Now Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived that the king’s heart was toward Absalom. Joab sent to Tekoa, and brought a wise woman from there, and said to her, “Please act like a mourner, and put on mourning clothing, please, and don’t anoint yourself with oil, but be as a woman who has mourned a long time for the dead. Go in to the king, and speak like this to him.” So Joab put the words in her mouth.
When the woman of Tekoa spoke to the king, she fell on her face to the ground, showed respect, and said, “Help, O king!”
The king said to her, “What ails you?” She answered, “Truly I am a widow, and my husband is dead.
Your servant had two sons, and they both fought together in the field, and there was no one to part them, but the one struck the other, and killed him. Behold, the whole family has risen against your servant, and they say, ‘Deliver him who struck his brother, that we may kill him for the life of his brother whom he killed, and so destroy the heir also.’ Thus they would quench my coal which is left, and would leave to my husband neither name nor remainder on the surface of the earth.”
The king said to the woman, “Go to your house, and I will give a command concerning you.”
The woman of Tekoa said to the king, “My lord, O king, may the iniquity be on me, and on my father’s house; and may the king and his throne be guiltless.”
The king said, “Whoever says anything to you, bring him to me, and he will not bother you any more.”
Then she said, “Please let the king remember Yahweh your God, that the avenger of blood destroy not any more, lest they destroy my son.” He said, “As Yahweh lives, not one hair of your son shall fall to the earth.”
Then the woman said, “Please let your servant speak a word to my lord the king.” He said, “Say on.”
The woman said, “Why then have you devised such a thing against the people of God? For in speaking this word the king is as one who is guilty, in that the king does not bring home again his banished one. For we must die, and are like water spilled on the ground, which can’t be gathered up again; neither does God take away life, but devises means, that he who is banished not be an outcast from him. Now therefore seeing that I have come to speak this word to my lord the king, it is because the people have made me afraid. Your servant said, ‘I will now speak to the king; it may be that the king will perform the request of his servant.’ For the king will hear, to deliver his servant out of the hand of the man who would destroy me and my son together out of the inheritance of God. Then your servant said, ‘Please let the word of my lord the king bring rest; for as an angel of God, so is my lord the king to discern good and bad. May Yahweh, your God, be with you.’ ”
Then the king answered the woman, “Please don’t hide anything from me that I ask you.” The woman said, “Let my lord the king now speak.”
The king said, “Is the hand of Joab with you in all this?” The woman answered, “As your soul lives, my lord the king, no one can turn to the right hand or to the left from anything that my lord the king has spoken; for your servant Joab urged me, and he put all these words in the mouth of your servant.
Your servant Joab has done this thing to change the face of the matter. My lord is wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to know all things that are in the earth.”
The king said to Joab, “Behold now, I have done this thing. Go therefore, and bring the young man Absalom back.”
Joab fell to the ground on his face, showed respect, and blessed the king. Joab said, “Today your servant knows that I have found favor in your sight, my lord, king, in that the king has performed the request of his servant.”
So Joab arose and went to Geshur, and brought Absalom to Jerusalem. The king said, “Let him return to his own house, but let him not see my face.” So Absalom returned to his own house, and didn’t see the king’s face. Now in all Israel there was no one to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty. From the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no defect in him. When he cut the hair of his head (now it was at every year’s end that he cut it; because it was heavy on him, therefore he cut it); he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred shekels, after the king’s weight. Three sons were born to Absalom, and one daughter, whose name was Tamar. She was a woman with a beautiful face. Absalom lived two full years in Jerusalem, and he didn’t see the king’s face. Then Absalom sent for Joab, to send him to the king, but he would not come to him. Then he sent again a second time, but he would not come. Therefore he said to his servants, “Behold, Joab’s field is near mine, and he has barley there. Go and set it on fire.” So Absalom’s servants set the field on fire.
Then Joab arose, and came to Absalom to his house, and said to him, “Why have your servants set my field on fire?”
Absalom answered Joab, “Behold, I sent to you, saying, ‘Come here, that I may send you to the king, to say, “Why have I come from Geshur? It would be better for me to be there still. Now therefore let me see the king’s face, and if there is iniquity in me, let him kill me.” ’ ”
So Joab came to the king, and told him; and when he had called for Absalom, he came to the king, and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the king; and the king kissed Absalom.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 30, 32 That the king favored him.
That the king favored him.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–33 2Sa 14:1 Now Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived…
2Sa 14:1 Now Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived that the king’s heart [was] toward Absalom.
Ver. 1. Now Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived,] sc., By probable signs; as being a cunning old courtier, and long conversant about David: he could easily find which way his pulse beat.
Read full note →
That the king’s heart was toward Absalom.] As the eldest now (for Chileab alias Daniel was dead), the fairest of all his sons, and the people’s darling. Only he wanted a fair excuse of fetching him home. Joab, therefore, to gratify David and ingratiate with Absalom, secretly brides this Tekoitess, by her wily discourse to bring about the business. How many good princes are persuaded to anything by the cunning craftiness of their favourites and followers; yea, even bought and sold by them! as it was said of Aurelian the emperor.
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 On vv1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33 He desired to see him, but was ashamed to…
He desired to see him, but was ashamed to show kindness to one whom God’s law and his own conscience obliged him to punish; and wanted a fair pretence, which therefore Joab gave him.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv1, 21, 28 Here is, I. Joab's design to get Absalom recalled…
Here is, I. Joab's design to get Absalom recalled out of banishment, his crime pardoned, and his attainder reversed, Sa2 14:1. Joab made himself very busy in this affair. 1. As a courtier that was studious, by all ways possible, to ingratiate himself with his prince and improve his interest in his favour: He perceived that the king's heart was towards Absalom, and that, the heat of his displeasure being over, he still retained his old affection for him, and only wanted a friend to court him to be reconciled, and to contrive for him how he might do it without impeaching the honour of his justice. Joab, finding how David stood affected, undertook this good office. 2. As a friend to Absalom, for whom perhaps he had a particular kindness, whom at least he looked upon as the rising sun, to whom it was his interest to recommend himself. He plainly foresaw that his father would at length be reconciled to him, and therefore thought he should make both his friends if he were instrumental to bring it about. 3. As a statesman, and one concerned for the public welfare. He knew how much Absalom was the darling of the people, and, if David should die while he was in banishment, it might occasion a civil war between those that were for him and those that were against him; for it is probable that though all Israel loved his person, yet they were much divided upon his case. 4. As one who was himself a delinquent, by the murder of Abner. He was conscious to himself of the guilt of blood, and that he was himself obnoxious to public justice, and therefore whatever favour he could procure to be shown to Absalom would corroborate his reprieve.
II. His contrivance to do it by laying somewhat of a parallel case before the king, which was done so dexterously by the person he employed that the king took it for a real case, and gave judgment upon it, as he had done upon Nathan's parable; and, the judgment being in favour of the criminal, the manager might, by that, discover his sentiments so far as to venture upon the application of it, and to show that it was the case of his own family, which, it is probable, she was instructed not to proceed to if the king's judgment upon her case should be severe.
Read full note →
1. The person he employed is not named, but she is said to be a woman of Tekoah, one whom he knew to be fit for such an undertaking: and it was requisite that the scene should be laid at a distance, that David might not think it strange that he had not heard of the case before. It is said, She was a wise woman, one that had a quicker wit and a readier tongue than most of her neighbours, Sa2 14:2. The truth of the story would be the less suspected when it came, as was supposed, from the person's own mouth.
2. The character she put on was that of a disconsolate widow, Sa2 14:2. Joab knew such a one would have an easy access to the king, who was always ready to comfort the mourners, especially the mourning widows, having himself mentioned it among the titles of God's honour that he is a Judge of the widows, Psa 68:5. God's ear, no doubt, is more open to the cries of the afflicted, and his heart too, than that of the most merciful princes on earth can be.
3. It was a case of compassion which she had to represent to the king, and a case in which she could have no relief but from the chancery in the royal breast, the law (and consequently the judgment of all the inferior courts) being against her. She tells the king that she had buried her husband (Sa2 14:5), - that she had two sons that were the support and comfort of her widowed state, - that these two (as young men are apt to do) fell out and fought, and one of them unhappily killed the other (Sa2 14:6), - that, for her part, she was desirous to protect the manslayer (for, as Rebekah argued concerning her two sons, Why should she be deprived of them both in one day? Gen 27:45), but though she, who was nearest of kin to the slain, was willing to let fall the demands of an avenger of blood, yet the other relations insisted upon it that the surviving brother should be put to death according to law, not out of any affection either to justice or to the memory of the slain brother, but that, by destroying the heir (which they had the impudence to own was the thing they aimed at), the inheritance might be theirs: and thus they would cut off, (1.) Her comfort: "They shall quench my coal, deprive me of the only support of my old age, and put a period to all my joy in this world, which is reduced to this one coal." (2.) Her husband's memory: "His family will be quite extinct, and they will leave him neither name nor remainder," Sa2 14:7.
