1 Chronicles 12:33

Of Zebulun, such as went forth to battle, expert in war, with all instruments of war, fifty thousand, which could keep rank: they were not of double heart.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(33) Expert in war . . . Marshalling (or ordering) battle with all kinds of weapons of war, and falling into rank (la’adōr, forming in line) without a double heart. The expression “falling into rank” occurs only here and in 1Chronicles 12:38. Nine MSS. read instead “ helping “ (la’zōr), and the LXX. and Vulg. so translate. The Syriac has “to make war with those who disputed the sovranty of David.” The phrase “falling into rank without a heart and a heart,” asserts the unwavering fidelity and resolute courage of these warriors of Zebulun (comp. Psalm 12:3, “a speech of smooth things with heart and heart they speak”; they think one thing and say another; are double-minded). The number of warriors assigned to Zebulun and Naphtali has been thought surprising, because these tribes “never played an important part in the history of Israel” (comp., however, Judges 5:18). The numbers here given are, at all events, not discordant with those of Numbers 1:31; Numbers 1:43; Numbers 26:27; Numbers 26:50.

MacLaren's Expositions

1 Chronicles

DRILL AND ENTHUSIASM

1 Chronicles 12:33.

These words come from the muster-roll of the hastily raised army that brought David up to Hebron and made him King. The catalogue abounds in brief characterisations of the qualities of each tribe’s contingent. For example, Issachar had ‘understanding of the times.’ Our text is spoken of the warriors of Zebulon, who had left their hills and their flocks in the far north, and poured down from their seats by the blue waters of Tiberias to gather round their king. They were not only like their brethren expert in war and fully equipped, but they had some measure of discipline too, a rare thing in the days when there were no standing armies. They ‘could keep rank,’ could march together, had been drilled to some unanimity of step and action, could work and fight together, were an army, not a crowd, and not only so, but also ‘they were not of double heart.’ Each man, and the whole body, had a brave single resolve; they had one spirit animating the whole, and that was to make David king, an enthusiastic loyalty which made them brave, and a discipline which kept the courage from running to waste.

I take, then, this text as bringing before us two very important characteristics which ought to be found in every Christian church, and without which no real prosperity and growth is possible. These two may be put very briefly: organisation and enthusiastic devotion. These are both important, but in very different degrees. Organisation without valour is in a worse plight than valour without organisation. The one is fundamental, the other secondary. The one is the true cause, so far as men are concerned, of victory, the other is but the instrument by which the cause works. There have been many victories won by undisciplined valour, but disciplined cowardice and apathy come to no good.

These two have been separated and made antagonistic, and churches are to be found which glory in the one, and others in the other. Some have gone in for order, and are like butterflies in a cabinet all ticketed and displayed in place, but a pin is run through their bodies and they are dead; and others have prided themselves on unfettered freedom, and been not an army, but a mob. The true relation, of course, is that life should shape and inform organisation, and organisation should preserve, manifest and obey life. There must be body to hold spirit, there must be spirit to keep body from rotting.

I. Organisation.

This is not the strong point of Nonconformist churches. We pride ourselves on our individualism, and that is all very well. We believe in direct access of each soul to Christ, that men must come to Him one by one, that religion is purely a personal matter, and the firmness with which we hold this tends to make us weak in combined action. It cannot be truthfully denied that both in the relations of our churches to one another, and in the internal organisation of these, we are and have been too loosely compacted, and have forgotten that two is more than one plus one, so that we are only helping to redress the balance a little when we insist upon the importance of organisation in our churches.

And first of all-remember the principles in subordination to which our organisation must be framed.

