarded him (Saul eyed David from that day and forward, v. 9). Their envy, producing dejection (evil spirit … upon Saul, v. 10) on the next occasion (morrow), was with them even while they preached in the nominal church (prophesied in … the house). Bro. Russell sought to soothe them as formerly he had done to them, particularly Dr. Seiss, as shown in Chapter VIII (David played … as at other times); and he sought to do this through Tower articles and tracts on restitution for the non-elect in the Millennium. Against this they had articles (javelin) ready to publish against him (in Saul's hand).
(3) While several of the crown-lost leaders took part in the attack (Saul cast the javelin, v. 11), the chief actor therein was Dr. Cook, who will here be used as a representative of all of them, and who sought to refute Bro. Russell, without naming him, by whipping him over the back of Prof. Dorner, of the Berlin University. The latter in nominal-church circles was then a much more widely known man than was Bro. Russell, and was then advocating probation for the non-elect in an alleged intermediate state, i.e., between death and the awakening of the dead. His back, as that of the most eminent intermediate-state-probation advocate, Dr. Cook selected as the one over which he would administer a beating to Bro. Russell. And in this act he performed his part in antitypical Saul's casting the antitypical javelin at antitypical David. This antitypical javelin is the prelude to the first
lecture of Dr. Cook's book entitled, Occident. In that prelude of 18 pages he made a savage attack on future probation as taught by Prof. Dorner. Dr. Cook thought that this attack would refute all advocates of future probation, thus also would prevail over Bro. Russell (I will smite David, even to the wall). But Bro. Russell foiled Dr. Cook's purpose by two turns of argument: (1) by proving that the intermediate state is one of unconsciousness, and that hence there could be no probation there; and (2) by proving that the Millennium will be the time for probation for the non-elect dead and living (David twice turned around from out of his presence, I. V.; see Dr. Young, also). Such an answer nonplussed Dr. Cook and his co-warriors; for it proved that his argument, so far as Bro. Russell's position was concerned, was a straw man. This caused him to fear our Pastor (Saul was afraid of David, v. 12), whose answers troubled him, and proved that Jehovah was with Bro. Russell, and had forsaken him (the Lord was with him, and was departed from Saul). This mental attitude in antitypical Saul moved them to withdraw their use of, and favor from, antitypical David, and made them seek to limit his activities to Truth people (Saul removed … and set him by himself leader of a thousand, v. 13, I. V.). Nevertheless, as the leader of such, Bro. Russell freely mingled with the public (went out and came in before the people), and prospered in all his undertakings (David prospered [see margin] in all his ways, v. 14) under the favor of the Lord (the Lord was with him). Observing this, the crown-lost princes increasingly feared him (v. 15). But both the nominal and the real people of God (Israel and Judah, v. 16) thought highly of him for his works (because … before them).
(4) Noting Bro. Russell's popularity, certain of the crown-lost princes sought to bring about his ruin at the hands of infidelity, and thus they would be spared the pains of undoing him (Let not mine … but the
hand of the Philistines be upon him, v. 17). They hoped that Bro. Russell would become involved in a controversy with infidels who would overpower him, and thus ruin him as a religious controversialist. Therefore, they proposed to give Bro. Russell one of their powers (my elder daughter, Merab [increase]), the power of holding public meetings under the support of all Protestant churches in various towns and cities as interdenominational evangelists do, on condition that he use such opportunities to fight infidelity, not, of course, to spread the harvest Truth, which by now these leaders were increasingly opposing. Thus in this limited sphere they were willing to offer him a measure of support and sanction (be thou valiant for me, and fight the Lord's battles). In this they acted as many a nominal-church preacher did during the reaping time when they expressed the desire that various brethren remain in, and help the churches, believing as they wished, only keeping the harvest Truth to themselves; but these leaders hoped that Bro. Russell would become overmatched therein. On receiving the offer Bro. Russell's humility asserted itself (who am I … that I … son-in-law to the king? v. 18), asserting that in person, powers and standing he was unequal to the office proposed. But the crown-lost princes begrudged him even this office so limited, and gave it to evangelists, like Moody, Whipple, Jones, Small, Torrey, and later, Sunday, Biederwolf, Gray, etc. (she was given unto Adriel [flock of God], the Meholathite [dancer], v. 19), who danced as the crown-lost princes piped. Antitypical Saul had another office power (Michal [brook], v. 20), that of addressing the membership of individual churches. This power was more inclined to suitableness for Bro. Russell (loved David), both because of his then development and the inclination of separate congregations, which welcomed him as a speaker in their midst. These made known to antitypical Saul their pertinent preference (they told
Saul), and they were willing to lend their support and sanction to it, on a condition and for a purpose similar to the former one (pleased him … will give him her … be a snare … the Philistines … against him … Saul said … thou … my son-in-law by the second, v. 21, I. V.). Then the crown-lost princes suggested to various pastors and principals of the flocks to encourage Bro. Russell to accept such a power and office (Saul commanded his servants, Commune with David … be the king's son-in-law, v. 22). As instructed, these pastors and principals of the flocks encouraged Bro. Russell to accept such powers (Saul's servants spake these words in the ears of David, v. 23), who again in humility hesitated to accept it (Seemeth it to you a light thing … I am a poor man, and lightly esteemed). This quality he always showed.