4. The king promised her his favour and a protection for her son. Observe how she improved the king's compassionate concessions. (1.) Upon the representation of her case he promised to consider of it and to give orders about it, Sa2 14:8. This was encouraging, that he did not dismiss her petition with "Currat lex - Let the law take its course; blood calls for blood, and let it have what it calls for:" but he will take time to enquire whether the allegations of her petition be true. (2.) The woman was not content with this, but begged that he would immediately give judgment in her favour; and if the matter of fact were not as she represented it, and consequently a wrong judgment given upon it, let her bear the blame, and free the king and his throne from guilt, Sa2 14:9. Yet her saying this would not acquit the king if he should pass sentence without taking due cognizance of the case. (3.) Being thus pressed, he made a further promise that she should not be injured nor insulted by her adversaries, but he would protect her from all molestation, Sa2 14:10. Magistrates ought to be the patrons of oppressed widows. (4.) Yet this does not content her, unless she can get her son's pardon, and protection for him too. Parents are not easy, unless their children be safe, safe for both worlds: "Let not the avenger of blood destroy my son (Sa2 14:11), for I am undone if I lose him; as good take my life as his. Therefore let the king remember the Lord thy God," that is, [1.] "Let him confirm this merciful sentence with an oath, making mention of the Lord our God, by way of appeal to him, that the sentence may be indisputable and irreversible; and then I shall be easy." See Heb 6:17, Heb 6:18. [2.] "Let him consider what good reason there is for this merciful sentence, and then he himself will be confirmed in it. Remember how gracious and merciful the Lord thy God is, how he bears long with sinners and does not deal with them according to their deserts, but is ready to forgive. Remember how the Lord thy God spared Cain, who slew his brother, and protected him from the avengers of blood, Gen 4:15. Remember how the Lord thy God forgave thee the blood of Uriah, and let the king, that has found mercy, show mercy." Note, Nothing is more proper, nor more powerful, to engage us to every duty, especially to all acts of mercy and kindness, than to remember the Lord our God. (5.) This importunate widow, by pressing the matter thus closely, obtains at last a full pardon for her son, ratified with an oath as she desired: As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of thy son fall to the earth, that is, "I will undertake he shall come to no damage upon this account." The Son of David has assured all that put themselves under his protection that, though they should be put to death for his sake, not a hair of their head shall perish (Luk 21:16-18), though they should lose for him, they shall not lose by him. Whether David did well this to undertake the protection of a murderer, whom the cities of refuge would not protect, I cannot say. But, as the matter of fact appeared to him, there was not only great reason for compassion to the mother, but room enough for a favourable judgment concerning the son: he had slain his brother, but he hated him not in time past; it was upon a sudden provocation, and, for aught that appeared, it might be done in his own defence. He pleaded not this himself, but the judge must be of counsel for the prisoner; and therefore, Let mercy at this time rejoice against judgment.
5. The case being thus adjudged in favour of her son, it is now time to apply it to the king's son, Absalom. The mask here begins to be thrown off, and another scene opened. The king is surprised, but not at all displeased, to find his humble petitioner, of a sudden, become his reprover, his privy-counsellor, an advocate for the prince his son, and the mouth of the people, undertaking to represent to him their sentiments. She begs his pardon, and his patience, for what she had further to say (Sa2 14:12), and has leave to say it, the king being very well pleased with her wit and humour. (1.) She supposes Absalom's case to be, in effect, the same with that which she had put as her son's; and therefore, if the king would protect her son, though he had slain his brother, much more ought he to protect his own, and to fetch home his banished, Sa2 14:13. Mutato nomine, de te fabula narratur - Change but the name, to you the tale belongs. She names not Absalom, nor needed she to name him. David longed so much after him, and had him so much in his thoughts, that he was soon aware whom she meant by his banished. And in those two words were two arguments which the king's tender spirit felt the force of: "He is banished, and has for three years undergone the disgrace and terror, and all the inconveniences, of banishment. Sufficient to such a one is this punishment. But he is thy banished, thy own son, a piece of thyself, thy dear son, whom thou lovest." It is true, Absalom's case differed very much from that which she had put. Absalom did not slay his brother upon a hasty passion, but maliciously, and upon an old grudge; not in the field, where there were no witnesses, but at table, before all his guests. Absalom was not an only son, as hers was; David had many more, and one lately born, more likely to be his successor than Absalom, for he was called Jedidiah, because God loved him. But David was himself too well affected to the cause to be critical in his remarks upon the disparity of the cases, and was more desirous than she could be to bring that favourable judgment to his own son which he had given concerning hers. (2.) She reasons upon it with the king, to persuade him to recall Absalom out of banishment, give him his pardon, and take him into his favour again. [1.] She pleads the interest which the people of Israel had in him. "What is done against him is done against the people of God, who have their eye upon him as heir of the crown, at least have their eye upon the house of David in general, with which the covenant is made, and which therefore they cannot tamely see the diminution and decay of by the fall of so many of its branches in the flower of their age. Therefore the king speaks as one that is faulty, for he will provide that my husband's name and memory be not cut off, and yet takes no care though his own be in danger, which is of more value and importance than ten thousand of ours." [2.] She pleads man's mortality (Sa2 14:14): "We must needs die. Death is appointed for us; we cannot avoid the thing itself, nor defer it till another time. We are all under a fatal necessity of dying; and, when we are dead, we are past recall, as water spilt upon the ground; nay, even while we are alive, we are so, we have lost our immortality, past retrieve. Amnon must have died, some time, if Absalom had not killed him; and, if Absalom be now put to death for killing him, that will not bring him to life again." This was poor reasoning, and would serve against the punishment of any murderer: but, it should seem, Amnon was a man little regarded by the people and his death little lamented, and it was generally thought hard that so dear a life as Absalom's should go for one so little valued as Amnon's. [3.] She pleads God's mercy and his clemency towards poor guilty sinners: "God does not take away the soul, or life, but devises means that his banished, his children that have offended him, and are obnoxious to his justice, as Absalom is to thine, be not for ever expelled from him," Sa2 14:14. Here are two great instances of the mercy of God to sinners, properly urged as reasons for showing mercy: - First, The patience he exercises towards them. His law is broken, yet he does not immediately take away the life of those that break it, does not strike sinners dead, as justly he might, in the act of sin, but bears with them, and waits to be gracious. God's vengeance had suffered Absalom to live; why then should not David's justice suffer him? Secondly, The provision he has made for their restoration to his favour, that though by sin they have banished themselves from him, yet they might not be expelled, or cast off, for ever. Atonement might be made for sinners by sacrifice. Lepers, and others ceremonially unclean, were banished, but provision was made for their cleansing, that, though for a time excluded, they might not be finally expelled. The state of sinners is a state of banishment from God. Poor banished sinners are likely to be for ever expelled from God if some course be not taken to prevent it. It is against the mind of God that they should be so, for he is not willing that any should perish. Infinite wisdom has devised proper means to prevent it; so that it is the sinners' own fault if they be cast off. This instance of God's good-will toward us all should incline us to be merciful and compassionate one towards another, Mat 18:32, Mat 18:33.
6. She concludes her address with high compliments to the king, and strong expressions of her assurance that he would do what was just and kind both in the one case and in the other (Sa2 14:15-17); for, as if the case had been real, still she pleads for herself and her son, yet meaning Absalom. (1.) She would not have troubled the king thus but that the people made her afraid. Understanding it of her own case, all her neighbours made her apprehensive of the ruin she and her son were upon the brink of, from the avengers of blood, the terror of which made her thus bold in her application to the king himself. Understanding it of Absalom's case, she gives the king to understand, what he did not know before, that the nation was disgusted at his severity towards Absalom to such a degree that she was really afraid it would occasion a general mutiny or insurrection, for the preventing of which great mischief she ventured to speak to the king himself. The fright she was in must excuse her rudeness. (2.) She applied to him with a great confidence in his wisdom and clemency: "I said, I will speak to the king myself, and ask nobody to speak for me; for the king will hear reason, even from so mean a creature as I am, will hear the cries of the oppressed, and will not suffer the poorest of his subjects to be destroyed out of the inheritance of God," that is, "driven out of the land of Israel, to seek for shelter among the uncircumcised, as Absalom is, whose case is so much the worse, that, being shut out of the inheritance of God, he wants God's law and ordinances, which might help to bring him to repentance, and is in danger of being infected with the idolatry of the heathen among whom he sojourns, and of bringing home the infection." To engage the king to grant her request, she expressed a confident hope that his answer would be comfortable, and such as angels bring (as bishop Patrick explains it), who are messengers of divine mercy. What this woman says by way of compliment the prophet says by way of promise (Zac 12:8), that, when the weak shall be as David, the house of David shall be as the angel of the Lord. "And, in order to this, the Lord thy God will be with thee, to assist thee in this and every judgment thou givest." Great expectations are great engagements, especially to persons of honour, to do their utmost not to disappoint those that depend upon them.