What are we united by? Common love and faith to Christ, or rather Christ Himself. ‘One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren.’ So there must be nothing in our organisation which is inconsistent with Christ’s supreme place among us, and with our individual obedience to Him. There are to be no ‘lords over God’s heritage’ in the Church of Christ. There are churches in which the temptation to be such affects the official chiefly, and there are others, with a different polity, in which it is chiefly a Diotrephes, who loves to have pre-eminence. Character, zeal, social station, even wealth will always confer a certain influence, and their possessors will be tempted to set up their own will or opinions as dominant in the Church. Such men are sinning against the very bond of Christian union. Organisation which is bought by investing one man with authority, is too dearly purchased at the cost of individual development on the individual’s own lines. A row of clipped yew-trees is not an inspiring sight.

And yet again what are we organised for? Not merely for our own growth or spiritual advantage, but also, and more especially, for spreading faith in Christ and advancing His glory. All our organisation, then, is but an arrangement for doing our work, and if it hinders that, it is cumbrous and must be cut away or modified, at all hazards. Ecclesiastical martinets are still to be found, to whom drill is all-important, and who see no use in irregular valour, but they are a diminishing number, and they may be recommended to ponder the old wise saying: ‘Where no oxen are, the crib is clean, but much increase is by the strength of the ox.’ If the one aim is a ‘clean crib’ the best way to secure that is to keep it empty; but if a harvest is the aim, there must be cultivation, and one must accept the consequences of having a strong team to plough. The end of drill is fighting. The parade-ground and its exercising is in order that a corps may be hurled against the enemy, or may stand unmoved, like a solid breakwater against a charge which it flings off in idle spray, and the end of the Church’s organisation is that it may move en masse, without waste, against the enemy.

But a further guiding principle to shape Christian organisation is that of the Church as the body of Christ. That requires that there shall be work for every member. Christ has endowed His members with varying gifts, powers, opportunities, and has set them in diverse circumstances, that each may give his own contribution to the general stock of work. Our theory is that each man has his own proper gift from God, ‘one after this manner, and another after that.’ But what is our practice? Take any congregation of Christian people in any of our churches, and especially in the Free Churches of which I know most, and is there anything like this wide diversity of forms of service, to which each contributes? A handful of people do all the work, and the remainder are idlers. The same small section are in evidence always, and the rest are nowhere. There are but a few bits of coloured glass in a kaleidoscope, they take different patterns when the tube is turned, but they are always the same bits of glass.

There needs to be a far greater variety of forms of work for our people and more workers in the field. There are too few wheels for the quantity of water in the river, and, partly for that reason, the amount of water that runs waste over the sluice is deplorable. There is a danger in having too many spindles for the power available, but the danger in modern church organisation is exactly the other way.

Every one should have his own work. In all living creatures, differentiation of organs increases as the creature rises in the scale of being, from the simple sac which does everything up to the human body with a distinct function for every finger. It should not be possible for a lazy Christian to plead truly as his vindication that ‘no man had hired’ him. It should be the Church’s business to find work for the unemployed.

The example in our text should enforce the necessity of united work. David’s levies could keep rank. They did not let each man go at his own rate and by his own road, but kept together, shoulder to shoulder, with equal stride. They were content to co-operate and be each a part of a greater whole. That keeping rank is a difficult problem in all societies, where individual judgments, weaknesses, wills, and crotchets are at work, but it is apt to be especially difficult in Christian communities, where one may expect to find individual characteristics intensified, a luxuriant growth of personal peculiarities, an intense grip of partial aspects of the great truths and a corresponding dislike of other aspects of these, and of those whose favourite truths they are. One would do nothing to clip that growth, but still Christians who have not learned to subordinate themselves in and for united work are of little use to God or man. What does such united work require? Mainly the bridling of self, the curbing of one’s own will, not insisting on forcing one’s opinions on one’s brother, not being careful of having one’s place secured and one’s honour asserted. Without such virtues no association of man could survive for a year. If the world managed its societies as the Church manages its unity, they would collapse quickly. Indeed it is a strong presumption in favour of Christianity that the Churches have not killed it long ago. Vanity, pride, self-importance, masterfulness, pettishness get full play among us. Diotrephes has many descendants to-day. A cotton mill, even if it were a co-operative one, could not work long without going into bankruptcy, if there were no more power of working together than some Christian congregations have. A watch would be a poor timekeeper, where every wheel tried to set the pace and be a mainspring, or sulked because the hands moved on the face in sight of all men, while it had to move round and fit into its brother wheel in the dark.

