NOTES ON THE INTERNATIONAL LESSON.
“Is the young man Absalom safe?” Had David asked himself this question earlier, he might not have needed to ask it then of another. The young man Absalom had not been safe for years. He had not been safe when allowed to have his own way, and let his passions run riot in the pleasures of a court. He had not been safe when his royal father failed to give him a father’s care. He had not been safe when placed in the way of temptation, with no shielding influences. It was too late then to ask, Is the young man Absalom safe.—Lesson Commentary. ABSALOM’S sin and shame had two sides. There was in it the curse that David’s sin brought on David’s house (2 Sam. 12:10), the misdeed of the father that is visited on the child (Ex. 20:5), and not less, Absalom’s own wickedness and recklessness, which made him the bearer of the family curse. David looks at Absalom’s deed not on the latter side, but on the former, for his own guilt seems to him so great that he looks little at Absalom’s; hence his deep, boundless compassion for his misguided son.—Kurtz. DAVID had not mourned after the death of his infant child, but had said, “Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” Chap. 12:23. Why, then, this mourning for Absalom? Why so intense a sorrow for him? (See chap. 19:4.) It was because David believed in the resurrection and in the Judgment to come. It was because his son Absalom had been cut off in the act of sin, the wages of which are the second death; and because by Absalom’s death the door of repentance and pardon was shut upon him.—Wordsworth. THE issue of the history, even as regards David, shows how sin brings suffering. Though his enemies are scattered and his throne restored, yet that deeply touching scene, where with keenest anxiety he waits for news of the battle, and with overwhelming grief laments his lost son, shows him still suffering the yet unfinished consequences of his great fall. How the bad example he had set his children, must have come home to him then. We sin, and our sin may be pardoned, but by sinning we have, perhaps, set in motion a chain of cause and effect which may work mischief years after. “Vouchsafe, O Lord, to keep us each day without sin.”—E. Stock. DAVID is a very forcible example of the weaknesses that often accompany and thwart the purposes of a natural affection. Of David’s love we can have no doubt. The cry, “O, my son Absalom! my son, my son, Absalom! would God I had died for thee!” was a dirge that could only have been composed after the heart had broken. David did not maintain discipline in his family, and suffered sadly from the unchecked passion and ambition of his children. Justice is not fatal to love. The rod is sometimes as much an evidence of affection as a kiss. To hold a child by the firm grip of authority may be as profitable as to fold him to the breast. Obedience is the condition of soul that heeds instruction, and that love is inexcusable that worships what it should condemn.—Rev. C. R. Barnes. THERE are many lessons to be learned from Absalom’s sad end. It shows, as in a picture, the final ruin which is sure to befall all whose plans are for self and self alone. It shows that a father’s anxiety over his son will not save him when he has neglected a father’s duty in the past. It shows that our acts have an influence affecting others beyond ourselves; David’s sorrow was so deep because he saw in Absalom’s death the result of his own sin. It shows that parental tenderness may make one blind even to kingly obligations. It shows that no gift or graces or endowments will supply the lack of character. Absalom’s beauty and popularity could not save his name from everlasting disgrace.—Lesson Commentary. “He is a good man, and cometh with good tidings.” The messenger, Ahimaaz, was the son of Zadok the priest; David no doubt knew his character, and knew that his goodness would deter him from bearing evil tidings. And this is shown to have been his disposition, inasmuch as he conveyed to the king only the good news of victory, and withheld the intelligence of Absalom’s death. But the language above quoted serves to express two prominent ideas of the Christian world to-day. 1. One believes that his father, or Rev. Mr. So-and-So, was a good man; he believed this or that doctrine, and therefore it must be correct. No further trouble is taken to investigate the matter; the teaching comes from a good man, and that is sufficient—if it is not according to Scripture, he would have known it. 2. We have the idea that one is a good man because he brings good tidings. He tells us the things we want to hear, therefore he is a good man. He “prophesies smooth things,” therefore the multitude is pleased with him. Should one point out our faults, or the errors in our creed, he is deemed dangerous, a dissensionist, one that “troubled Israel.” “The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord,” Ps. 37:23; and the good man proclaims the truth, and will not object to having his teaching tested by the word of the Lord. See Acts 12:11.