7. The hand of Joab is suspected by the king, and acknowledged by the woman, to be in all this, Sa2 14:18-20. (1.) The king soon suspected it. For he could not think that such a woman as this would appeal to him, in a matter of such moment, of her own accord; and he knew none so likely to set her on as Joab, who was a politic man and a friend of Absalom. (2.) The woman very honestly owned it: "Thy servant Joab bade me. If it be well done, let him have the thanks; if ill, let him bear the blame." Though she found it very agreeable to the king, yet she would not take the praise of it to herself, but speaks the truth as it was, and gives us an example to do likewise, and never to tell a lie for the concealing of a well-managed scheme. Dare to be true; nothing can need a lie.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv1–33 Now Joab the son of Zeruiah,.... The general of…
Now Joab the son of Zeruiah,.... The general of David's army:
perceived that the king's heart was towards Absalom; and longed to have him returned, though he knew not how to bring it about with credit to himself, his crime being so foul, and worthy of death. This Joab perceived by some words he now and then dropped, and by his conduct, not seeking by any ways and means to bring him to justice, and being now reconciled to the death of Amnon; wherefore Joab devised a way to make known to him his own mind, and the sense of the people, which would serve to encourage him to restore him; and the rather Joab was inclined to take such a step, as he knew it would establish him in the king's favour, and ingratiate him into the affection of Absalom, the next heir to the crown, as well as please the people, whose darling he was. Though Abarbinel is of opinion that Joab proceeded upon another view of things, not because he saw the heart and affection of David were towards Absalom, but the reverse; that though David restrained himself and his servants from going out after Absalom, yet Joab knew that the heart of the king was against him, and that his heart was to take vengeance on him, though he did not go out to seek him; he perceived there was still enmity and hatred in his heart to take vengeance on Absalom, and therefore he took the following method to remove it, and reconcile his mind to him; and so the Targum,"and Joab the son of Zeruiah knew that the heart of the king was to go, out against Absalom;''and it may be observed, that when Joab had so far prevailed upon him as to admit him to bring him back to Jerusalem, he would not suffer him to see his face, nor did he for two years after.
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 On vv1, 2, 5, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 32, 33 The story told David of the widow of Tekoah,…
The story told David of the widow of Tekoah, ver. 1-20. Absalom is brought back to Jerusalem, but not to court, ver. 21- 24. An account of Absalom's person and children, ver. 21-27. He is at length introduced to David, ver. 28-33.
Was towards - He desired to see him, but was ashamed to shew kindness to one whom God's law and his own conscience obliged him to punish; he wanted therefore a fair pretense, which therefore Joab gave him.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30 A woman of Tekoah, by the advice of Joab,…
CHAPTER XIV
A woman of Tekoah, by the advice of Joab, comes to the king; and
Read full note →
by a fictitious story persuades him to recall Absalom, 1-20.
Joab is permitted to go to Geshur, and bring Absalom from
thence, 21-23.
Absalom comes to Jerusalem to his own house, but is forbidden
to see the king's face, 24.
An account of Absalom's beauty, and the extraordinary weight of
his hair, 25, 26.
His children, 27.
He strives to regain the king's favour, and employs Joab as an
intercessor, 28-32.
David is reconciled to him, 33.
NOTES ON CHAP. XIV
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv1, 2, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 2Sa 14:1. That the king’s heart was toward Absalom…
2Sa 14:1. That the king’s heart was toward Absalom — That he longed to see him, and have him restored to his country; but was ashamed to show kindness to one whom God’s law and his own conscience obliged him to punish. He wanted, therefore, a fair pretence for it, with which Joab now furnished him.
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 On vv2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 24, 26, 27, 33 Tekoah - In the south of Judah, six miles…
Tekoah - In the south of Judah, six miles from Bethlehem, the modern Tekua. The rough, wild district was well suited for the lawless profession of the wise woman; it abounds in caves, as does the country near Endor.
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 On vv2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 29, 33 Thecua, twelve miles south of Jerusalem. (St. Jerome) ---…
Thecua, twelve miles south of Jerusalem. (St. Jerome) --- Joab causes this unknown woman to come from the country to conceal his design, (Calmet) hoping that Absalom would be his father’s successor. (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).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 1Now [And] Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived that…
4. DAVID’S WEAKNESS TOWARDS JOAB AND ABSALOM. ABSALOM’S RETURN AND RECONCILIATION WITH DAVID THROUGH JOAB’S INTERCESSION
2Sa_14:1-33
Read full note →
1Now [And] Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived that the king’s heart was toward1 Absalom. 2And Joab sent to Tekoah and fetched thence a wise woman, and said unto her, I pray thee feign thyself to be a mourner,2 and put on now [om. now3] mourning-apparel, and anoint not thyself with oil, but [and] be as a woman that had [has] a long time mourned for the dead; 3And come to the king, and speak on this manner unto him. So [And] Joab put the words in her mouth.
4And when [om. when] the woman of Tekoah spake [came4] to the king, she [and] fell on her face to the ground and did obeisance, and said, Help O King. 5And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered [said], I am indeed [In truth, I am] a widow woman. And mine husband is dead [died]5; 6And thy handmaid had two sons, and they two strove together in the field, and there was none to part them, but [and] the one smote6 the other and slew him. 7And behold, the whole family is risen [rose] against thine handmaid, and they [om. they] said, Deliver him that smote his brother, that we may [and we will] kill him for the life of his brother whom he slew; and we [they7] will destroy the heir also, and so they shall quench [and quench] my coal which is left, and shall [will] not [or in order not to] leave to my husband neither [om. neither] name nor remainder upon the earth. 8And the king said unto the woman, Go to thy house, and I will give charge concerning thee. 9And the woman of Tekoah said unto the king, My lord, O king, the iniquity be on me and on my father’s house, and the king and his throne be guiltless. 10And the king said, Whosoever saith aught unto thee, bring him to me, and he shall not touch thee any more. 11Then said she [And she said], I pray thee, let the king remember the Lord [Jehovah] thy God, that thou wouldest not suffer the revengers of blood to destroy any more, lest they destroy my son [that the avenger of blood multiply not destruction, and that they destroy not my Song of Solomon 8]. And he said, As the Lord [Jehovah] liveth, there shall not 12one hair of thy son fall to the earth. Then [And] the woman said, Let thine handmaid, I pray thee, speak one [a] word unto my lord the king. And he said, Say on. 13And the woman said, Wherefore, then, [And why] hast thou thought such a thing against9 the people of God? for the king doth speak10 this thing as one which [that] is faulty, in that the king doth not fetch home again [bring back] 14his banished. For11 we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again; neither doth God respect any person [and God takes not away the life], yet doth he devise means [and thinketh thoughts] that his 15banished be not expelled [banished] from him. Now therefore [And now] that12 I am come to speak of this thing unto my lord the king, it is because the people have made me afraid; and thy handmaid said, I will now speak unto the king; it may be that the king will perform the request of his handmaid. 16For the king will hear, to deliver his handmaid out of the hand of the man that would13 destroy 17me and my son together out of the inheritance of God. Then [And] thine handmaid said, The word of my lord the king shall now be comfortable [May the word, etc., be for rest14]; for as an angel of God, so is my lord the king to discern [hear] good and bad; therefore the Lord thy God will be [and may Jehovah thy God be] with thee.
18Then [And] the king answered and said unto the woman, Hide not from me, I pray thee, the thing that I shall ask thee. And the woman said, Let my lord the king now [om. now] speak. 19And the king said, Is not [om. not] the hand of Joab with thee in all this? And the woman answered and said, As thy soul liveth, my lord the king, none can turn to the right hand or to the left from aught that my lord the king hath spoken; for thy servant Joab, he bade me, and he put all these words in the mouth of thine handmaid; 20To fetch about this form of speech [To change the face of the thing] hath thy servant Joab done this thing; and my lord is wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to know all things that are in the earth.