(5) These messengers reported to the crown-lost princes what and how Bro. Russell replied (v. 24). The crown-lost princes told these messengers to assure Bro. Russell that they desired not a human reward, but would instead be satisfied with the refutation of the infidelistic, i.e., unconsecrated [uncircumcised] universalists, whom they regarded as nothing less than infidels (the king desireth not any dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, v. 25). Having great difficulty in coping with such, the pertinent crown-lost princes felt sure and desired that such would refute Bro. Russell (Saul thought to make David fall by … Philistines). The messengers told Bro. Russell of this proposal (servants told David these words, v. 26). He accepted it (pleased David … the king's son-in-law). Therefore, before the time of exercising the office came (the days were not expired) Bro. Russell with his cooperating warriors among the Truth people (he and his men, v. 27) entered into a controversy with Mr. Paton and his co-warriors, who were no-ransomers (one hundred of the antitypical Philistines) and universalists (the second hundred of the antitypical Philistines)
and completely refuted them (slew of the Philistines two hundred men) and through their refuted unholy [uncircumcised] theories (foreskins) gave evidence that he had refuted the holders of both classes of infidels (gave them in full tale [count] to the king), thus claiming the right to exercise the office of a lecturer in local churches among the denominations (that he might be the king's son-in-law). The crown-lost princes then allowed and sanctioned his use of such power (Saul gave him Michal, his daughter, to wife). This victory of Bro. Russell's over the infidelistic sifters among Truth people all the more impressed the crown-lost leaders with the fact that the Lord favored Bro. Russell (Saul saw and knew that the Lord was with David, v. 28) and that the power of addressing various nominal-church congregations was very favorable to Bro. Russell (Michal … loved him). These facts, instead of pleasing the crown-lost princes in various of their members, aroused them to still more and lasting fear and suspicion of, and enmity toward Bro. Russell (Saul … more afraid … enemy continually, v. 29). It was in the third hour of the Harvest, June, 1881 to Oct., 1884, that the infidelism sifting was especially active in the Sanctuary, the Court and the City, and it was of such a sifting movement that the type of v. 30 treats when it says that the princes of the Philistines went forth. And in such campaigns of the infidelistic leaders (princes of the Philistines went forth, v. 30), Bro. Russell succeeded more against them (David prospered more) than all the other helpers of the crown-lost princes (than all the servants of Saul). This, of course, enhanced him in the estimation of anti-infidels (so that his name was much set by). And of it he was worthy.