Subordination is required as well as co-operation. For if there be harmonious co-operation in varying offices, there must be degrees and ranks. The differences of power and gift make degrees, and in every society there will be leaders. Of course there is no commanding authority in the Churches. Its leaders are brethren, whose most imperative highest word is, ‘We beseech you.’

Of course, too, these varieties and degrees do not mean real superiority or inferiority in the eye of God. From the highest point of view nothing is great or small, there is no higher or lower. The only measure is quality, the only gauge is motive. ‘Small service is true service while it lasts.’ He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet’s reward. But yet there are, so far as our work here is concerned, degrees and orders, and we need a hearty and ungrudging recognition of superiority wherever we find it. If the ‘brother of high degree’ needs to be exhorted to beware of arrogance and imposing his own will on his fellows, the ‘brother of low degree’ needs not less to be exhorted to beware of letting envy and self-will hiss and snarl in his heart at those who are in higher positions than himself. If the chief of all needs to be reminded that in Christ’s household preeminence means service, the lower no less needs to be reminded that in Christ’s household service means pre-eminence.

So much, then, for organisation. It is perfectly reconcilable with democracy that is not mob-ocracy. In fact, democracy needs it most. If I may venture to speak to the members of the Free Churches, with which I am best acquainted, I would take upon myself to say that there is nothing which they need more than that they should show their polity to be capable of reconciling the freest development of the individual with the most efficient organisation of the community. The object is work for Christ, the bond of their fellowship is brotherly union with Christ. Many eyes are on them to-day, and the task is in their hands of showing that they can keep rank. The most perfect discipline in war in old times was found, not amongst the subjects of Eastern despots who were not free enough to learn to submit, but amongst the republics of Greece, where men were all on a level in the city, and fell into their places in the camp, because they loved liberty enough to know the worth of discipline, and so the slaves of Xerxes were scattered before the resistless onset of the phalanx of the free. The terrible legion which moved ‘altogether when it moved at all,’ and could be launched at the foe like one javelin of steel, had for its units free men and equals. There needs freedom for organisation. There needs organisation for freedom. Let us learn the lesson. ‘God is not the author of confusion, but of order, in all churches of saints.’

II. Enthusiastic devotion.

These men came to bring David up to Hebron with one single purpose in their hearts. They had no sidelong glances to their own self-interest, they had no wavering loyalty, they had no trembling fears, so we may take their spirit as expressing generally the deepest requirements for prosperity in a church.

The foundation of all prosperity is a passion of personal attachment to Christ our King.

Christ is Christianity objective. Love to Christ is Christianity subjective. The whole stress of Christian character is laid on this. It is the mother of all grace and goodness, and in regard to the work of the Church, it is the ardour of a soul full of love to Jesus that conquers. The one thing in which all who have done much for Him have been alike in that single-hearted devotion.

But such love is the child of faith. It rests upon belief of truth, and is the response of man to God. Dwelling in the truth is the means of it. How our modern Christianity fails in this strong personal bond of familiar love!

Consider its effect on the individual.

It will give tenacity of purpose, will brace to strenuous effort, will subdue self, self-regard, self-importance, will subdue fear. It is the true anaesthetic. The soldier is unconscious of his wounds, while the glow of devotion is in his heart and the shout of the battle in his ears. It will give fertility of resource and patience.

Consider its effect on the community.

It will remove all difficulties in the way of discipline arising from vanity and self which can be subdued by no other means. That flame fuses all into one glowing mass like a stream that pours from the blast furnace. What a power a church would be which had this! It is itself victory. The men that go into battle with that one firm resolve, and care for nothing else, are sure to win. Think what one man can do who has resolved to sell his life dear!

Consider the worthlessness of discipline without this.

