“Moreover you know also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, even what he did to the two captains of the armies of Israel, to Abner the son of Ner, and to Amasa the son of Jether, whom he killed, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war on his sash that was around his waist, and in his sandals that were on his feet.
Parallel Translations
-
“Moreover you know also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, even what he did to the two captains of the armies of Israel, to Abner the son of Ner, and to Amasa the son of Jether, whom he killed, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war on his sash that was around his waist, and in his sandals that were on his feet.
-
Moreover thou knowest also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, and what he did to the two captains of the hosts of Israel, unto Abner the son of Ner, and unto Amasa the son of Jether, whom he slew, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war upon his girdle that was about his loins, and in his shoes that were on his feet.
-
Moreover thou knowest also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did unto me, even what he did to the two captains of the hosts of Israel, unto Abner the son of Ner and unto Amasa the son of Jether, whom he slew, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war upon his girdle that was about his loins, and in his shoes that were on his feet.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (1)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (15)
Passages linked to 1 Kings 2:5 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- 2 Samuel 3:27 When Abner was returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside into the middle of the gate to speak with him quietly, and struck him there in the body, so that he died, for the blood of Asahel his brother.
- 2 Samuel 20:10 But Amasa took no heed to the sword that was in Joab’s hand. So he struck him with it in the body, and shed out his bowels to the ground, and didn’t strike him again; and he died. Joab and Abishai his brother pursued Sheba the son of Bichri.
- 2 Samuel 18:5 The king commanded Joab and Abishai and Ittai, saying, “Deal gently for my sake with the young man, even with Absalom.” All the people heard when the king commanded all the captains concerning Absalom.
- 2 Samuel 18:12 The man said to Joab, “Though I should receive a thousand pieces of silver in my hand, I still wouldn’t stretch out my hand against the king’s son; for in our hearing the king commanded you and Abishai and Ittai, saying, ‘Beware that no one touch the young man Absalom.’
- 2 Samuel 3:39 I am weak today, though anointed king. These men, the sons of Zeruiah are too hard for me. May Yahweh reward the evildoer according to his wickedness.”
- 2 Samuel 18:14 Then Joab said, “I’m not going to wait like this with you.” He took three darts in his hand, and thrust them through the heart of Absalom, while he was yet alive in the middle of the oak.
- 2 Samuel 2:18 The three sons of Zeruiah were there, Joab, and Abishai, and Asahel: and Asahel was as light of foot as a wild gazelle.
- 2 Samuel 17:25 Absalom set Amasa over the army instead of Joab. Now Amasa was the son of a man whose name was Ithra the Israelite, who went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah, Joab’s mother.
- 2 Samuel 19:5-7 Joab came into the house to the king, and said, “Today you have shamed the faces of all your servants, who today have saved your life, and the lives of your sons and of your daughters, and the lives of your wives, and the lives of your concubines; in that you love those who hate you, and hate those who love you. For you have declared today that princes and servants are nothing to you. For today I perceive that if Absalom had lived, and all we had died today, then it would have pleased you well. Now therefore arise, go out, and speak to comfort your servants; for I swear by Yahweh, if you don’t go out, not a man will stay with you this night. That would be worse to you than all the evil that has happened to you from your youth until now.”
- 1 Kings 1:7 He conferred with Joab the son of Zeruiah, and with Abiathar the priest; and they followed Adonijah and helped him.
- 1 Kings 1:18-19 Now, behold, Adonijah reigns; and you, my lord the king, don’t know it. He has slain cattle and fatlings and sheep in abundance, and has called all the sons of the king, Abiathar the priest, and Joab the captain of the army; but he hasn’t called Solomon your servant.
- 1 Kings 2:32 Yahweh will return his blood on his own head, because he fell on two men more righteous and better than he, and killed them with the sword, and my father David didn’t know it: Abner the son of Ner, captain of the army of Israel, and Amasa the son of Jether, captain of the army of Judah.
- Jeremiah 2:34 Also the blood of the souls of the innocent poor is found in your skirts. You didn’t find them breaking in, but it is because of all these things.
- Jeremiah 6:15 Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush. Therefore they will fall among those who fall. When I visit them, they will be cast down,” says Yahweh.
- Ezekiel 24:7-8 “ ‘ “For her blood is in the middle of her. She set it on the bare rock. She didn’t pour it on the ground, to cover it with dust. That it may cause wrath to come up to take vengeance, I have set her blood on the bare rock, that it should not be covered.”
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (17 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain 2 Sam. 29:10
2 Sam. 29:10
He put the bloody sword into his sheath.
Read full note →
He shed his blood in time of peace, as if there had been war.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 1Ki 2:5 Moreover thou knowest also what Joab the…
1Ki 2:5 Moreover thou knowest also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, [and] what he did to the two captains of the hosts of Israel, unto Abner the son of Ner, and unto Amasa the son of Jether, whom he slew, and shed the blood of war in peace, and put the blood of war upon his girdle that [was] about his loins, and in his shoes that [were] on his feet.