21And the king said unto Joab, Behold, now, I15 have done this thing; go, therefore 22[and go], bring the young man Absalom again [back]. And Joab fell to the ground on his face, and bowed himself, and thanked [blessed] the king; and Joab said, To-day thy servant knoweth that I have found grace in thy sight, my lord 23O [the] king, in that the king hath fulfilled the request of his16 servant. So [And] Joab arose and went to Geshur, and brought Absalom to Jerusalem. 24And the king said, Let him turn to his own house, and let him not see my face. So [And] Absalom returned [turned] to his own house, and saw not the king’s face.
25But [And] in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty; from the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. 26And when he polled his head (for [and] it was at every year’s end [from time to time] that he polled it, because [for] the hair was heavy on him, therefore [and] he polled it), he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred shekels after the king’s weight. 27And unto Absalom there were born three sons, and one daughter, whose name was Tamar; she was a woman of a fair countenance.
28So [And] Absalom dwelt two full [om. full] years in Jerusalem, and saw not the 29king’s face. Therefore [And] Absalom sent for Joab, to have sent [to send] him to the king; but [and] he would not come to him; and when [om. when] he sent 30again the second time, [ins. and] he would not come. Therefore [And] he said unto his servants, See, Joab’s field is near [beside] mine, and he hath barley there; 31go and set it on fire. And Absalom’s servants set the field on fire. Then [And] Joab arose and came to Absalom unto his house, and said unto him, Wherefore have thy servants set my field on fire? 32And Absalom answered [said to] Joab, Behold, I sent unto thee, saying, Come hither, that I may send thee to the king, to say, Wherefore am I come from Geshur? it had been good for me to have been there still [better for me that I were still there]. Now therefore [And now] let me see [I will see] the king’s face, and if there be any iniquity in me, let him kill 33me. So [And] Joab came to the king, and told him. And when he had called for [And he called] Absalom, [ins. and] he came to the king, and bowed himself on his face to the ground before the king; and the king kissed Absalom.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
2Sa_14:1-24. Joab by a stratagem procures Absalom’s return to Jerusalem without punishment.
2Sa_14:1. Though David’s soul was comforted for Amnon’s death, and he had consequently desisted from the pursuit of Absalom, his anger at the latter’s fratricide had nevertheless not disappeared. This supposition is psychologically necessary, since otherwise David would appear as an extremely weak man; and it is supported by the fact that he would not see Absalom for two years after his return [2Sa_14:28]. For this reason the latter clause of this verse is to be explained as indicating not David’s returning inclination to Absalom (as Vulg., Sept., Syr., Arab. [Eng. A. V.], Joseph., Cleric., and most modern expositors), but his enduring disinclination towards him. [Erdmann renders: “Joab perceived that the king’s heart was against Absalom.”—Tr.] It might have been supposed from the discontinuance of the pursuit that David’s heart had turned to him; but Joab, who had exact knowledge of court-affairs, observed that the king’s heart was against him. How the word “perceived” is contrary to this view (Maur., Then.) does not appear, since it contains the simple statement that David was still hostilely disposed towards Absalom. And “in the only other place where this construction (without substantive verb) occurs, Dan_11:28, the Prep. means against” (Keil). [The Prep. (על) is often used, however, in the general sense of “towards,” sometimes with favorable meaning, and the absence of the subst. verb is not important. The whole connection (somewhat disguised by the division of chapters) seems to favor the rendering of Eng. A. V. In the last verse of the preceding chapter David’s heart goes forth towards Absalom (see annotations on that verse), and here Joab is said to perceive it, so that he devises a scheme to remove the king’s judicial objections to recalling Absalom. The understanding of the narrative, however, is not affected by the rendering of the Prep. In either case Joab appears as a shrewd man. Possibly he was influenced by a genuine feeling of kindness towards David and Absalom; it is more likely perhaps that he wished to ingratiate himself with them and the people (Patrick). A. P. Stanley (in Smith’s Bib. Dict.): “Joab combines with the ruder qualities of the soldier something of a more statesmanlike character, which brings him more nearly to a level with his youthful uncle, and unquestionably gives him the second place in the whole history of David’s reign.” Wordsworth: “Joab is the impersonation of worldly policy, and temporal ambition practising on the weakness of princes for its self-interests.” Bib. Comm.: “He ever appears wily and politic and unscrupulous.”—Tr.]
2Sa_14:2. Tekoah, now Tekua, about five [Eng.] miles south of Bethlehem, the native place of the prophet Amos. See Robins. II. 406 [Am. ed. I. 486 sq.; and see Dr. Hackett’s Art. in Am. ed. of Smith’s Bib. Dict.—Tr.]. As Bethlehem was Joab’s native place, it is not strange that he was acquainted with Tekoah. He knew this “wise woman” as one fitted by her readiness of speech, boldness, shrewdness, and adroitness, to act the part he wanted.17 That it cost Joab so great pains to gain his end is evidence moreover against the supposition that David’s heart was already turned to Absalom.
2Sa_14:4. “And the woman came,”18 etc.; for so we must read instead of the first “said” [Eng. A. V.: “spake”] of the Hebrew text. Böttcher supposes that here by similar ending (homœoteleuton) two lines have fallen out, in which is given the answer of the woman before she goes to the king; but there is no sign in any ancient version of such an omission.
2Sa_14:5. Here begins the lively, flowing narration of the feigned misfortune. Though Joab had “put the words into the woman’s mouth,” yet considerable readiness was required in order to bring them out so skilfully in her assumed character, and to make such an impression on the king as to lead him to the desired definite resolution. [Read: I am a widow. And my husband died, and I had two sons, etc.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:6. The fratricide. “And he smote him, the one the other,” a pleonasm arising from the circumstantialness and liveliness of the narration.19 [A slight change in the text will give the reading: “one smote the other,” as in Eng. A. V.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:7. The demand for the survivor. “And we will destroy the heir also.” Instead of this, Michaelis, Dathe and Thenius propose to read (after Syr. and Arab.): “and they will destroy,” etc.20 But these authorities [the versions] are not sufficient to warrant this emendation. Thenius urges that if the woman had put these words also into the mouth of the kinsmen, she would have represented them as diabolically wicked; but it does not follow that it is really so bad, simply because she expresses her opinion of what they wish to do. These words [“we will destroy the heir”] are added to the preceding “we will kill him” (to indicate the purpose of the kinsmen) by reason of the second thought that characterizes the blood-revenge—namely, that, while they kill him for blood-vengeance, they wish at the same time to destroy the surviving heir. The woman’s purpose is not only to bring out the design of the kinsmen in their blood-avenging as harshly as possible, but also, with reference to David’s hostile feeling to Absalom, to emphasize the point that the latter is the heir to David’s throne, and to save him as such from his father’s anger. [Wellhausen: “The woman does not really intend to represent the unavoidable result [killing the heir] as the purpose [of the kinsmen], but is carried on by the connection of the discourse; not till she has uttered the word does she correct herself.” Yet the third person seems more natural here, especially as the whole thing is feigned, and the woman had carefully prepared her words beforehand.—Tr.] So that they quench.—The power of the discourse lies in the fact that they are represented as already doing what their words show to be their purpose. “My coal,” the burning coal (ζώπυρου) with which fire is kindled. “In order not to set (permit, grant) to my husband name and remainder (posterity).”21 [The law in the case is given in Num_35:18-19. Blood-revenge was no doubt an ancient pre-Mosaic custom. The whole family was against the fratricide. “This indicates that all the king’s sons and the whole court were against Absalom, and that the knowledge of this was what hindered David from yielding to his affection and recalling him” (Bib. Comm.).—Tr.]
2Sa_14:8. I will give charge concerning thee in thy behalf. David grants her request and protects her son because, as the homicide was committed in the heat of conflict, a purposed murder was out of the question.
2Sa_14:9. On me be the iniquity.—That is, if it be wrong not to carry out the blood-avenging. The woman is not yet satisfied with the somewhat indefinite statement of the king that he would fulfil her request. She proceeds to work on him still further.
2Sa_14:10. She gains the end that she had in her remark in 2Sa_14:9, namely, to bring the king to say definitely that no one should further molest her or demand her son for blood-vengeance.