(6) Our study brings us now to 1 Sam. 19. Bro. Russell's successes against the infidelistic sifters, instead of pleasing the crown-lost princes, as it should have done, aroused their envy to symbolic murderous
proportions, moving them to advise the most consecrated and Truth-loving of the crown-losers and their supporting co-warriors to cut off Bro. Russell from all fellowship in nominal-church circles (Saul spake to Jonathan, his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David, v. 1). This charge greatly pained antitypical Jonathan, who much appreciated Bro. Russell (Jonathan … delighted much in David, v. 2) and who told him of their superiors' orders (told David … father seeketh to kill thee). They counseled him to be on his guard and to retire for a while from activities in the churches until times would change (take heed … morning … in a secret place and hide thyself). They offered to take Bro. Russell's place of service supported by the crown-lost princes (go out and stand beside my father … where thou art, v. 3) and to speak favorably of him to them and then report to him the results (commune … of thee … will tell thee). These then praised Bro. Russell to the crown-lost princes (spake good of David unto Saul, v. 4). They expostulated with them not to sin against Bro. Russell by cutting him off from fellowship and service, since therein he did no wrong against, but did much good to the crown-lost leaders (sin against David … not sinned against thee … his works … thee-ward very good). Especially did they emphasize Bro. Russell's courage and skill in his successful refutation of evolution (life in his hands, and slew the Philistine, v. 5), which none of the crown-lost princes nor their co-warriors were able to do, by which the Lord wrought a signal victory for His people, thus showing that He favored Bro. Russell (Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel), and which the crown-lost leaders witnessed with joy (sawest … didst rejoice). Why, then, they reasoned, should the crown-lost leaders sin against an innocent one, causelessly cutting him off from fellowship and service (Wherefore … sin
against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause)? The fine plea had its intended result. The crown-lost leaders relented and gave solemn assurance that Bro. Russell would not be cut off from fellowship and service in nominal-church circles (Saul harkened … the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain).
(7) True to their promise these most faithful and Truth-loving crown-losers informed Bro. Russell of what they had said to the crown-lost princes in his favor and of their resultant assurance (called David … showed him all, v. 7). Furthermore, they re-introduced him to the crown-lost leaders as one acceptable to them (brought David to Saul); and he was in their favor again as formerly (was in his presence [favor] as in times past). The no-ransomers, the no-substitutionists, began toward the end of 1883 again to set forth their views against the Bible teachings on that point (there was war again, v. 8), and Bro. Russell, the champion of the Ransom, again entered the lists in its defense and in refutation of the no-ransomers (David went out, and fought against the Philistines) and he certainly mightily overthrew them (slew them with a great slaughter). Among others, the article in Reprints 573-575 is a part of this slaughter, as the battle referred to in 1 Sam. 18: 27 finds its antitype in articles like those in Reprints 481-482 and 483. Under such onslaughts the no-ransomers fled from the field of battle (fled from him). The melancholy spirit that God's forsaking antitypical Saul brought upon him troubled him as he administered the matters of his office (evil [sad] spirit … upon Saul … as he sat in his house, v. 9). Again he had a writing on future probation ready to publish (javelin in his hand) and Bro. Russell as before used the Bible to bring out the sweet music of the Song of Moses, restitution, numerous examples of which can be found in the Towers from Jan., 1884, onward. Among other crown-lost leaders, Dr. Cook again took part in the antitype of the javelin-throwing
of v. 10. While a newspaper report of his attempting to beat Bro. Russell over Dr. Dorner's back (1 Sam. 18: 11) appeared in Boston papers of Jan. 9, 1883, what proved to be the antitypical javelin of v. 10, though given as the prelude to his lecture of Jan. 15, 1883, did not appear in print until in 1884, i.e., when his book containing it, entitled, Occident, appeared. The former prelude was entitled, New Departures in and from Orthodoxy; the prelude now under consideration was entitled, Does Death End Probation? By this time, 1884, Dr. Cook was quite aroused against Bro. Russell's teaching on Restitution, and he aimed mainly at Bro. Russell, though, as delivered Jan. 15, 1883, and printed in 1884, this prelude ostensibly aimed at Dr. Dorner (Saul … smite David … wall … javelin, v. 10). Bro. Russell overcame its damaging effects as before (slipped away out of Saul's presence). This prelude as respects Bro. Russell failed of its purpose (smote … the wall); for Bro. Russell's pertinent teachings enabled him to evade (David fled) its force and to escape its effects (escaped that night).