Ver. 5. What Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me.] Why, what did Joab to David? Pellican justifieth him, and commendeth Joab highly for a good man; but few interpreters are of his mind. David had much ado with him all along, and complained of his insolences, which yet he dared not punish, till in his old age the armies fell off from him, and Benaiah, captain of the guard, was able to deal with him. What is it that David here meaneth which Joab had done against him, is uncertain. The Hebrews tell us, that he showed David’s letters to him concerning the death of Uriah, which was much to his disgrace. Others hold that the death of Absalom still stuck in David’s stomach, together with that rough and rude language which Joab gave him for his excessive mourning thereupon. Theodoret thinketh it was his siding with Adonijah, and the evil that he might yet work against Solomon, whom he never loved, but held him unworthy to reign for his scandalous birth.
Read full note →
And what he did to the two captains, &c.] This seemeth to be the very thing that he did against David; for besides that the sovereign is smitten in the subject, David had given the public faith to these two captains for their safety, and, therefore, appropriateth their slaughter, as good reason he had.
And put the blood of war upon his girdle, &c.] In a bold and public way, as if he had bragged of his murders; like as Alexander Pheraeus is said to have consecrated the javelin wherewith he slew his uncle Polyphron, and called it his god Tychon, of great luck. {a}
{a} Plutarch, in Pelopida.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain Did to me, i.e. against me; either, first, Directly…
Did to me, i.e. against me; either, first, Directly and immediately; how insolently and imperiously he hath carried himself towards me from time to time, trampling upon my authority and commands when they thwarted his humour or interest, provoking my spirit by his words and actions. See 2Sa 3:39; 19:7. Or, secondly, Indirectly, in what he did against Abner and Amasa; whose death was a great injury to David, as it was a breach of his laws and peace; a contempt of his person and government; a pernicious example to others of his subjects upon the like occasions; a great scandal and dishonour to him, as if Joab had been only David’s instrument, to effect what he secretly desired and designed; whereby the hearts of his people either were or might have been alienated from him, and inflamed against him, and the wounds which were well nigh healed might have been widened again, and made to bleed afresh.
And what he did, or, even; the following branches being added as an explication of the foregoing, to show what and how he acted towards or against David. Or, and particularly; as his other miscarriages, so these especially.
Read full note →
Shed the blood of war in peace; he slew them as if they had been in the state and act of war, when there was not only a cessation of arms, but also a treaty and agreement of peace, of which also they were the great procurers and promoters.
Upon his girdle that was about his loins, and in his shoes that were on his feet: this is added to note his impudence and impenitency, that although by his perfidious manner of killing them, when he pretended to embrace them, he stained his own garments with their blood, yet he was not ashamed of it, but gloried in it, and marched boldly along with the army with the same girdle and shoes which were sprinkled with their blood. See 2Sa 20:10.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain Moreover thou knowest also what Joab the son of…
Moreover thou knowest also what Joab the son of Zeruiah did unto me,.... In slaying Absalom, contrary to his orders, and in behaving insolently towards him on account of his mourning for him, and at other times; but as these things might not be personally known to Solomon, only by hearsay, this may respect his disloyalty towards him, in joining with Adonijah, who set himself up for king in his lifetime, and without his knowledge and consent; or it may respect the instances next mentioned, in which he did injury to the interest, honour, and character of David:
and, or "even",
Read full note →
what he did to the two captains of the host of Israel, unto Abner the son of Ner, and unto Amasa the son of Jether, whom he slew; to Abner who was under Ishbosheth, and Amasa under David, who had not only the promise of the post, but was actually in it when Joab slew him; and indeed out of envy to him for it:
and shed the blood of war in peace; when they were at peace with him, as if they had been in open war; and even under a pretence of friendship to them, asking of their peace and welfare, as if he meant nothing less than to behave peaceably towards them; hence the Targum is,
"whom he slew in craftiness:''
and put the blood of war upon the girdle that was about his loins,
and in his shoes that were in his feet; which particularly respects the affair of Amasa, whose blood he shed with his sword, that dropped out of its scabbard, girded upon his loins, and into which he put it again, all over bloody, and wore it girded upon his loins; and which he also stooped for when it fell, as if he was going to unloose or buckle his shoes, and into which the blood ran down when he stabbed him; and after this barbarous action marched on without any shame or remorse, with his bloody sword on his loins, and the blood of the murdered in his shoes.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain To me - That is, against me; in what…
To me - That is, against me; in what he did against Abner and Amasa: whose death was a great injury to David, as it was a breach of his laws and peace; a contempt of his person and government; a pernicious example to his subjects, and a great scandal to him, as if Joab had been only David's instrument, to affect what he secretly designed. And shed - He slew them as if they had been in the state of war, when there was not only a cessation of arms, but also a treaty of peace. Put the blood - This is added to note his impenitency, that although by his perfidious manner of killing them when he pretended to embrace them, he stained his own garments with their blood, yet he was not ashamed of it, but gloried in it, and marched boldly along with the army, with the same girdle and shoes which were sprinkled with their blood.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 5. Thou knowest - what Joab - did…
Verse 5. Thou knowest - what Joab - did to me] He did every thing bad and dishonourable in itself, in the murder of Abner and Amasa, and indeed in the death of the profligate Absalom.