2Sa_14:11. Third stage of the woman’s address. She wishes to bring the king to swear before God, and that not in the “character of a talkative woman” (Thenius), but rather to gain her end as surely as possible, and to bind the king by his own words to reconciliation with Absalom. “That the avenger of blood (cause) no more destruction” (De Wette); literally: “let the king remember the Lord thy God from the avenger’s increasing22 to destroy;” that is, “so that the avenger shall not more destroy”—the phrase “let him interpose” being understood (Thenius). The woman brings the king to the point of assuring her son’s safety by an oath. [Patrick: “Others think she only prays him to remember how merciful and gracious God is, and had been to himself, even in pardoning the murder of Uriah”—not so well.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:12. Transition in the woman’s discourse to a reference to David’s relation to Absalom by the request to be permitted to say something farther. [“The woman proceeds cautiously and hence obscurely” (Bib. Comm.).—Tr.]
2Sa_14:13. “Why dost thou contrive (think, proceed) thus against the people of God?” The “thus” refers to the following words: “that the king does not bring back his banished.” She goes on as if she now advanced to a second object of her coming; in reality, however, she now comes to the principal matter, though sure of success from what the king (led on by her skilful talk) had granted her. “Now she is to make the application to the king’s own case, and this is hard, because she cannot speak openly and boldly like a prophet, but only slightly, and, as it were, in passing, yet must make the allusion to Absalom intelligible” (Ewald). The woman intimates that David’s hostility towards Absalom is directed “against the people of God,” since the people would suffer in the suffering of the heir, who would some time become their king. Having thus softly represented his conduct as blameworthy from the point of view of the people (among whom there was certainly a party for Absalom, as appears from the following history), she proceeds to entrap him in his own words (spoken in reference, to her feigned case) for Absalom’s advantage. And by the king’s speaking23 this word (that is, 2Sa_14:11, the oath that her son’s blood-guilt should not be avenged) he is as one in fault (against God’s people as against Absalom), in that the king brings not back his banished.—He must show his son the mildness he has shown hers. And, as for Absalom there was only the question of punishment for a homicide, not of release from the demand of the avenger, the woman, having gained grace for her son, might the more surely expect it for Absalom. She calls Absalom his banished because the latter, though he had banished himself by flight, had not since received permission to return. Dathe [“why resolvest thou thus in a cause pertaining to God’s people?”] and Thenius [“why thinkest thou thus in relation to God’s people?” (thy subjects)] refer the question to David’s protection of the woman and her son, while, according to his own words, he appears as blame-worthy towards Absalom; but the meaning of the Heb. (עַל = against) and the connection do not permit this. [Bishop Patrick remarks that the woman’s reasoning here was weak, her son’s case being very different from Absalom’s, but the king, inferring that the people were well disposed towards Absalom, concluded to overlook the differences, without saying any thing to her of the defects of her argument. Probably the king was glad of an excuse to recall Absalom. Though an absolute monarch, he had to attend to the wishes of the people, who liked the young prince, and would be offended if he were kept in banishment. It seems less likely that there is a reference in the words “people of God” to Absalom’s deprivation of religious privileges (Bib. Comm.), though the phrase is intended to include Absalom.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:14. The reasons that should determine David to forgiveness: 1) for we must die, and are like water poured out on the ground that is not gathered again.—Thenius refers these words to Amnon’s death, with the meaning: “he had to die some time, and all you can do against the murderer will not bring him to life;” but the connection shows that the woman is referring not to Amnon, but to Absalom, as the “banished one,” her meaning being: “Absalom (like all men) may die in banishment, and, as the dead (like poured out water) do not return, it would then repent thee not to have recalled him; take him back before it is too late.” Possibly, however, the reference is to David himself, a warning that he may soon die, and must, therefore, not delay to be reconciled to Absalom. [The sense seems to be: “As life is fleeting and perishable, let not these enmities engage your mind, but put away unkindness and forgive your son.” According to any of these explanations, the woman’s argument is false, since it leaves the justice of the case out of view; but see the quotation from Philippson below at the end of this verse.—Tr.] 2) And God takes not away a soul, but thinks thoughts not to banish a banished one.—An argument from God’s procedure towards the sinner. He does not take away the soul [life] of one that is banished, condemned for sin, so as thus to banish him forever, but “thinks thoughts not to banish him;” such mercy show to thy banished son. These words must have brought to David’s recollection God’s mercy towards him banished from God’s presence as adulterer and murderer. [Philippson: “This is one of the noblest and profoundest declarations of the Scripture: God, who has determined us to death, nevertheless does not deprive us of life, of personality (נֶפֶשׁ), but has the holy purpose to receive again the banished, the sinful.” This explanation makes the first half of the verse merely introductory to the thought in the second, merely a relative sentence containing an affirmation about God; this is not so probable as the view that makes the first half a separate argument. Patrick sees here a reference to the cities of refuge, for which, however, the language is too general. The argument (appeal to the divine mercy) is powerful, though false; the human judge cannot set aside the demands of justice, though God may pardon the sinner. The woman’s view of death is a general one, neither denying nor affirming a future state: her statement is simply that the dead do not return to earthly life. It is therefore inadmissible to press her simile, and represent it as meaning that, as the spilt water passes in vapor to the clouds and returns as rain to the earth, so human life is to return in the raised body. This may be an allowable simile now, but it is not the teaching of this passage.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:15. The wise woman skilfully turns David’s thoughts again to her own affair, in order to remove the suspicion that she came merely to plead for Absalom; she is content to have lodged a sharp thorn in David’s heart. And now that I am come.—A natural mode of return to her first subject. Her design is to append a further explanation of her boldness in troubling the king with such a personal affair. The occasion of her coming is, she says, that the people [her kinsfolk] frightened her by demanding her son, so that she had to appeal to the king. This, therefore, is not a mere repetition of what she has already said (Thenius).
2Sa_14:16 expresses 1) joyful assurance that her request will be heard, and 2) the evil from which the king will save her and her son, “destruction from the inheritance of God;” the cutting off24 of posterity by slaying the heir is so dreadful in her eyes, because it is excision from the people belonging to the Lord. Comp. 1Sa_26:19; Deu_32:9.
2Sa_14:17. Further, she says, the king’s word was to be to her for rest—that is, for herself. “The king hears (judges) as” the angel of God—the angel that God sends to impart His manifestations of grace to His people, the covenant-angel, the mediator of grace for the peculiar people [the people that is God’s private property]. [Rather the woman here praises the king’s wisdom as being like that of one of the higher intelligences (so Achish speaks of David in 1Sa_29:9), a proof that the Israelites were then familiar with the idea of angels. Her praise is here skilfully introduced to mollify him; she does not mention Absalom’s name, but leaves the king to reflect on what such a high character requires of him.—Tr.] To hear the good and the evil.—This affirms two things: 1) in every case brought before him the king will impartially and justly hear both sides, the good and the bad, Vulg.: “unmoved by benediction or malediction 2) He helps the oppressed. And the Lord thy God be with thee! (not “therefore be” (De Wette)); with this blessing she concludes, touching the king’s heart in its innermost relation to his God and Lord. [Patrick: “There is a great deal of artifice in all this. For to presume upon the kindness of another, and to expect gracious answers from their noble qualities, is very moving; men being very loath to defeat those who think so highly of them, according to that saying of Aristotle (Rhet. 2, 4, 19): ‘We love those that admire us.’ ”—Tr.]
2Sa_14:18 sq. From the cleverly put discourse of the woman the king perceives that there is something else in hand than her private affair; and surmising at the same time that she is only the instrument of another, he thinks of Joab from the confidential relation in which the latter stood to Absalom. “Is the hand of Joab with thee in all this?” The woman frankly answers in the affirmative [in the form of a compliment to the king’s sagacity]: There is nothing on the right or the left of25 what the king says, he always says the right; “you always hit the nail on the head” (Thenius). Joab, she says, arranged this to turn the face (form) of the thing [not “fetch about this form of speech,” as in Eng. A. V.—Tr.] These words do not refer to the clothing of the request for Absalom in this story about her sons, as if she meant: “that I should turn the thing so” (Luther), or “to disguise the thing in a skilful way” (Keil), or “to set before thee a figurative discourse” (Vatablus), or “that I should transfer to myself and my sons what pertains to the king and his sons” (Clericus), but the thing is Absalom’s relation to his father. In order to change this relation in its present unhappy form, that is, to bring about a reconciliation, has Joab done this, sent me to thee with the words I have spoken. The woman concludes (looking back to her comparison of David to the “angel of God” in 2Sa_14:17) with the words: My lord (the king) is wise according to the wisdom of the angel of God—anxious by this appeal to the king’s wisdom to secure a favorable decision for Absalom. [Here again render: “an angel of God,” as in 2Sa_14:17. “To know all things that are in the earth,” better, perhaps: “in the land,” all the affairs of the land of Israel. The mingling of flattery and boldness in the woman’s discourse is skilful and striking.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:21-23. Joab’s request fulfilled by permitting Absalom to return to Jerusalem. Behold, I have done this thing (according to thy word).—The margin has (through misapprehension): “thou hast done;” but the text is to be retained. The Perfect is used because the thing is an accomplished fact = I have fulfilled thy request. Go and bring Absalom back.—These words refer merely to the execution of what had been already determined and accomplished.