(8) Connected with the prelude (entitled, Probation at Death) to Dr. Cook's lecture of Feb. 12, 1883, but not appearing in print until over a year later, we find the acts of the crown-lost princes and their messengers illustrated, as typed in vs. 11-17. Dr. Cook's attacks on Dr. Dorner in the above-mentioned two preludes not only drew fire from Bro. Russell, but also from certain professors of the Congregational Seminary at Amherst, Mass., notably from Dr. Smyth, at whom in the prelude of the Feb. 12th lecture Dr. Cook aimed, as well as at Bro. Russell. The type refers to its aim at Bro. Russell. By this time Dr. Cook had aroused a considerable number of his sympathizers (messengers, v. 11) to be in waiting to catch Bro. Russell in his words (watch him … slay him), especially in his future lecturing in various churches (morning). The exercise of this office brought with it a warning of
his danger (saying, If … not tonight … slain), which with the assistance of this office he escaped, by quietly retiring from such work (Michal let David down … escaped, v. 12). Bro. Russell's pertinent powers as lodged in his sympathizers in local churches defended him by representing his teachings (bed, v. 13) as nominal-church doctrines (Michal took an image), stressing his justification (goat's hair) teachings as the rest of his doctrines (pillow … bolster), and thus hid them from clear sight (covered … cloth). Dr. Cook's coworkers demanded the surrender of Bro. Russell by his nominal-church sympathizers (Saul sent messengers to take David, v. 14); but these made plausible excuses for him (she said, He is sick). But Dr. Cook, suspecting the excuses, incited them to the task again (Saul … see David, v. 15), charging them to bring Bro. Russell's teachings in his writings (bed) to him for refutation (bring … in the bed … slay him). These messengers could get no more of his teachings from his nominal-church sympathizers than those centering in justification, set forth by them as exactly like orthodoxy's pertinent teachings (image … goats' hair, v. 16). When Dr. Cook and other crown-lost leaders expostulated with those sympathetic with Bro. Russell's pertinent powers as attempting to deceive him and them, they used deception to shield themselves (Saul … Michal … deceived me so … enemy … escaped … said … I kill thee, v. 17).
(9) Thus Bro. Russell escaped the plots of the crown-lost leaders to undo him, and found safety and solace among some of the brethren who survived from the Philadelphia phase of the Church (Samuel, v. 18) in the heights of Christian character development (escaped, and came to Samuel to Ramah). Of course, Bro. Russell told these dear Philadelphia survivors of his experience with antitypical Saul, and these could from certain of their experiences with antitypical Saul sympathize with him (told him all that Saul had done
to him). Then these occupied themselves with feeding God's sheep (dwelt in Naioth [pastures]). The news of their activities and character development was soon brought to Dr. Cook and other crown-lost princes (it was told Saul … David is at Naioth in Ramah, v. 19). They sent messengers to take Bro. Russell captive (Saul sent messengers to take David, v. 20). Again we will illustrate this part of the crown-lost princes' activities through those of Dr. Cook. Dr. Smyth, of Amherst, replied to Dr. Cook's prelude of Feb. 12, 1883, by some questions, immediately submitted to Dr. Cook. This led to a further controversy between them, in which each replied to the other three times, Dr. Cook doing so Feb. 12, 19 and Mar. 12. These replies of Dr. Cook were published as an appendix to his book, Occident, in 1884, and only with their publication did they affect Bro. Russell. It is in connection with these three replies of Dr. Cook to Dr. Smyth that the antitypes of 1 Sam. 19: 20-24 occurred. These we will briefly trace. The messengers antitypical of those of v. 20 were those who were stirred up by Dr. Cook's reply of Feb. 12 to Dr. Smyth's questions. Apparently Bro. Russell's and Dr. Cook's first personal meeting at Pittsburgh, where the former handed the latter Food for Thinking Christians and Tabernacle Shadows, occurred between Dr. Cook's oral controversy in 1883 and its publication in 1884 in the book, Occident. This will account for Dr. Cook's continued beating of Bro. Russell over others' backs. He, therefore, by these three replies incited various ones to make three attempts to make Bro. Russell a captive, restrained by Dr. Cook's arguments. And these three attempts ended in the would-be captors' accepting more or less of the Truth teachings, and preaching them when they perceived that those who were presenting them were affiliated with, and led by antitypical Samuel, as the old-time Millennial advocates (vs. 20, 21).