Shed the blood of war - upon his girdle - and in his shoes] He stabbed them while he pretended to embrace them, so that their blood gushed out on his girdle, and fell into his shoes! This was a most abominable aggravation of his crimes.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain 1Ki 2:5. Moreover, thou knowest, &c. — After David…
1Ki 2:5. Moreover, thou knowest, &c. — After David had given Solomon this general charge, he proceeded to direct him to do some particular acts of justice and kindness, and first of all, bids him remember how Joab had acted. We must not look upon this admonition of David, on his death-bed, as proceeding from a spirit of private revenge, but as advising the execution of a public piece of justice which the circumstances of things would not permit him to inflict before. Certainly the punishment of Joab was owing both to God and man, for his treacherous and cruel murder of Abner and Amasa; and, therefore, David here, in justice to his people, and the divine laws, ordered his son and successor to do that, when his throne was fully established, which he could not execute himself for want of sufficient power, Joab’s interest being then so great, that it might have thrown the state into a fresh civil war, had any steps been taken to inflict punishment upon him. What Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me — That is, against me. For Joab’s murder of Abner and Amasa was a great injury to David, as it was a breach of his laws and peace, a contempt of his person and government, a pernicious example to his subjects, and a great scandal to him, giving people reason to suspect that Joab had been only David’s instrument, to effect what he secretly designed. And shed the blood of war in peace — He slew them as if they had been in the state of war, when there was not only a cessation of arms, but also a treaty of peace. And put the blood of war upon his girdle — This is added to denote his impenitence, that although by his perfidious manner of killing them, when he pretended to embrace them, he stained his own garments with their blood, yet he was not ashamed of it, but gloried in it, and marched boldly along with the army, with the same girdle and shoes which were sprinkled with their blood.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain In his directions with respect to certain important persons,…
In his directions with respect to certain important persons, David, anxious for the security of his young successor’s kingdom, allows old animosities to revive, and is willing to avenge himself indirectly and by deputy, though he had been withheld by certain scruples from taking vengeance in his own person. We must not expect Gospel morality from the saints of the Old Testament. They were only the best men of their several ages and nations. The maxim of “them of old time,” whether Jews or Gentiles, was “Love your friends and hate your enemies” (see Mat 5:43); and David perhaps was not in this respect in advance of his age. Joab’s chief offence against David, besides his two murders, was no doubt his killing Absalom 2Sa 18:14. Another serious crime was his support of the treasonable attempt of Adonijah 1Ki 1:7. But besides these flagrant misdemeanours, he seems to have offended David by a number of little acts. He was a constant thorn in his side. He treated him with scant respect, taking important steps without his orders 2Sa 3:26, remonstrating with him roughly and rudely 2Sa 2:24-25, almost betraying his secrets 2Sa 11:19-21, and, where he disliked the orders given him, disobeying them 1Ch 21:6. David allowed his ascendancy, but he chafed against it, finding this “son of Zeruiah,” in particular “too hard” for him (margin reference).
Put the blood of war upon his girdle ... - Meaning “The blood of Amasa spirited all over the girdle to which the sword of Joab was attached; and the sandals on his feet were reddened with the stains left by the falling corpse.”
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain Joab. These instructions given by David to his son,…
Joab. These instructions given by David to his son, with relation to Joab and Semei, proceeded not from any rancour of heart, or private pique; but from a zeal for justice: that crimes so public and heinous might not pass unpunished. (Challoner) --- David and Solomon esteemed themselves, in a manner, defiled, as long as these continued unpunished, ver. 31. Joab had behaved to David with great insolence, after the death of Absalom. (Haydock) --- He had lately sided with Adonias. (Menochius) --- But what touched the good old king more particularly, were the treacherous murders of two great generals, who had put themselves under his protection, and were endeavouring to promote his welfare. Only the fear of greater commotions had hitherto prevented David from bringing his nephew to public execution, as the people expected. He deemed it requisite to remind his successor of this obligation, when his power should be sufficiently strong, that the impunity of such daring offenders might not destroy the commonwealth. (Haydock) --- Peace. Pretending affection. Joab had treated Abner and Amasa as the worst of enemies, and their blood had stained his garments. (Menochius)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain thou knowest also what Joab . . . did--The…
thou knowest also what Joab . . . did--The insolent and imperious conduct of that general had not only been deeply offensive to the feelings (Sa2 18:5-15; Sa2 19:5-7), but calculated to bring reproach on the character, to injure the prospects, and endanger the throne of David. Passing over the injuries committed directly against himself, David dwelt with strong feelings on the base assassination of Abner and Amasa.