2Sa_14:22. Joab thanks and blesses David for granting his request. To judge from his words here, he had often before made this request, but hitherto in vain. Read: “his servant,” as in the text, against the marginal reading: “thy servant.” Joab himself brings Absalom back to Jerusalem.
2Sa_14:24. Absalom’s pardon, however, was not a full one; it consisted only in the permission to return to Jerusalem. He remained banished from the royal court. My face shall he not see, says David. This was no real pardon. David’s anger still continued. It is a natural surmise that this was because Absalom showed no repentance and did not ask for forgiveness; there is not the slightest hint of his doing so. Let him turn to his own house.—These words suggest that Absalom was not merely banished from court, but also confined to his own house. Otherwise (as Thenius points out) he would not have been obliged to send for Joab (2Sa_14:28 comp. with 2Sa_14:31.) [David’s banishing Absalom from court was just and wise, since his crime deserved punishment, and it was right that the people should know the king’s abhorrence of the crime (Patrick). Perhaps this half-forgiveness was an impolitic measure (Keil), since it may have merely vexed and embittered Absalom. It is not necessary to suppose that the king was angry with him; his conduct may have been determined by his regard for law and justice while his heart desired complete reconciliation. Bib. Comm. suggests that Bathsheba’s influence may have been exerted to keep Absalom in disgrace for the sake of Solomon.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:25-33. Absalom’s person and family.—By defiant obstinacy he secures his recall to court through Joab’s mediation.
2Sa_14:25 sqq. Absalom’s beauty.—He was the handsomest man in Israel. Literally: “and as Absalom there was not a handsome man in all Israel to praise much.” There was no spot, no bodily blemish in him. From year to year26 he polled or cut his hair. The weight of the polled hair here given, 200 shekels, is certainly too great, being about six pounds, if the royal shekel = the sacred shekel; and if it be taken as = one half the sacred shekel, the weight is still too great. There is no doubt an error of text here. Perhaps we should read 20 instead of 200 (כ may have passed into ר); “for 20 shekels (= 9 or 10 ounces) would suppose a very heavy, but not incredibly heavy, head of hair” (Thenius). [Others read four shekels—(ד instead of ר). But as all the ancient versions (except the anonymous vers. quoted in Montfaucon’s Hex. as giving “one hundred”) agree with the Hebrew, any such change of letters must have been made early, when probably not the present square characters, but the old Phenician were in use; so that we must go to them to discover possible changes of this sort.—There is doubt as to what particular weight is meant by the “king’s shekel.” It cannot be the Babylonian shekel, says Thenius, for this would point to a postexilian origin for this passage, which is impossible. The king, says Wellhausen, is the Persian Great King, and this verse betrays a postexilian origin. Nothing more definite can be said than that the king’s shekel is probably a different weight from the sacred shekel, and probably less than that. Kitto mentions reading of a lady’s hair that weighed more than four pounds, and, if the two hundred shekels is not more than this, it is a possible weight. It is evidently intended to represent the hair as extraordinarily heavy and strong, in order to explain 2Sa_18:9. The ancients were accustomed to bestow much care on the hair, see Jos. Ant. 8, 7, 3, and Bp. Patrick in loco.—Tr.].
2Sa_14:27. Absalom’s children. Only one is mentioned by name, a daughter Tamar, probably called after Absalom’s unfortunate sister. The sons (contrary to custom) are not named, probably because they died young. This would explain Absalom’s erecting a monument (2Sa_18:18) to perpetuate his name. Concerning Tamar the Sept. adds: “and she becomes the wife of Roboam the son of Solomon and bears him Abia.” Now 1Ki_15:2 certainly describes the wife of Rehoboam and mother of Abijah as a daughter of Absalom, but calls her Maacah. The Sept. has here (as elsewhere) evidently introduced an explanation from that passage, confounding, however, Tamar with another later-born daughter of Absalom, who was Rehoboam’s wife. Thenius remarks: “Rehoboam’s wife is certainly a granddaughter of Absalom (daughter of his daughter Tamar) named after her great-grandmother Maacah (iii. 3);” where “perhaps” ought to stand instead of “certainly.”
2Sa_14:28 sqq. As Absalom was not permitted for two years to enter the king’s presence, and Joab declined to visit him though twice sent for (evidently because he did not wish to have any thing more to do with the matter since the king’s displeasure continued), it is clear that 2Sa_14:1 cannot be rendered: “the king’s heart was toward him.” [David’s conduct may be explained by supposing that, while his heart was with Absalom, his regard for justice led him to punish his crime by keeping him at a distance.—Tr.].
2Sa_14:30. Joab’s “piece, parcel,” that is, field (as we also use the word). Sept. has: “the portion in the field of Joab,” but there is no reason to change the Heb. text accordingly.—The Heb. text reads: “I will set it on fire;” but all the versions adopt the marginal reading: “set it on fire.”27 The phrase “at my hand” = “alongside of my ground, beside me.” This confirms the view that Absalom occupied himself with tilling the soil even in Jerusalem. That Absalom fired Joab’s barley because he knew it would bring Joab to him (Keil) is not probable. It was rather an act of angry revenge in keeping with Absalom’s haughty and passionate nature. In 2Sa_14:30 Sept. and Vulg. add: “and the servants of Joab came to him with garments rent, and said: Absalom’s servants have set the field on fire.” It is possible that these words belonged to the original text, and fell away by similar ending, two consecutive sentences ending with the word “fire” (Then.). But the narrative is perfectly clear without this addition.
2Sa_14:31. Joab came to Absalom’s house, because the latter was shut up, a prisoner, as it were, in his own house.
2Sa_14:32. The message sent by Absalom through Joab to his father contains 1) a reproach: why am I come from Geshur? (= why didst thou send for me) if I am not permitted to appear before thee? 2) A repudiation of the indulgence shown him in the permission granted him to return home: it were better for me that I were still there; 3) a self-willed demand: and now I will see the king’s face, and 4) a defiant challenge: if there be iniquity in me, let him kill me.—These words mean neither: “if the king can and may not forgive me,” (Thenius), nor: “if he remember my iniquity” (Vulg.). Absalom rather defiantly challenges his father to proceed with strict justice, if he has done wrong; this, however, (from the tone of his speech) he does not allow, but relies on the rights he thinks he has against his father, who had been too indulgent to Amnon, having also the support of a considerable party, who would the more approve his act of bloody vengeance, because David had let Amnon go unpunished. Absalom gives no sign of repentance; there is rather a savage defiance in his words, and, instead of confessing his guilt, he challenges his father to kill him, if he is guilty, that is, he denies his guilt. David has already shown weakness in permitting Absalom to return without penitent confession; and by this halfway-procedure (letting him return, yet banishing him from his presence two years) had given occasion to the defiance and bitterness that appears in these words. He is now guilty of a still greater weakness in receiving Absalom into favor when he shows the very opposite of penitence.
2Sa_14:33. The words: he bowed himself on his face to the ground by no means show penitence with humble request for forgiveness, but merely exhibit the usual homage paid to the king. David was soon to taste the bitter fruits of all this faulty weakness towards Absalom.
HISTORICAL AND ETHICAL
1. David, weakly yielding to ungodly influence on his mind (the woman of Tekoa), on his will (Joab) and on his feeling (Absalom), sinned against the Lord in failing to punish Absalom (as he had failed to punish Amnon) for his crime, and in receiving him into favor, on his return, without penitence. As God does not forgive sin, without confession and prayer for pardon, so men must observe this law in their relations to one another. This is demanded both by truth and by justice, neither of which may be set aside by expiating and pardoning love.
2. He who in unholy, weak love confounds the disposition to forgive one’s neighbor with the act of forgiveness itself, and pardons when the condition is not complied with, sins not only against God’s holy ordination of love, but also against his neighbor, since the hard, impenitent heart is the more hardened by such weak love, and led into further evil, as Absalom’s example shows.