(10) This led Dr. Cook and other crown-lost leaders
to make a closer investigation of the harvest Truth, activities and advocates (he went to Ramah) as these appeared in its ever-growing literature which was in the lookout of the Truth people (a great well in Sechu [lookout], v. 22). They asked for the views and activities of antitypical Samuel and Bro. Russell (Where are Samuel and David?). And they were told that these were dwelling in the heights of Christian character, and were tending God's sheep (at Naioth in Ramah). Thereupon they gave attention to these two things in these (went … Naioth in Ramah, v. 23), and they were so influenced as to preach the Millennial message, though, of course, not with probation for the dead then (Spirit … upon him … prophesied, until [but not at Naioth in Ramah, i.e., did not give the full Millennial message] he came to Naioth in Ramah). While so doing, they divested themselves of their authority and prerogatives as crown-lost princes (stripped off his clothes, v. 24). They continued to preach as on the way to antitypical Samuel, i.e., advocating the Millennium as blessing the then living only (prophesied … in like manner). This seems to be the last time that antitypical Saul met antitypical Samuel, even as in the type it was the last time that typical Saul saw typical Samuel (before Samuel). Thus before the few remaining members of the Samuel class of the Philadelphia epoch the crown-lost princes humbled themselves (lay down naked). And from that time onward antitypical Saul for a long time humbly preached, increasingly in his members, the pre-Millennial Second Advent of our Lord, the bulk of them in retraction of their former opposition thereto (all that day and all that night). This led to the saying on the part of many of their sympathizers, Are these leaders among the teachers of the pre-Millennial Advent of Jesus also (Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets)? We may well rejoice that these crown-lost princes, who are our brethren, though crown-losers, got even a partial
glimpse of the coming time of blessing and glory. And with fear and trembling at the possibility of a fall, we may humbly thank and praise God for the larger and happier views of that blessed period which Divine grace has vouchsafed little us, who are so much less able than these crown-lost princes.
(11) Next 1 Sam. 20 will engage our attention. Antitypical Saul's pursuit of our Pastor to his sphere of reaping and character activities, as just seen, made the latter turn his attention to justifying himself before his friends of the Jonathan class in the nominal church against the charges of heresy, tearing down the churches, etc., that antitypical Saul and the latter's messengers were hurling against him (David fled … came and said before Jonathan, v. 1). His rhetorical questions (What … what … what) imply that he denied practicing wrong works (done), teaching error (iniquity) and committing injustice (sin) against the crown-lost princes (thy father), who therefore were not justified in seeking to cut him off from fellowship and service in the churches (seeketh my life). The more faithful and Truth-loving crown-losers (he, v. 2) felt abhorrence at such a course on the crown-lost princes' part (God forbid; literally, a profanation) and assured Bro. Russell that he would not be cut off from such fellowship and service (thou shalt not die). Antitypical Jonathan felt that the crown-lost princes had such confidence in them as would move them to tell them whatever they planned to do (my father will do nothing … but … will shew it me). And seeing no reason for not having been told of such a plan, if it existed, they felt it was not entertained (why … hide … from me … not so). But Bro. Russell solemnly affirmed (David sware, v. 3) that the plan was entertained, and was by the crown-lost princes concealed from antitypical Jonathan, because the former knew of their favoring Bro. Russell (thy father … knoweth that I have found grace in thine eyes) and desired to spare their feelings
(Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved), Again Bro. Russell solemnly assured antitypical Jonathan that he was on the verge of being cut off from the fellowship and service of his nominal-church sympathizers (as the Lord … thy soul liveth … a step between me and death). Thus Jonathan was convinced of the danger and offered to carry out Bro. Russell's desires in the situation (Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I will even do it for thee; literally, What thy soul saith, I will also do for thee, v. 4).
(12) On being assured by antitypical Jonathan that he was willing to fulfill his pertinent desires, Bro. Russell told them of a plan that would certainly manifest antitypical Saul's real designs. He suggested that shortly there would be special solemn occasions (tomorrow is the new moon, v. 5) at conferences, synods, assemblies, etc., where the crown-lost leaders and their chief supporters would feast, and where he should certainly be expected in attendance (I should not fail to sit … at meat; literally, I should surely sit with the king to eat). By his absenting himself from such and engaging in some secular matters until these feasts were passed (I hide myself in the field … third day at even), it could be ascertained whether he was missed and whether his being missed would not give occasion to a more free expression of opinion on him, favorably or unfavorably, on the part of the crown-lost leaders. To test out antitypical Saul all the more thoroughly Bro. Russell suggested that antitypical Jonathan tell antitypical Saul, if the latter missed him, that Bro. Russell was engaged in seasonal harvest work in cooperation with the Truth people and others (father … miss me, then say, David … asked … run to Bethlehem … yearly sacrifice … for … family, v. 6). If antitypical Saul would under such conditions speak well of Bro. Russell (If he say … well, v. 7), it would be favorable for Bro. Russell (peace); if he would be very angry at Bro. Russell's engaging in such
activities instead of his being at the feast, it would mean that his cutting off from fellowship and service had been sealed (very wroth … evil is determined). Under the circumstances it would be difficult to devise a better plan to bring to the light antitypical Saul's real intentions. Bro. Russell gave the covenanted friendship between him and antitypical Jonathan as the reason that Jonathan do him this desired favor (deal kindly with thy servant; for … thy servant into a covenant … with thee, v. 8). Bro. Russell assured these dear friends that if he were an evil-doer, he desired them to cut him off from fellowship and service; for why should they betray him to the crown-lost princes (if … iniquity, slay me thyself; for why … bring me to thy father)? These dear friends were far from desiring to see Bro. Russell so cut off (Far be it from thee; literally, [it would be] a profanation to thee, v. 9). They assured him that if they were certain that the crown-lost princes were so minded toward him, they would surely make it known to him (if I knew … evil were determined … tell thee).