shed the blood of war in peace, &c.--The obvious meaning is, that in peace he acted towards them as if they had been in a state of warfare; but perhaps these graphic expressions might be designed to impress Solomon's mind more strongly with a sense of the malice, treachery, and cruelty by which those murders were characterized.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 5. Thou knowest… what Joab… did — For the…
5. Thou knowest… what Joab… did — For the facts, see marginal references. This charge concerning Joab is but a particular application of the more general charge in 1Ki_2:3. A strict regard for the honour of Jehovah, and for his statutes, laws, judgments, and testimonies, required that the crimes of the bloody Joab should receive their merited penalty; but David seems to have felt that his own hands were too full of blood, and his own heart had been too deeply stained with “blood-guiltiness,” (Psa_51:14) to allow him to be the instrument of Joab’s punishment. His own unworthiness made him feel that the son of Zeruiah was too strong for him, and hence this charge to Solomon. It was not “a dark legacy of long-cherished vengeance,” as Stanley avers, though personal feelings were no doubt involved, but a solemn responsibility resting on the king of Israel as the guardian of Jehovah’s honour. He that “keeps the charge of Jehovah” must, if he regard the safety of the kingdom and the honour of its laws, show that “he beareth not the sword in vain.” See Rom_13:4. “David does not mention, among Joab’s sins, that one which caused him personally the most poignant grief — the murder of Absalom. Not for sins committed against David as a father, but for sins committed against the law and majesty of God, does David advise Solomon the king, as the keeper of God’s law and the guardian of God’s honour, to punish the guilty offender.” — Wordsworth.
Shed the blood of war in peace — Shed in time of peace, blood which should have been shed only in warfare. As in the case of Abner, with whom David had made a treaty of peace, but whom Joab treacherously slew at the gate of Hebron. 2Sa_3:12-30.
Read full note →
Put the blood of war upon his girdle… and in his shoes — That is, he stained his garments with innocent blood, the blood of those whom he could have lawfully slain only in battle. The words are to be taken literally, and with special reference to the case of Amasa. See 2Sa_20:8-10. When Joab, after the murder of Amasa, returned his sword to its girdle he doubtless stained the girdle, and probably his feet also, with the blood of the slain captain. Or we suppose that the one fearful thrust that disembowelled Amasa caused the blood to spurt out, and spatter Joab from his girdle to his feet.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 5. what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to…
5. what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me] This one of the sons of Zeruiah had been all through his reign too strong for his uncle. See 2Sa_3:39 : and for the rough remonstrances of Joab with David, cf. 2Sa_19:5-7. The slaughter of Absalom, though neither mentioned here by David, nor afterwards by Solomon, when Joab is put to death, must have been constantly present to their minds.
unto Abner the son of Ner] Ner being brother of Kish (1Ch_9:36), the father of Saul, we can understand how Abner became a man of much importance in the court of Saul, under whom he was commander-in-chief. After the death of Saul it was Abner who proclaimed Ishbosheth and supported him against David, until some quarrel arising Abner made overtures to David which were favourably received. During the earlier events of the war between Ishbosheth’s supporters and those of David, Abner to save his own life had slain Asahel, Joab’s younger brother. To avenge this death and probably also from jealousy, lest Abner coming into David’s service should become more influential than himself, Joab calling Abner aside as he was departing from the court, in conjunction with Abishai his brother treacherously slew him. Owing to Abner’s early course of action David might have been suspected of conniving at his murder. The exposure to such a suspicion no doubt aggravated the king’s sorrow. David’s lament over Abner’s death is found 2Sa_3:33-34. He never forgave the murder, though he was unable during his lifetime to take vengeance on the perpetrator.
Read full note →
unto Amasa the son of Jether] Amasa was a son of David’s sister Abigail, and the name of her husband is elsewhere (2Sa_17:25) written ‘Ithra.’ Amasa took the side of Absalom when that prince rebelled against his father, but David forgave this, when Absalom had been slain by Joab, and appointed Amasa commander-in-chief in Joab’s place (2Sa_19:13). Afterwards, under the pretence of saluting Amasa, Joab gave him a fatal wound with a sword which he held hidden in his left hand (2Sa_20:10).
the blood of war in peace] For both these murders were committed when the opportunity had been gained under the guise of friendship.
