Abner and Ishbosheth being dead, and Mephibosheth incapable from his lameness, the eleven tribes that for upwards of seven years had not only held aloof from David, but waged war with him, now come to the conclusion that it is best to become his subjects, and again be united with Judah in one kingdom. They accordingly make their submission to him and solemnly accept him as their sovereign.

I. THE GROUNDS OF THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF HIM.

1. Close relationship. "Behold, we are thy bone and thy flesh" (comp. Ephesians 5:30). God has given to us a King who is one with us in nature. The Ruler of the Church, yea, of all things, is a Man; the throne of the universe is filled by a human form (see Hebrews 2:5, et seq.) - a fact which endears the Christ to his willing subjects.

2. Previous service. (Ver. 2.) "In time past," etc. In which service David had both displayed and increased his capacities for ruling men. With this may be compared Christ's period of service when on earth, especially during his public ministry and last sufferings. By these he was trained and prepared for his throne (made "perfect through sufferings," Hebrews 2:10); and it is in and by these that he reveals himself and attracts the hearts of men.

3. Divine appointment. (Ver. 2.) "The Lord said to thee, Thou shalt feed ['shepherd,' 'be the shepherd of'] my people Israel, and thou shalt be a captain [literally, 'foremost man, leader'] over Israel." A king is to be as a shepherd to his subjects, not only ruling them, but caring for, watching over, protecting, guiding, uniting them; guarding and preserving the weak from violence and oppression, as a shepherd his lambs. The image was natural to the Hebrews, and runs through the Scriptures, extending even to the visions of heaven (Revelation 7:17). The king was also to be leader in peace or war, ever "to the front," worthy to be followed, first and foremost in all noble deeds, accepting courageously the perils of such a position. David was such a king, imperfectly; Christ is such a King, perfectly. Both were divinely designated to the office of Ruler of God's people, Kings by Divine right in the strictest sense. As such David is here recognized at length by the tribes of Israel, as before by the tribe of Judah. As such the Lord Jesus is recognized by his followers. These reasons had existed and should have been as powerful immediately after Saul's death; but they had not been allowed to operate. But the experience of these tribes whilst holding aloof from David, their present disorganized condition, possibly also their knowledge of the benefits of David's rule to Judah, combined to open their eyes, and so impress these considerations on their hearts as to produce a general willingness to accept him whom they had been rejecting. And thus it is with many in respect to the great King. His claims are known, but other lords are preferred, until, after delay more or less protracted, they become convinced of their sin and folly, and surrender themselves to him. Let those who are thus procrastinating beware lest they become convinced too late.

II. THE SOLEMNITIES BY WHICH THEIR ACCEPTANCE OF DAVID, AND HIS OF THEM, WERE SIGNIFIED,

1. A mutual covenant. He engaging to rule them, and they to serve him according to the Law of God (Deuteronomy 17:14-20). In like manner, when men receive Christ as their King, promising loyalty and obedience, he on his part promises to be to them all that his gospel represents him. These Israelites, indeed, may have imposed special stipulations not expressed in the Law; but we, in accepting Christ, have simply to submit to the terms of the Divine covenant, as we are not in any degree independent parties.

2. The anointing of David as king. The third time he was anointed - once by Samuel, once by the tribe of Judah, and now by the rest of the tribes. For the people could in a measure give him authority over them. But our King Jesus can receive no authority from us. He is the Christ (the Anointed) of God; we have simply to recognize his Divine authority.

3. The presence of God was recognized. "Before the Lord." This was fitting, as he was supreme Monarch, to whom both king and people were bound to submit, whose blessing was necessary to render the union happy; and an engagement made as in his sight would be felt as peculiarly binding. So should we, in accepting Christ, place ourselves in the presence of God, first in secret, then in his house, and at the Lord's Table.

4. A joyful feast concluded the proceedings. (See 1 Chronicles 12:39, 40.) It was to the whole people a suitable occasion for rejoicing. They were again one nation. Their union would be cemented by eating and drinking together. They would the better retain the feeling of union when they had separated to their various localities and homes, and would be the better prepared to perform their common duties to the king and the nation. Thus also our Lord enjoins his subjects to eat and drink together in his Name, that they may recognize each other as his, rejoice together in their privileges, and be more closely united to him and the whole "Israel of God." In conclusion:

1. Happy is the nation whose rulers and subjects alike recognize God as the supreme Ruler over them, and his will as their supreme law; act as in his sight, and invoke his blessing.

2. Closer union amongst Christians must spring from more thorough acceptance of the royal authority of Christ. They are one in him, and they will become more completely, more consciously, and more manifestly one in proportion as they, all alike, renouncing merely human authorities, come to Christ himself, listen to him, and submit to his authority in all things. - G.W.

For one born into the family, no formal covenant is necessary, in order to bind to his support all who are of the same blood with himself. But when one is taken in from outside, to be closer than a brother, or when a number of persons who are not of one blood would bind themselves together in mutual fellowship, a specific league must be made in ratification of the new relation. The form of the league is different in different cases. The simplest form, and one which has always had a binding force in the East, is that of eating together, of breaking bread in common, in token of mutual fidelity. Dr. Cyrus Hamlin, in his Among the Turks, gives various illustrations of this truth. As he sat on the floor, at dinner, in a Turkish governor's residence, the boy gave him in his fingers a piece of roast mutton, to be taken by the guest's fingers and then eaten. "Now, do you know what I have done?" asked the boy. "Perfectly well," answered Dr. Hamlin. "You have given me a delicious piece of roast meat, and I have eaten it." "You have gone far from it," responded the boy. "By that act, I have pledged you every drop of my blood, that while you are in my territory no evil shall come to you. For that space of time we are brothers." Coming from Smyrna, at one time, Dr. Hamlin was on a vessel containing a large number of raw recruits for the Turkish army. "Just before reaching port, some fifteen or so of these recruits threw off their look of stolid resignation, cleared a place on the deck, as I supposed, for a country dance; and I looked on with interest. I could see, by their costumes, that they were all from the same village, or villages closely associated... They stood in a ring, each man's right hand upon his neighbour's left shoulder. Soon one came to take a vacant place, with a semeet, a ring of bread, in his hand. He broke it into bits, and they all ate of it, saying a few words of prayer, probably the first chapter of the Koran. It was a religious act, plainly. About to separate, and be dispersed into the army, they bound themselves to be faithful in memory, and in aid, should it ever become possible. It was to them a kind of sacrament, an oath of brotherhood." And so they "made a league" with one another.

(The Sunday School Times.)