(13) Antitypical Jonathan agreeing to sound out antitypical Saul and reveal the results as per Bro. Russell's suggestion, Bro. Russell inquired, "Who shall tell me?" (v. 10) of the results of the test? Then feeling sympathy with antitypical Jonathan, he solicitously asked, What if antitypical Saul should answer sharply (what if … roughly)? Instead of answering at once, antitypical Jonathan, likely fearing that they would be overheard, suggested that they continue the conversation under more private conditions (Jonathan said … go out into the field, v. 11). This was done (they went … field). Then antitypical Jonathan solemnly invoked a curse from God upon themselves if, learning at or after the feasts that antitypical Saul was well disposed toward Bro. Russell, they would not reveal it to him (Lord God … sounded my father … if good … and shew it thee … do so and much more
to Jonathan, vs. 12, 13). But if they found that antitypical Saul intended to do the evil to Bro. Russell, they would reveal it to him, and send him away in safety (please my father … evil … I will shew it thee, and send thee away… in peace). They expressed their hearty wishes for the Lord's favor upon him as the leader of God's people, even as that favor had been on antitypical Saul (the Lord be with thee, as … with my father). Then antitypical Jonathan desired that Bro. Russell not only continue to show them favors from the Lord: grace, mercy and Truth, throughout their earthly sojourn, that their New Creatures be preserved (while yet I live show me the kindness of the Lord, that I die not, v. 14), but also not cut off his kindness from those who will have and show antitypical Jonathan's spirit (not cut off thy kindness from my house, v. 15), not even when the Lord would make him victorious over all his enemies (when the Lord hath cut off the enemies … from … the earth). Then antitypical Jonathan promised to abide in the attitude that desires God to execute judgment against Bro. Russell's opponents, i.e., to take his part against his enemies (made a covenant … Let the Lord require … of David's enemies, v. 16). Antitypical Jonathan's great love for Bro. Russell prompted them to ask that Bro. Russell repeat their pertinent solemn mutual promises (caused David to swear again loved him, v. 17). Antitypical Jonathan realized that Bro. Russell would not and could not partake with fellowship in the feasts of the crown-lost leaders in their various conventions (Jonathan said … Tomorrow is the new moon, and thou shalt be missed … thy seat will be empty, v. 18).