It is a poor mechanical accuracy. How easy to have too much machinery! How the French Revolution men swept the Austrian martinets before them! David was half-smothered in Saul’s armour. On the other hand, this fervid flame needs control to make it last and work. Spirit and law are not incompatible. Valour may be disciplined, and the combination is irresistible.

And so here, till we exchange the close array of the battlefield for the open ranks of the festal procession on the Coronation day, and lay aside the helmet for the crown, the sword for the palm, the breastplate for the robe of peace, and stand for ever before the throne, in the peaceful ranks of ‘the solemn troops and sweet societies’ of the unwavering armies of the heavens who serve Him with a perfect heart, and burn unconsumed with the ardours of an immortal and ever brightening love, let us see to it that we too are ‘men that can keep rank and are not of double heart.’

Benson Commentary

1 Chronicles 12:33. Fifty thousand — For this tribe, being next to that of Issachar, which was generally well affected to David, were probably very much swayed by their opinion and advice. Which could keep rank — Or, which were prepared, or ordered for battle, or to fight for David if occasion required. Not of double heart — They were sincerely loyal, and did not dissemble with David, pretending to be for him, while in their hearts they favoured Saul’s family. And none had any separate interests, but all were for the public good.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

12:23-40 When the throne of Christ is set up in a soul, there is, or ought to be, great joy in that soul; and provision is made, not as here, for a few days, but for the whole life, and for eternity. Happy are those who wisely perceive it to be their duty and interest, to submit to the Saviour Jesus Christ, the Son of David; who renounce for his sake all that is not consistent; whose earnest endeavours to do good are directed by the wisdom that God giveth, through acquaintance with his word, experience, and observation. If any man lack this wisdom, let him ask it of God, who giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Expert in war ... - Rather "arrayed for battle with all harness of battle, who set the battle in array with no double heart," excelling, that is, in the matter of their arms and accoutrements. The writer notes in each tribe the point in which it was most admirable.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

33. Zebulun … could keep rank—that is, were more disciplined soldiers than the rest.

not of double heart—Though their numbers were large, all were in a high degree well affected to David.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Of Zebulun fifty thousand; for this tribe being next to that of Issachar, which was generally well affected to David, were probably very much swayed by their opinion and advice.

Which could keep rank, or, which were disposed, or prepared, or ordered for battle, or to fight for David, if occasion so required.

Not of double heart, Heb. without a heart and a heart; which may relate either,

1. To the whole body of them; they were all of one heart and one mind towards David, not some for him, and others secretly against him, but all with one soul and one consent adhered to him. Or,

2. To the same particular persons; they were each of them sincerely loyal to David, and did not dissemble with David, pretending to be for him, whilst in their hearts they favoured Saul’s family; which possibly some of those who came to Hebron did. Or this is particularly noted of this tribe, because they lay under some suspicion in this matter, as also some of the other tribes did; and therefore the like testimony is given to all of them, 1 Chronicles 12:38.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And these are the numbers of the bands that were ready armed to the war,.... That were trained up to it, and accounted for it:

and came to David to Hebron; after the death of Ishbosheth and Abner, and when David had reigned seven years in Hebron:

to turn the kingdom of Saul to him; to transfer it to him and his family:

