- 60-
remained from the time of its return from the Philistines to that of David (1 Samuel 7:2;
2 Samuel 6:2; 1 Chronicles 13:5, 6).
When the people learned the deceit practiced upon them, they "murmured against the
princes;" but the latter refused to break their solemn oath, so far as it insured the lives
and safety of the Gibeonites. If they had sworn rashly and presumptuously "by Jehovah,
God of Israel," it would have only added another and a far more grievous sin to have
broken their oath; not to speak of the effect upon the heathen around. The principle
applying to this, as to similar rash undertakings, is, that a solemn obligation, however
incurred, must be considered binding, unless its observance involve fresh sin.^102 But in
this instance it manifestly did not involve fresh sin. For the main reason of the
destruction of the Canaanites was their essential hostility to the kingdom of God. The
danger to Israel, accruing from this, could be avoided in a solitary instance. With a view
to this, the Gibeonites were indeed spared, but attached as "bond-men" to the sanctuary,
where they and their descendants performed all menial services^103 (Joshua 9:23). Nor,
as the event proved, did they ever betray their trust, or lead Israel into idolatry.^104 Still,
as a German writer observes, the rashness of Israel's princes, and the conduct of the
Gibeonites, conveys to the church at all times solemn warning against the devices and
the deceit of the world, which, when outward advantage offers, seeks a friendly alliance
with, or even reception into, the visible kingdom of God.
(^)