his girdle … his shoes] Both these portions of his dress must have been covered with the blood spurting and flowing from wounds inflicted at such close quarters.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (5) What Joab . . . did.—The charge as…
(5) What Joab . . . did.—The charge as to Joab has a certain righteousness in it. David could not—probably since Joab’s knowledge of his great crime, he dared not—punish him as he deserved. There is a graphic vividness in the description of the blood of his victims, shed as “the blood of war in peace,” spirting over the girdle and sandals of the murderer, which shows how the horror of the crimes had dwelt on David’s imagination. The murder of Abner, treacherous as it was, probably had some show of justification in the rough justice wrought out by the duty laid in ancient law on the “avenger of blood.” David disclaims it (2Sa_3:28-29; 2Sa_3:37-39), without actually condemning it as inexcusable. The more recent and shameful murder of Amasa was simply one of revenge and ambition, because Amasa had been put in Joab’s place; yet David, broken in spirit, does not dare to blame it, and quietly acquiesces in the resumption by Joab of the dignity conferred on the murdered man. That these crimes should be punished by a king whose hands were clean, and who owed Joab nothing. was perhaps just, certainly within the letter of the law; though clemency might have spared the old and now fallen warrior, who had at least served David ably with long and faithful service. It is singularly true to nature, that the old King makes no mention of the act for which nevertheless, in all probability, he most bore grudge against Joab—the reckless slaughter of Absalom against his own express commands and entreaties—and does not deign to allude to his recent treason, which probably had already embittered Solomon against him.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain "Moreover, thou knowest also what Joab, the son of…
"Moreover, thou knowest also what Joab, the son of Zeruiah there is no "emphasis on these words: he who was mine own sister"s son," as Wordsworth, see on 1:113, did to me and this last word has no place in the original, and should be left out, as it is misleading. It makes David demand the death of Joab partly because of the private injuries he had suffered at his hands, and partly because of his two brutal murders mentioned presently. But this is just what David did not do; for he is careful to exclude all mention of his private wrongs. It is true, he says, "what Job did to me," but that is because "the sovereign is smitten in the subject" (Bp. Hall), and because the first of these murders had caused David to be suspected of complicity, while each had deprived him of an able officer. And the words that follow what he did to the two captains of the hosts of Israel these words are clearly explicative of the "what he did to me." Only thus can we explain the absence of the "and" unto Abner the son of Jether. (2Sa_3:27) This was one of those foul murders to which the law expressly denied any right of sanctuary, for it was "with guile". (Exo_21:14) Joab "took Abner aside in the gate to speak with him peaceably, and smote him there in the abdomen", and unto Amasa the son of Jether or Ithra. In 2Sa 27:23, Ithra is called "an Israelite," an obvious mistake for "Ishmaelite," as indeed it stands in, 1Ch_2:17. Amasa"s mother, Abigail, was sister of David and Zeruiah; Amasa, consequently, was Joab"s first cousin. This murder was even fouler than that of Abner. Here there were ties of blood; they were companions in arms, and there was no pretence of a vendetta whom he slew and shed lit., "put," a somewhat strange expression. It almost looks as if wyl "upon him," had dropped out. The meaning "make," which Keil assigns to is not borne out by his references, Deu_14:1; Exo_10:2. "Showed," "displayed," is nearer the original the blood of war in peace the meaning is obvious. Blood might lawfully be shed in time of war, in fair fight; and Joab might have slain the two captains in battle without guilt. But he slew them when they were at peace with him and unprepared, by treachery, and put the blood of war the LXX has ai=ma ajqwon, "innocent blood" upon his girdle that was about his loins, and in his shoes that were on his feet we are not to suppose that the girdle and sandal are mentioned as die Zeichen des Kriegerstandes (Bahr), i.e., military insignia; nor yet that the idea is "from the girdle to the sandal" (Ewald), i.e., copiously. These are, usual (hardly "principal," as Keil) articles of Eastern dress, of the civilian"s as well as of the soldier"s, and these two are mentioned because, no doubt, the horrible details of the two murders, and especially of the last, (see 2Sa_20:8) had been reported to David. He had been told at the time how the blood of Amasa had spurted on to the girdle of Joab, and streamed down into his sandals, and these details, which no doubt made a deep impression upon his mind, are recited here to show how dastardly and treacherous was the deed, and how thoroughly Joab was stained with innocent blood, blood which cried to heaven for vengeance. (Gen_4:10)
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain 1Ki_2:5. Shed the blood of war in peace; i.e.,…
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES.—
1Ki_2:5. Shed the blood of war in peace; i.e., murderously slew the inoffensive; shed, in peace, blood which should only flow in war. Put the blood of war on his girdle and in his shoes—The “girdle” was the military band, and to which his sword was attached, worn by a warrior, suggestive, therefore, of his rank; while his “shoes” suggest his marching equipment; and these insignia of his office and dignity he soiled with murder! (comp. Lange).
Read full note →
1Ki_2:6. Do according to thy wisdom—At fitting time, and in fitting manner, mark his crimes with abhorrence, and requite his guilty deeds.
1Ki_2:7. “Eat at thy table, for so they came to me,” i.e., they did me kindness in entertaining me.
1Ki_2:8. Bahurim—A village beyond Olivet, five and a quarter miles distant from Jerusalem. A grievous curse—Not merely cursed me, but קְלָלָה נִמְרֶצֶת a grievous, violent curse (as in Mic_2:10, “sore destruction”); heinous, dreadful. Such punishment of Shimei was not vindictiveness on David’s part, but a vindication of the Divine justice against a ribald impiety.
HOMILETICS OF 1Ki_2:5-9
THE TERRIBLE PERTINACITY OF REVENGE
It is unfair to judge Old Testament characters according to the standard of New Testament morality. Viewed in the light of the religious ideas of the nineteenth century, the temper and conduct of David on his death-bed are irreconcileable with the spirit and genius of Christianity. But the religious era of David was initial and imperfect in its development; and it is no marvel if we detect serious blemishes alongside what is best in its experimental life. Besides, it should not be overlooked that in the instance before us David spoke not as a private individual, but as a theocratic king, uttering the decrees of the righteous vengeance of Heaven against gross wrong-doing. We may regard the whole passage as illustrative of the terrible pertinacity of revenge.