3. Moral weakness makes one unforesighted and unwise, and often leads to the destruction of the moral ordinances of life, on which rests the welfare of private and public life. David, by his weakness towards Absalom, became guilty of the further dissolution of the theocratic rule of life in his house and in his kingdom; the breaking up of the royal family thereby produced was the cause and the starting-point of the breaking up of the theocratic kingdom by Absalom’s revolt.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
2Sa_14:1-3. Cramer: The children of the world are wiser in their generation than the children of light, Luk_16:8. Wuert. B.: The greatest rogues have, commonly the best patrons, who take interest in them and try to help them through.—[Hall: Good eyes see light through the smallest chink. The wit of Joab hath soon discerned David’s renewed affection, and knows how to serve him in that which he would, and would not, accomplish.—Tr.]
2Sa_14:4-11. Starke: To represent something wisely is also a gift of God; for thereby much good is accomplished and much evil hindered, Pro_18:15.—[Hall: We love ourselves better than others, but we see others better than ourselves: whoso would perfectly know his own case, let him view it in another’s person. Parables sped well with David: one drew him to repent of his own sin, another to remit Absalom’s punishment.—Tr.]—Schlier: Foresight is profitable in all things, and doubly so when others wish to accomplish something with us. There are cases where certainly the first impression is the most correct, but as a rule it is better not to yield to the first momentary impression, but to prove everything. Had David first proved and inquired into the matter which with cunning and deceit was brought before him, he would not have given assurance with an oath.
2Sa_14:13 sqq. Schlier: If thou hast something against a person, forget not how soon thy adversary may die, how soon thou thyself also mayst perhaps have to pass away, and besides think of what God does to us, how rich is His mercy towards us.
2Sa_14:21 sqq. Cramer: It is easily done, to let loose an outrageous offender and a murderer, but not so easily is it excused before God: for thereby blood-guiltiness is brought on the land, and other great misfortunes caused; Eze_7:23.—J. Lange: Wilful sinners also are not permitted, so long as they continue impenitent, to come into blessed communion with God, although instead of the well-deserved punishment they enjoy God’s long-suffering.—Schlier: If thou wilt pardon, do it wholly, take out of thy heart everything thou hast against another person, forget also the injustice done thee, and make it thy concern again to show the other a whole and full heart.
2Sa_14:25. Starke: Ungodly men often receive from God the fairest gifts, 1Sa_9:2; 1Sa_17:4.—Schlier: A fair body is also a gift of God, but what does all physical beauty help, if there does not also dwell therein a fair soul? A deformed and ugly man who has beauty of soul is worth more in the sight of God. The Lord looks at the heart.
2Sa_14:30. Lange: Friendship that has self-interest for its ground, does not commonly last long.
2Sa_14:33. Schlier: David is propitiated, but it does not occur to him to work for a thorough reconciliation in Absalom’s heart also; he brings to meet his son the old, full love; but he does not observe whether his son is in condition really to receive such love.—Chastisement without love is an outrage, no father is at liberty to plague or torture his child; but a love that cannot chastise is no love, and reaps a poor reward. A child that does not at the proper time feel the father’s rod, becomes at last a rod for his father.
[2Sa_14:1-20. The wise woman of Tekoah. Her previous reputation for worldly wisdom, known to Joab. Her skilful employment, at Joab’s instance, of a parallel case, yet not too obviously similar. I. Observe the motives to which she appeals. Knowing David’s character, she makes good motives most prominent. 1) His course impolitic and unpopular (2Sa_14:13). 2) We are all mortal, and enmities should not be perpetual. 3) God is forgiving (2Sa_14:14). 4) She flatters him, a) as impartial (2Sa_14:17), b) as knowing everything (2Sa_14:20). II. Contrast this address with that of Nathan, 2 Samuel 12. In certain respects similar; but 1) One sent by Joab, the other by the Lord. 2) One designing and unscrupulous, the other sincere. 3) One mingling bad motives, the other employing only the good. 4) One flattering, the other humbling. 5) One giving the king an excuse for what he wishes to do, the other arousing him to what he ought to do. 6) One bringing upon David great temporal trouble, the other great spiritual blessing.
2Sa_14:14. Two great reasons for forbearance and forgiveness. 1) Both we and those who have wronged us must die, and so our enmities should not be undying. 2) God forbears, and is disposed to forgive.—Tr.]
[2Sa_14:25. Causes which spoiled the character of Absalom. 1) The personal gift of extraordinary personal beauty. 2) Great power of bending others to his will (2Sa_14:30; 2Sa_13:28; 2Sa_15:6). 3) A doting father, weak through consciousness of his own great and well-known sins (2Sa_14:1). 4) A good excuse for indulging revenge and selfish ambition (2Sa_13:22-29). 5) Resentment at what seemed neglect by his father and by Joab (2Sa_14:28-29). 6) Success in reckless and defiant measures (2Sa_14:30-33). 7) Apprehension that the son of Bathsheba (2Sa_12:24-25) might supplant him as heir to the throne.—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1][2Sa_14:1. Erdmann renders: “against” and gives his reasons therefor in the Exposition. The versions generally and most commentators favor the rendering of Eng. A. V. The translation of this preposition depends on the view taken of the whole connection, on which see the notes on 2Sa_13:39.—Tr.]
[2][2Sa_14:2. The Hithpael in the so-called hypocritical sense, a derivation from the reflexive or reflexive-declarative sense. See Conant’s Gesen., § 54. Ewald, Gr., § 124 a.—Tr.]
[3][2Sa_14:2. The Eng. “now” is sometimes a proper rendering of the Heb. cohortative particle נָא (rendered just before by “I pray thee”), but would here have too much the effect of an adverb of time.—Tr.]
[4][2Sa_14:4. The reading “came” (וַתָּבֹא, or, as in one MS. of Kennicott, וַתֵּלֶךְ) is now generally adopted, and is required by the sense. Bruns (in De Rossi) thinks that the date of the introduction of the corrupt reading (ותאמר) may be fixed in this way: The correct reading is found in all the ancient versions (not excepting the Chald., the text of which in the London Polyglot is corrupt here, and should be ואתת); but David Kimchi had the present reading (ותאמר) before him, while Cod. 154 has ותבא, whence it may be concluded that the corruption in question came between A. D. 1106 (date of Cod. 154) and 1190 (date of Kimchi’s commentary). This is a very interesting fact for Old Testament text-criticism, if it be true, for it then shows that our text exhibits very recent changes. It depends on the assumption that all codices in the beginning of the twelfth century had the same reading; but it is possible that Cod. 154 and Kimchi’s Cod. had different genealogies.—Tr.]
[5][2Sa_14:5. The rendering: “I am a widow, and my husband is dead,” presents a useless tautology; Böttcher therefore suggests a relative force for the ו: “inasmuch as my husband is dead;” but it may be better (with Thenius) to connect this latter clause with the following verse: “and my husband died and I had two sons,” that is, when my husband died, I was left with two sons.—Tr.]
[6][2Sa_14:6. For וַיַּכּוֹ read וַיַּךְ. The suffix is hardly allowable here; the text-form may have been originally plural, so written because the two brothers formed the subject in the mind of the writer.—Tr.]
[7][2Sa_14:7. So Syr. and Arab. It is more probable that this is the expression of the woman than that she should put it into the mouth of the kinsfolk (against Erdmann and Wellhausen). A ה may easily have passed into a נ. Böttcher proposes to read: “we will kill, etc., and destroy (נשמיד); even (הֲגם) the heir will they destroy,” etc., which puts the expression about the heir into the woman’s mouth, but seems unnecessarily involved.—Tr.]
[8][2Sa_14:11. The Inf. (חרּבת) has for its subject the Goel, and not “the king” as in Eng. A. V The word goel also is Sing., while in the succeeding clause the indef. Plu. construction is used, so that it might be rendered: “and that my son be not destroyed.”—Tr.]
[9][2Sa_14:13. Instead of “against,” Thenius renders the Prep. (על) by “in respect to,” on the ground that David had expressed no thought contrary to the well-being of God’s people. But the woman covertly refers to his procedure towards Absalom as something against the people of God.—Tr.]
[10][2Sa_14:13. The מִדַּבֵּר is better understood as a participle, either as Hithpael with assimilation of ת (as in Num_7:89; Eze_2:2; Eze_43:6) or as Piel (as Böttcher insists) with dagesh forte emphatic (as in Isa_52:5; 2Ch_36:16). Only in this way can the כְּאָשֵׁם (“as a faulty man”) be easily construed, for, if the above form be taken as Infin. (“from the king’s speaking this word”) we should more naturally expect הוּא after כאשם; or possibly we might render (with the Sept.): “from the speaking (στόματος) of the king this thing is as a fault,” where אָשָׁם is read instead of אָשֵׁם.—Tr.]
