THEOSISJohn Chrysostom
You recently praised David for his patience, and I was impressed by your genuine kindness and affection for him. It is through diligent pursuit of virtue and the honorable acknowledgment of those who strive for it that we receive great rewards. Just as sin itself leads to punishment, the approval of sinful behavior subjects us to even greater consequences, a reality articulated by Paul. He enumerated various sins, condemning those who transgress God's commandments, and added that those who understand God's righteousness know that such wrongdoers deserve death; yet they not only persist in their actions but also enable others to do so. Therefore, the apostle asserts that the endorsement of evil is a graver offense than the act of evil itself.
Read more (534 words)
Consequently, the approval of sinful deeds warrants a far harsher penalty than the sins themselves, for such endorsement indicates a deeply corrupted soul suffering from an incurable affliction. A person who acknowledges their sin may find the path to repentance, but one who lauds sin deprives themselves of the healing grace that comes from remorse. Thus, the apostle rightly regards the approval of sin as more culpable than the sin itself. Therefore, just as those who commit evil are liable to punishment, so too are those who endorse it; conversely, those who honor and support the righteous share in the glory prepared for them. This principle is reflected in Scripture, where God tells Abraham, “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee” (Genesis 12:3). This is similarly evident at the Olympic Games, where not only the victor is crowned, but also those who admire their achievements partake in the joy of their glory. Hence, I commend both this courageous warrior David for his fortitude and you for your support of him. He fought valiantly and triumphed, receiving his crown; meanwhile, by celebrating his victory, you have gained a significant share in his honor.
To further enrich our understanding, let us consider the narrative further. After recounting David's refusal to commit murder, the text notes he “did not let them rise up and kill Saul,” highlighting both the soldiers’ eagerness to kill and David’s courage. Many among the enemy, while appearing virtuous, may refrain from committing murder themselves, yet they do not stop others from doing so. David, however, did not act this way; he possessed an obligation, and not only did he refrain from harming Saul, but he actively intervened to prevent others from doing so. As a result, he became a formidable protector rather than a foe. It is not an exaggeration to state that David was in greater peril than Saul at that moment. He fiercely struggled, seeking every means to protect Saul from the soldiers' malice—not so much fearing for his life, but rather concerned that one of the soldiers might act in anger and kill Saul. Thus, he sought to justify Saul’s actions. The soldiers were the accusers, Saul was the accused, the enemy stood justified, and God served as the ultimate judge, affirming David's decision. Without divine assistance, David would have been unable to quell the soldiers' fury; nonetheless, God's grace inspired his words with persuasive power as they flowed from his lips. David’s previous guidance prepared the soldiers to be ready and obedient at that crucial moment. He led them not as a commander, but in a priestly manner; his surroundings bore the resemblance of a sacred space. Clothed in the role of a spiritual leader, he imparted a profound message to them, followed by an extraordinary offering—not the typical sacrifices of bullocks or lambs, but what surpassed these offerings: he presented to God his humility and kindness, extinguished the raging fury, silenced anger, and subdued “your members which are upon the earth” (Colossians 3:5). In this act, he himself became both the sacrifice and the priest as well as the altar, for the meekness offered came entirely from his own purified heart.