I. That a spirit of revenge is difficult to suppress.
1. It may obtruds itself amid the solemnities of the dying hour. When the soul is about to quit its frail, worn tenement, and is pluming its wings to soar into the invisible and eternal, it is desirable that its latest thoughts on earth should savour of amity, peace, and concord, and that its words should be free from bitterness and enmity. But such is the subtle, pertinacious character of revenge, that it clings to the soul for years, and disturbs the repose of the dying pillow. It is the dark, grim shadow of man’s better self, ever present, consciously or unconsciously, and which sometimes never vanishes but into the deeper shadow of the grave.
2. It mars a character otherwise noble and generous. There was much in the character of David of moral beauty, of noble impulse, and lofty aspiration. In the complexity of its elements, passion, tenderness, generosity, fierceness—the soldier, the shepherd, the poet, the statesman, the priest, the prophet, the king, the romantic friend, the chivalrous leader, the devoted father—there is no character of the Old Testament at all to be compared to it. Jacob comes nearest in the variety of elements included within it. But “David’s character stands at a higher point of the sacred history, and represents the Jewish people just at the moment of their transition from the lofty virtues of the older system to the fuller civilization and cultivation of the later. In this manner he becomes naturally, if one may so say, the likeness or portrait of the last and grandest development of the nation and of the monarchy in the person and period of the Messiah.” Pity it is that a character of qualities so fine and varied should be blurred by the dark, unsightly blot of revenge! making every allowance for David as representing in his last utterances the intentions of avenging Heaven. Revenge threatens the destruction of every virtue.
II. That a spirit of revenge retains a vivid recollection of past injuries.
1. The particular occasions of past injuries are retentively remembered (1Ki_2:5; 1Ki_2:8.) Joab’s chief offence against David, besides his murder of Abner and Amasa, was, no doubt, his killing Absalom (2Sa_18:14), despite the king’s orders to the contrary. Another serious crime was his support of the treasonable attempt of Adonijah. But, besides these, he seems to have offended David by a number of little acts. He was a constant thorn in his side. He treated him with scant respect, taking important steps without his orders (2Sa_3:26), remonstrating with him roughly and rudely (ib. 1Ki_2:24-25), almost betraying his secrets (ib. 11. 1Ki_2:19-21), and where he disliked the orders given him, disobeying them (1Ch_21:6). David allowed his ascendancy, but he chafed against it, finding “this son of Zeruiah” in particular, “too hard” for him (2Sa_3:39). Shimei’s cursing was all the more grievous because David was in distress at the time (2 Samuel 16); and the Jews say the insult was all the greater because Shimei upbraided him with his descent from Ruth. the Moabitess. The hatred and virulence of the curse indicated that the Benjamites resented the loss of royalty in their tribe, even in the palmiest days of David’s monarchy. Revenge notes every minute detail of the injury inflicted, broods over it in secret, and watches for the moment of retaliation; its memory is infallible, its hatred intense, its patience stern and unwearying, and its sting venomous and cruel.
2. The character of past injuries modifies the character of the revenge they provoke. The injuries in this case were of the gravest kind—cursing and murder. Sometimes the revenge is more terrible than the offence. In other instances the acts are so flagrant and sinful that to cherish and execute revenge simply amounts to the infliction of the righteous punishment of outraged justice. Magistrates are the avengers of the blood of those of whom they have charge. There are some sins which it would be a greater sin to allow to go unnoticed and unrequited. The murderer and blasphemer were punishable with death (Lev_24:14; Exo_22:27; 2Sa_16:9; ib. 2Sa_19:22).
3. Great forbearance may be shown before revenge is gratified (1Ki_2:8). Shimei had seen and confessed his sin, and obtained a reprieve, at least during David’s lifetime (2Sa_19:16-23). But his offence was of such a character, and his turbulent, malicious temper so well known, that Solomon was warned not to let slip the opportunity which any new offence offered of inflicting the punishment he deserved. The spirit of revenge may be for a while restrained by the prevalence of a more generous feeling, from motives of policy, or in order to choose the best time for its gratification; but, sooner or later, the stroke will fall. For a justification of David’s conduct in committing to judgment a man whom he had forgiven, see Keil on 1Ki_2:8-9, with foot note.
III. That a spirit of revenge is terribly pertinacious in its demands (1Ki_2:6-9).
1. It surrenders its victims to the extreme penalties of justice. “Hold him not guiltless,”—do not treat him as an innocent man; but punish him as in thy wisdom may seem best. Not at once; but when the next delinquency is committed, hesitate not to punish with the utmost severity. “So that deferring payment is no breach of bond: there will come a time wherein the Lord will have a full blow at the impenitent person, be the pretences of impunity what they will.”—Trapp. The hoary head of both must be brought to the grave with blood, else David’s head could not be brought to his grave in peace. Due punishment of malefactors is the debt of authority: if that holy king has run into arrearages, yet, as one that hates and fears to break the bank, he gives orders to his paymaster, it shall be defrayed, if not by him, yet for him.—Bishop Hall. Revenge may slumber for years; but when it is once roused, terrible is the havoc which it works. It burns with irresistible fierceness. It exacts the uttermost farthing of the penalty.
