1 Samuel 25:2 - Meaning and Application

Here begins Nabal’s story. First, we get a brief account of who he was and what sort of man he proved to be (1 Samuel 25:2, 1 Samuel 25:3). We might never have heard of him if David had not had dealings with him. His name, Nabal, means “fool,” and that name suited him well. It is surprising that his parents gave him such a name, though in truth we all deserve to be called fools when we enter the world, because people are born with foolishness in their hearts.

Nabal came from the house of Caleb, but he did not have Caleb’s spirit. He inherited Caleb’s land, since Maon and Carmel were near Hebron, which had been given to Caleb (Joshua 15:54, Joshua 15:55; Joshua 14:14). But he did not inherit Caleb’s virtues. A noble family line becomes a shame to a person who turns away from it. Some ancient versions even read his name as a description, not a family name: “He was a dog-like man,” rough, snarling, and hard to deal with. In that sense, he was a cynic, a sour and cross-minded man.

He was also very rich, which made him seem great in the eyes of the world. But to anyone who judged rightly, he was still a mean and worthless man. Riches are common gifts, and God often gives them to Nabals, to people who have neither wisdom nor grace. His wife was Abigail, a woman of good understanding. Her name means “my father’s joy,” though her marriage could not have promised much joy, since she was given to a man who cared more about wealth than wisdom. Many a child is thrown away on worldly riches, joined to money and nothing else worthwhile. Wisdom is valuable with an inheritance, but an inheritance is of little use without wisdom. Many an Abigail is tied to a Nabal, and if so, her good sense will be needed every day.

Nabal had no true sense of honor or honesty. He was churlish, cross, and bad-tempered. He was also evil in his dealings, harsh and oppressive, willing to use fraud and force if it helped him gain and keep more. This is the character given by the One who knows every man.

Next comes David’s humble request that Nabal send food for him and his men. David was in such need that he was glad to ask help from him, and in effect he came begging to Nabal’s door. That reminds us how little reason we have to admire worldly riches when such a fool as Nabal has plenty, while such a saint as David goes hungry. David had begged before, but then it was from Ahimelech the high priest, which was much easier to bear. To ask Nabal for help was harder for a man like David, yet if providence brought him to that need, he would not say he was too proud to beg. Still, he was indeed reduced to a low place (Psalm 37:25).

David chose a good time to send his request, when Nabal had many workers around him shearing sheep and preparing a feast. Since it was sheep-shearing time, there was likely to be plenty of food and a freer spirit for giving. If David had come at another time, Nabal might have claimed he had nothing to spare. Such feasts were common at sheep-shearings, as seen later with Absalom’s feast on that occasion (2 Samuel 13:24), since wool was one of the main products in Canaan.

David also told his men to speak with great courtesy and respect. They were to greet Nabal in David’s name and ask after his well-being and that of his house (1 Samuel 25:5). David even had them say, “Peace to you, peace to your house, and peace to all that you have.” That was a warm and gracious greeting. It was almost too high a compliment to call Nabal “the man who lives,” as if real life were found in wealth and comfort. David knew better, that true life is found in God’s favor, not in the world’s approval. Still, his kind wishes were fitting. He also told them to call Nabal “my son David” (1 Samuel 25:8), showing respect for Nabal’s age and standing, and hoping for fatherly kindness in return.

David then reminded Nabal of the kindness Nabal’s shepherds had already received from him and his men. One good turn should be met with another. David’s men had not harmed the shepherds, caused them trouble, or taken even one lamb from the flock. Considering what sort of men they were, distressed, indebted, and discontented, and considering how scarce food was in David’s camp, it took care and restraint to keep them from plundering. They also protected Nabal’s shepherds from being harmed by others. David did not boast about this, but only said, “Nothing was missing to them” (1 Samuel 25:7). The shepherds themselves went further and said, “They were like a wall to us, both night and day” (1 Samuel 25:16). While Philistine bands were robbing threshing floors (1 Samuel 23:1), David’s men guarded Nabal’s flocks. So David reasonably asked, “Let us find favor in your eyes.” Those who have shown kindness have a fair claim to receive kindness.

David’s request was very modest. Though he had been anointed king, he did not ask for royal food. He simply said, “Give whatever you can spare, and we will be thankful.” Beggars cannot be choosers. Those who had helped protect the flock were now glad to receive whatever was left. David also said it was a good day, a feast day, when people are usually more open-handed and more able to share. He did not demand anything as a king, like tribute, or as a general, like a tax. He asked as a friend asking a favor. David’s servants delivered the message faithfully and respectfully, expecting to return with food.

Then comes Nabal’s rude answer to this humble request (1 Samuel 25:10, 1 Samuel 25:11). No one would have thought it possible for a man to be so harsh and ill-mannered as Nabal proved to be.

David had called himself Nabal’s son and asked for bread and fish, but Nabal gave him a stone and a scorpion, as it were. He did not just refuse David, he insulted him. If Nabal had been unwilling to send supplies because he feared the fate of Ahimelech, who suffered for helping David, he could still have answered kindly and declined in a modest way, since David’s request was modest too.

Instead, Nabal flew into a rage, as greedy people often do when asked for anything. They try to cover one sin with another, and they mistreat the poor to excuse themselves from helping them. But God will not be fooled.

First, Nabal spoke of David with contempt, as if he were a nobody. The Philistines could say, “This is David the king of the land, who killed his ten thousands” (Sa1 21:11), yet Nabal, his close neighbor and a man of the same tribe, acted as if he did not know David, or did not care about his worth. “Who is David? And who is the son of Jesse?” he said. He could not have been ignorant of how much David had done for the country, but his small heart would not acknowledge that debt. He spoke of David as if he were obscure and unimportant. Do not be surprised if great people and great service are treated this way.

Second, Nabal mocked David’s present trouble and used it to paint him as a bad man, fit for punishment rather than help. How naturally he used the rough, rude language of people who hate giving to the needy! There are many servants today, as if there had not been such people before, who “break away from their masters,” suggesting that David had done the same. In effect, Nabal said, “He should have stayed with King Saul, and then he would not have needed to ask me for food.” He also hinted that David was sheltering other fugitives like himself. It is enough to make a person angry to hear such a good and noble man spoken of so shamefully by such a base man as Nabal. But “the vile person will speak vileness” (Isa 32:5-7).

Even when people bring trouble on themselves through their own foolishness, they still deserve pity and help, not scorn and starvation. But David was in distress, not because of any fault or carelessness of his own, but because of the good he had done for his country and the honor God had given him. Yet he was treated like a runaway and a vagabond. This should help us bear insults and false accusations with patience and cheerfulness. It has often been the lot of the best people on earth. Some of the finest men the world ever had were counted as “the scum of the world” (Co1 4:13).

Third, Nabal kept pressing the fact that the food on his table was his own, and he would not let anyone share it. “It is my bread, my meat, and even my water,” he seemed to say, though water is meant for common use. “It is prepared for my shearers,” and he took pride in having it all for himself. Who had denied him that property? Who had questioned his right to it? Yet he thought this gave him the right to keep everything and give David nothing. “May I not do what I want with my own?” he would say. But that is a mistake. We are not absolute owners of what we have, as if we could use it any way we please. We are only stewards, and we must use our goods as God directs us, remembering that they are not really ours, but his, who has entrusted them to us. Riches are “another’s” (Luk 16:12), and we should not speak too confidently of them as if they belonged to us alone.