(14) Then antitypical Jonathan proceeded to suggest a course for Bro. Russell to pursue after such convention feasts would be over, since the plan had already been made as to what he was to do during the full time of these feasts, as we saw when commenting
on v. 5 (hast stayed three days, v. 19). Immediately after these conventions (quickly) Bro. Russell was to betake himself to the same activities, i.e., more or less secular work, as those in which he was engaged when antitypical Jonathan had interceded with antitypical Saul for Bro. Russell (1 Sam. 19: 2; where thou didst hide thyself when the business was in hand), encouraging him that he should hold fast the Truth (stone) that supports one who must depart (Ezel [parting]) from Babylon. From this we infer that antitypical Jonathan had little hope that antitypical Saul would relent and become friendly toward Bro. Russell. Then antitypical Jonathan unfolded to Bro. Russell the various features of the sign that he would give him: (1) They would set forth three sharp truths (Ps. 45: 5): (a) that error, (b) wrong practices and (c) false hopes were increasingly prevailing in the churches as to leaving Babylon (shoot three arrows on the side thereof [of Ezel], v. 20), and would do it as though they had a definite thing in view (as … at a mark). (2) They would charge their immature helpers (the, not a, lad, v. 21) to lay hold on these sharp truths after studying them (Go, find the arrows). (3) If they told these immature ones that these truths lay between antitypical Jonathan's pertinent teaching position and the teaching position (stone, Ezel) of Bro. Russell against saints remaining in Babylon, antitypical Jonathan's being in favor of remaining in the nominal church, and that the immature ones should accept his sharp sayings, then this would mean that all was well between antitypical Saul and David, and that, therefore, Bro. Russell might come to antitypical Jonathan (arrows are on this side of thee [David], take them; then come … peace to thee, and no hurt). This antitypical Jonathan solemnly asserted (the Lord liveth). (4) If they told the immature ones (say unto the young man, v. 22) that the sharp truths went beyond his and into Bro. Russell's teaching position
on leaving Babylon, i.e., were in favor of leaving Babylon and thus were in Bro. Russell's and beyond antitypical Jonathan's teaching position (beyond thee [David]), it would mean that antitypical Saul was intent on cutting Bro. Russell off from privileges and services in the nominal church, and this would require him of his own accord to give up such fellowship and service (go thy way; for the Lord hath sent thee away). After giving this token as to how the word would be given to Bro. Russell on antitypical Jonathan's sounding out antitypical Saul, antitypical Jonathan for a third time impressed upon David's mind their mutual agreement, which was to guarantee antitypical Jonathan and all like-spirited crown-losers coming later from such refutative attacks as Bro. Russell would make on enemies of the Truth, assuring Bro. Russell that the Lord would be its Umpire and Blesser or Avenger, as the case, might require (the matter … spoken of … the Lord be [is] between thee and me forever, v. 23). This reminder, as well as what is said in vs. 13-16, implies that antitypical Jonathan realized that Bro. Russell would become the Lord's executive instead of the crown-lost princes. As crown losers, antitypical Jonathan, as noble as they were, would naturally cast in their lot with antitypical Saul, and not with Bro. Russell and the Truth people, even as typical Jonathan cast in his lot with Saul, and not with David. This is pathetic.
(15) According to their understanding, Bro. Russell busied himself awhile in secular matters; and the crown-lost princes in the various denominations occupied themselves at the feasts connected with various conventions (David hid … new moon … king … eat meat, v. 24). Antitypical Saul took the place of chief prominence and influence, as was their custom (as at other times, upon a seat by the wall, v. 25). Antitypical Jonathan showed these respect (Jonathan arose); and the controversial theological professors
(Abner [father of light]) occupied the next most prominent places (sat by Saul's side); but Bro. Russell was there neither in person nor in his writings (David's place was empty). In the first part of these feasts the crown-lost princes, while missing Bro. Russell, said nothing thereon, but internally made excuse for him, that he was absent through some Adamic weakness overtaking him (Saul spake not … that day… thought … befallen … not clean, v. 26). Later in these feasts (on the morrow, v. 27) these crown-lost princes, noting Bro. Russell's continued absence (David's place was empty), inquired of antitypical Jonathan, as close friends of Bro. Russell, why the latter had not come to the first and last part of the feast (Wherefore cometh not … to meat … yesterday, nor today?). Thus the situation was furnished to tell antitypical Saul what Bro. Russell had suggested as the means of sounding but the crown-lost princes (vs. 28, 29; compare with v. 6). Thus his absence was ascribed to his being active in harvest work. This indeed was a tester for the crown-lost princes' attitude toward Bro. Russell; and it brought it into clear light: for it brought, first of all, an angry rebuke upon antitypical Jonathan as being under the influence [mothered] of the alleged perverse and rebellious teachings of Bro. Russell (Saul's anger … against Jonathan … said … son of the perverse rebellious woman, v. 30). Then these princes publicly rebuked antitypical Jonathan as setting his choice upon Bro. Russell, which would bring them and the erroneousness of these teachings to public shame, in suffering refutation (I know … chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion [shame] … mother's nakedness). The crown-lost princes warned antitypical Jonathan, as the crown-prince, that Bro. Russell's continuance in fellowship and service among the churches prevented their full development and their future preeminence (as long as … liveth … thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom, v. 31). This