2. The aged are allowed no exemption from its severest punishments. Grey hairs, if found in the way of righteousness, are a crown of glory (Pro_16:31), adorned with which man may go the way of all flesh in peace and comfort; but an old sinner, whom even grey hairs have not brought to repentance, goes down to the grave without solace or peace. Age in itself is no protection from justice. The longer man continues in sin, the more fearful will be his punishment (Isa_65:20). A life of wasted opportunities, abused privileges, and unrepented sins will bring an old age of suffering and dishonour.
IV. That a spirit of revenge is often relieved by the exhibition of an opposite spirit of kindness and liberality. “But shew kindness unto the sons of Barzillai” (1Ki_2:7). A good deed will not go unrewarded. Even successions of generations fare better for one good parent (Pro_27:10). The children of Barzillai inherit the fruits of their father’s timely hospitality (2Sa_17:27-29). Generous natures are never ungrateful. Agesilaus, king of Sparta, was always very grateful for any courtesies he received, and used to say that it was not only an unjust thing not to be thankful, but if a man did not return greater kindness than he received. The honour of eating at the royal table is a custom thoroughly oriental, and has prevailed in all ages. How much more bountiful is the Father of Mercies in the remuneration of our poor, unworthy services! The heart that is susceptible of the bitterest revenge is often most lavish in affection and generosity.
LESSONS:—
1. Revenge is strangely out of place on a death-bed.
2. The predominance of the Christian spirit destroys revenge.
3. To forgive an injury is more noble than to retaliate.
HOMILETICS OF 1Ki_2:8-9
THE SINS OF GODLY MEN
A man of God retains to the last the bias of nature with which his Maker endowed him at the first. Christianity does not reduce men to one dead level; it rather brings out in greater relief those parts of our character which are in harmony with its principles, while tending to tone down others with which it has no affinity. If the good man in the present age is so misunderstood, and his actions so unmercifully criticised, what little chance is there of the characters of men in past times being rightly appreciated and justly dealt with? The Almighty is ever the same; but the peoples of every age, in every land, differ from their sires. Where once the stalwart Roman stood, there now the effeminate Italian basks in languid ease. The bandit lurks where erst the philosophic Greek discoursed. All this God recollects, if we forget, and assuredly will judge men as well from that outside them, as from that within their hearts. There are three ways in which David may have been influenced in giving this dying injunction to his son:—
I. As the agent, unconscious or otherwise, of Divine justice. We cannot conceive this measure as being the consummation of a Divine purpose, it had apparently so much about it of human plan. The Almighty’s power, when exerted in support of justice, has always been certain and direct in its action, without any references to contingencies. With God it is all justice or all mercy: no half measures. How different from man’s punishment is this! The very manner of Shimei’s death is the greatest argument against it having been ordained by God (1Ki_2:36-46). Even David and his son were ashamed of it; and shall God be credited with what they despised? For the honour of his father’s name, as well as his own, Solomon disguised his real object by laying a trap for Shimei, puerile in its meanness, and yet sufficient to attain the end desired. David’s conduct in giving this dying injunction to his son may have been influenced—
II. By a conscientious desire to administer human justice according to the will of God. David, we are told, was a man of God, one after His own heart. Intimately acquainted with the Divine nature—keenly alive to heaven’s requirements, and inspired most devoutly with the desire to imitate his Maker’s character—he is prominently put forth as, in many respects, the model of a godly man How, then, with such clear perceptions of the Divine attributes, can we conceive of him as acting in this matter conscientiously and with cool judgment, in the full belief of the harmony of his decree with Almighty rectitude? To do so is to dishonour the unswerving uprightness of God’s justice, or to depreciate David’s experiences and knowledge of the Divine character. We would rather be left to our final alternative in—
III. Regarding his injunction as prompted by revenge. As a man he forgave Shimei at the time of his crime, which then should have been effaced from his memory. Heavenly justice, if not satisfied, would have taken its own way of vindicating itself, without further action on David’s part. With David, as a man of God and Israel’s lawgiver, we must utterly disconnect this act, and attribute it entirely to a flaw in his character, which, at the last, reasserted its natural power in antagonism to Divine grace. Feud and retaliation have ever been the preceders of law, order, and Christianity; and even now, among some nations, one of the most sacred principles a man acknowledges is to avenge a loved one’s death, or his own personal wrong, till the third and fourth generations. Undoubtedly, in David’s time, this custom of revenge and retaliation was rife among the Eastern nations, along with many other practices at variance with progress and religion. Men were brought up to them, accepted them as their moral clothing, and acted up conscientiously to their injunctions. So it was with David. Though a man of God, in whom He delighted, yet the customs of his time, the habits of thought of those about him, with the silent effect of their example, had—unknown, maybe, to him—so impregnated his being as to germinate into ungodly actions at any sudden temptation or