according to the word of the Lord; by Samuel, which they were acquainted with; and the number of those of the children of Judah, who made him their king already, and so there was the less need of a numerous appearance of them, were 6800 armed men, 1 Chronicles 12:24, of the tribe of Simeon, valiant men, 7100, 1 Chronicles 12:25, of the children of Levi 4600, 1 Chronicles 12:26, of the Aaronites or priests, with Jehoiada the son of Benaiah, according to Jarchi and Kimchi, at the head of them, 3700, 1 Chronicles 12:27, besides Zadok, a young man of the line of Eleazar, who was made high priest in the time of Solomon, who brought with him twenty two captains, 1 Chronicles 12:28 the heads of the courses of the priests, which were afterwards twenty four, 1 Chronicles 24:4 of the tribe of Benjamin, the kindred of Saul, the greatest part of whom had been sticklers for the continuance of the kingdom in the family of Saul, 3000, 1 Chronicles 12:29, of the tribe of Ephraim, valiant men, 20,800, 1 Chronicles 12:30, of the half tribe of Manasseh on this side Jordan, whose names were pricked down, being given, to make David king, 18,000, 1 Chronicles 12:31, and of the tribe of Issachar, two hundred of the heads of them; men of knowledge and understanding, either in chronology or astrology, or in the proper seasons for husbandry, or for the fixing the beginning of years and months, and the intercalation of them, for keeping the several festivals; or rather were men of prudence and wisdom, and knew that this was the proper time for making David king, Ishbosheth and Abner his general being dead; and as they were men in high esteem for their parts and abilities, their brethren were at their beck and command, 1 Chronicles 12:30, and of the tribe of Zebulun, warlike men, skilful in war, and well armed, 50,000 men; and their numerous appearance showed that they were hearty and sincere, being the greatest number of all the tribes, 1 Chronicles 12:33, and of the tribe of Naphtali, 1000 captains, and with them armed men, 37,000, 1 Chronicles 12:34 and of the tribe of Dan, men skilled in war, 28,600, 1 Chronicles 12:35 and of the tribe of Asher, warlike men, 40,000, 1 Chronicles 12:36 and of the Reubenites, Gadites, and half tribe of Manasseh, on the other side Jordan, military men, well armed, 120,000, 1 Chronicles 12:37, which in all made 348,800 men, and upwards.

Geneva Study Bible

Of Zebulun, such as went forth to battle, expert in war, with all instruments of war, fifty thousand, which could keep rank: they were not of double heart.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

33. went forth to battle, expert in war, with all instruments] R.V. were able to go out in the host, that could set the battle in array, with all manner of instruments. This description is intended to exclude mere lads (such as David appeared to be, 1 Samuel 17:33) who might be in attendance on the warriors.

which could keep rank: they were not of double heart] R.V. that could order the battle array and were not of double heart; i.e. who moved as one man in battle array; cp. 1 Chronicles 12:8, note on shield and buckler. For “of double heart” cp. 2 Chronicles 30:12, “one heart.”

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 33. - Not of double heart. This phrase should be connected closely with the preceding clause, of which it is the termination, the sense being that they were the men to face battle with no doubtful heart. 1 Chronicles 12:33

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

מלחמה ערכי, preparing war with all manner of warlike weapons, i.e., practice in the use of all kinds of weapons for war; cf. 1 Chronicles 12:8. The infinitive לעדר is substantially a continuation of the preceding participles, but grammatically is dependent on בּאוּ understood (cf. 1 Chronicles 12:23, 1 Chronicles 12:38). Cf. as to this free use of the infinitive with ל, Ew. 351, c. The signification of the verb עדר, which occurs only here (1 Chronicles 12:33, 1 Chronicles 12:38), is doubtful. According to the lxx and the Vulg. (βοηθῆσαι, venerunt in auxilium), and nine MSS, which read לעזר, we would be inclined to take עדר for the Aramaic form of the Hebrew עזר (cf. Arabic ‛dr), to help; but that meaning does not suit מערכה עדר, 1 Chronicles 12:38. Its connection there demands that עדר should signify "to close up together," to set in order the battle array; and so here, closing up together with not double heart, i.e., with whole or stedfast heart (שׁלם בּלבב שׁלם, 1 Chronicles 12:38), animo integro et firmo atque concordi; cf. Psalm 12:3 (Mich.). - In 1 Chronicles 12:38 we have a comprehensive statement; כּל־אלּה, which refers to all the bodies of men enumerated in 1 Chronicles 12:24-37. שׁרית is שׁארית defectively written; and as it occurs only here, it may be perhaps a mere orthographical error. The whole of the remainder of Israel who did not go to Hebron were אחד לב אחד er, of one, i.e., of united heart (2 Chronicles 30:12): they had a unanimous wish to make David king.