crisis, with sufficient power to sweep away for a time the tuition and principles of his heavenly life. In David’s case, what mighty lessons this should teach! Here was a patriarch indeed, at the last moments of his existence succumbing to the seducing wiles and powerful instincts of his grosser nature Men may well dread death, for then is the last great struggle between earth and heaven—nay hell and heaven. It is Satan’s last chance, and he puts forth his mighty energies in one last grand endeavour, in which the deadliest hate and fear, and every terrible passion, is at work, striving to counteract the power of his Almighty antagonist. But the Almighty knows him, and He knows us. Like David, we may be vengeful on our death-bed—our spirits may become dim, and weak, and faint; yet He knows our hearts that we are in Him, and He in us, and pardons the wanderings of our faltering footsteps as we totter to His threshold, until, as we gain the door and faintly knock, it opens wide, disclosing a scene of light, and joy, and bliss, with the inspiriting words sounding gladly in our ears—“Be of good courage, I will never leave thee or forsake thee!”—Homilist.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
1Ki_2:5-9. Perhaps the dying monarch is solely anxious for the security of his young successor’s kingdom. Perhaps he allows old animosities to revive, and is willing to avenge himself indirectly and by deputy, though he had been withheld by certain scruples from taking vengeance in his own person. We must not expect gospel morality from the saints of the Old Testament. They were only the best men of their several ages and nations. The maxim of them of old time, whether Jews or Gentiles, was “Love your friends and hate your enemies” (Mat_5:43), and David, perhaps, was not, in this respect, in advance of his age. It would have been more magnanimous had he, either now or previously, freely forgiven these great offenders (Joab and Shimei) their offences against himself; but it would have been a magnanimity unexampled in the previous history of the world, and which we have no right to look for in one who was the warrior king of a nation just emerging from barbarism. If David was actuated by a sense of his own wrongs in the injunctions which he gave with respect to Joab and Shimei, we cannot justify the morality of his conduct; but it ought not to occasion us any surprise or difficulty. At any rate, it is satisfactory to see that, if David did allow himself to accept the unchristian half of the maxim above quoted, and to indulge malevolent feelings against his enemies, at least he accepted equally the other half, and entertained warm feelings of affection towards his friends. His hatred pursues only the individuals who have done him wrong. His gratitude and love pass on from the doer of a kindness to the doer’s children after their father’s death.—Speaker’s Comm.
1Ki_2:7. A noble heart does not forget what was done for him in times of trouble especially, and thinks of it even in the hour of death. The world is ungrateful. A blessing rests on deeds of faithfulness, and self-sacrificing, disinterested love; and it descends to children and children’s children.—Lange.
A spirit of kindness—
1. Has a lively appreciation of help rendered in time of need.
2. Is prompt to acknowledge its obligations.
3. Delights in showing greater kindness than it received.
4. Is an important, practical feature of the Christian spirit.
1Ki_2:8-9. A curse rests on those who curse the “powers” which are God’s ministers, instead of praying for them, and they are made, sooner or later, to feel the curse (1Pe_2:17; 1Pe_2:6). The Lord prayed for those who cursed Him; but when they did not repent and become converted, Divine judgment came down on them. No doubt a wicked man often goes a long time unpunished for his deeds; but Divine justice does not fail to overtake him finally, ere he is aware. It required wisdom to punish: a premature, ill-judged chastisement does more harm than good.—Lange.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 General Information:
General Information:
King David continues to tell Solomon how to lead Israel.
Read full note →
what Joab ... did to me, and what he did
David is referring to the same thing twice. AT: "what Joab ... did to me—that is, what he did"
shed the blood of war in peace
Possible meanings are 1) "killed those men during a time of peace as if he were killing them in war" or 2) "took revenge on those men during a time of peace because they had killed people in war" (See: Metonymy)
put the blood of war on the belt around his waist and on the shoes on his feet
Possible meanings are 1) Joab was close enough to these men when he killed them that their blood spattered on his belt and on his sandals or 2) the word "blood" is a metonym for guilt of murder, and the belt and the shoes are metonyms for Joab's authority as commander, so David is saying that because Joab is guilty of murder, he should not be commander of the army. Either way, it is best to translate this literally. (See: Metonymy)
do not let his gray head go down to the grave in peace
Here being old is represented by having gray hair, that is, a "gray head." AT: "make sure Joab dies a violent death before he grows old" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
Joab
commander
Abner
blood
peace
wise
grave
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 2:5-6 Joab had supported David’s bid for kingship but…
2:5-6 Joab had supported David’s bid for kingship but had become too ambitious. He had murdered former military rivals Abner (2 Sam 3:22-30) and Amasa (2 Sam 20:10), as well as David’s son Absalom (2 Sam 18:1-18). A party to David’s murder of Uriah the Hittite (2 Sam 11:14-27), Joab had grown very powerful (2 Sam 20:23), and his backing of Adonijah posed a serious threat to Solomon.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.