[11][2Sa_14:14. Böttcher: “when we die it is as (with) water,” etc. The “needs” of Eng. A. V. represents the Infinitive Absolute (emphatic).—The difficulty in this verse lies partly in the translation of the second half, partly in the relation of thought between the two halves. The thought of our text is: “The king has declared himself faulty, in that he does not restore his banished. We die and pass away; God does not take life, but devises means not to banish his banished.” Here the expression: “to banish one already banished,” is hard, but may be perhaps understood in the pregnant sense of keeping banished the banished. So the representation of God as thinking thoughts or devising means to gain an end is somewhat rudely anthropomorphic, but is not wholly out of keeping with the times and with the terse and obscure address of the wise woman. Then, the reference to human mortality (allusion to Amnon, Absalom or David?) is to quicken the king to haste or to mercy, and the exhortation is enforced by a reference to the divine mercifulness.—Various alterations have been proposed to get rid of supposed difficulties. Ewald (Gesch. Isrl. III. 236) changes וְחָשַׁב to חוֹשֵׁב and renders: “God takes not away the soul of one that thinks not to leave in banishment one banished by Himself.” Here the “devising” and the “banishing” are transferred to the man; but the resultant thought (that God will not slay a merciful man) is not specially striking or appropriate. Wellhausen (reading הֵשִׁב for חָשַׁב) translates: “We must die, etc., and when God takes away a soul, does He give it back?” in which the second clause simply repeats the thought of the first. The attempts at alteration are all unsatisfactory, and the ancient versions help little or nothing. Sept.: and God will take life, even devising to thrust from Him an outcast; Theodotion: as water, etc., and the soul hopes not in it; Syr.: God takes not away the soul, but deviseth means that no one may wander from Him (or, perish through Him). The Vulg. is a tolerably literal rendering of the Heb.—Houbigant (in Chandler) proposed to insert 2Sa_14:15-17 in 2Sa_14:11 after the word “son;” but there is no ground for this change nor advantage in it. There seems nothing better than to retain the present text.—Tr.]
[12][2Sa_14:15. The word “that” (אשׁר) is omitted in several MSS. and printed EDD., and in Syr., Arab., Vulg., perhaps because it seemed superfluous (Sept. ὅ).—Patrick: though the people make me afraid. Philippson: when I came, etc., the people made me afraid. Better (if the אשר be retained) as Eng. A. V.—In the last clause one MS. of De Rossi has ישמע (hear) instead of יעשה (do), correction for the sake of propriety of expression.—Tr.]
[13][2Sa_14:16. Something has here fallen out of the Heb. text, perhaps הַמְּבַקֵּשׁ (Böttcher). Vulg. takes the word האישׁ as collective (de manu omnium qui volebant). Syriac (as not infrequently) gives a condensed rendering: “I will speak to the king; perhaps he will deliver his handmaid from the hand of men, that they destroy not me and my son,” etc. Yet the diffuse language of the Heb. is more in keeping with the character of a glib-tongued woman assumed by the speaker.—Tr.]
[14][2Sa_14:17. Syriac: “the word of my lord the king shall be sure, and shall be an offering (מִנְחָה),” misunderstanding the text.—Wellhausen reads at the beginning: “and the woman said” (after the Sept.), as the common formula introducing the conclusion of a long discourse. This is rendered somewhat probable by the voluntative form of the following sentence; but this form is not decisive for a change of text.—Tr.]
[15][2Sa_14:21. So the Kethib (text). Qeri (margin) has second person: “thou hast done,” on which De Rossi says that many of his MSS. and printed EDD. have not this Qeri; and he quotes R. Jacob Chayyim and Norzi, the former of whom says that not more than one MS. in a thousand has this Qeri, and the latter that it is not found in the correctest Spanish MSS. The ancient, VSS. also follow the Kethib, for which, therefore, the external authority is complete. Böttcher, however, defends the Qeri on the ground that it better suits the initial: “behold, now,” and that a change from it to the Kethib is more easily explicable than the converse. But, as the text gives a good sense, these considerations (even if they were unquestionable) cannot avail against the external evidence.—Tr.]
[16][2Sa_14:22. Kethib (his) in all the VSS. except Vulg.; Qeri (thy) in Vulg., and some MSS. and EDD. The text is properly retained by Erdmann and Eng. A. V.—Tr.]
[17][According to the Talmud (Menachoth, 85, 2) there were important oil-plantations near Tekoah, and the women there were noted for their shrewdness (Philippson).—Tr.]
[18]The error in the Heb. text may easily be accounted for by supposing that in the manuscript to be copied the וַתָּבֹא [came] stood immediately over the following וַתּאמֶר [said] (Thenius).
[19]There is no reason for changing יַכּוֹ to יַכּוּ (Ewald, § 252 a; Then.), since, the suffix וֹ with verbs ל׳ה, though infrequent, is not unexampled; nor does the Plu. suit here (Keil).—[By reading יַךְ we avoid the intolerable repetition of the Hebrew text, and the inappropriateness of the plural.—Tr.]
[20] יַשְׁמִידוּ [or הְשִׁמידוּ] instead of the text-word נַשְׁמִידָה.
[21][Bishop Patrick points out how cleverly the woman’s story was put, so as essentially to include Absalom’s case, while yet it was different enough from it to avoid rousing the king’s suspicions at the outset.—Tr.]
[22]Instead of the Kethib הַרְבִּית read Qeri הַרְבַּת—an unusual form of the Infin. Absolute. Comp. Ew. § 240 e. [Or, הַרְבּוֹת Inf. Construct may be read.—Tr.]
[23]Instead of מִדַּבֵּר [Inf. with מִן], Vulg., Chald., Syr. read the Participle מְדַבֵּר, which does not change the sense. [So Eng. A. V. See “Textual and Grammatical.”—Tr.]
[24]There is no need to write (with Thenius) הַמְּכַקִשׁ before לְהַשְׁמִיד (after Sept. and Vulg.), since אֲשֶׁר הָיָה (“the man that was, had in mind, to destroy”) is naturally supplied (Gesen. § 132, 3, Rem. 1). [On this comp. “Text. and Gramm.” Eng. A. V. supplies “that would.”—Tr.]
[25] אִשׁ is later softer form for יֵשׁ, Mic_6:10; Ew. § 53 c.
[26] יָמִים וְיָמִים = יָמִים לַיָמִים [“from time to time”].—Tr.].
[27] וְהַצִּיתוּהָ (ordinary Hiph. of יָצַת, 2 pers. plu.) instead of וְּהוֹצִיתִיהָ (Hiph. according to בּ״ו, 1 pers. sing.).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 13, 22, 25, 28 they shall quench my coal which is left--The life…
they shall quench my coal which is left--The life of man is compared in Scripture to a light. To quench the light of Israel (Sa2 21:17) is to destroy the king's life; to ordain a lamp for any one (Psa 132:17) is to grant him posterity; to quench a coal signifies here the extinction of this woman's only remaining hope that the name and family of her husband would be preserved. The figure is a beautiful one; a coal live, but lying under a heap of embers--all that she had to rekindle her fire--to light her lamp in Israel.
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 On vv1, 2, 7, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32 ABSALOM’S RETURN AND RESTORATION TO FAVOUR, 2Sa_14:1-33.
ABSALOM’S RETURN AND RESTORATION TO FAVOUR, 2Sa_14:1-33.
1. Joab… perceived — He was always artful, shrewd, foreseeing, and laying plans for the future. From what he knew of the king’s heart he had reason to think that Absalom might be the next king of Israel, and then how important to himself that Absalom feel indebted to him for his restoration from exile.
Read full note →
Toward Absalom — Not against him, as several interpreters explain the sense, for that would contradict 2Sa_13:39, and render inexplicable the later conduct of the king towards Absalom. 2Sa_18:5; 2Sa_18:12; 2Sa_18:33. Besides, if Joab had known that the king was bitterly hostile to Absalom, we cannot see his object in interceding for him. When Absalom was engaged in the war of rebellion against David it was by Joab’s hand that he was slain. 2Sa_18:14.
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 On vv1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33 Ch. 2Sa_14:1-20. Joab’s stratagem to procure Absalom’s recall
Ch. 2Sa_14:1-20. Joab’s stratagem to procure Absalom’s recall
1. that the king’s heart was toward Absalom] This verse like the preceding one admits of two widely different explanations. (1) If the rendering of the E. V. is retained, the exact meaning will depend on whether the first or the second explanation of chap. 2Sa_13:39 given above, is adopted. (a) In combination with the first of those explanations, the words simply state Joab’s recognition of the king’s yearning towards his son which is there described. (b) In combination with the second of those explanations, which seems to be preferable, the words describe a further change in the king’s feeling from indifference to a positive desire for reconciliation. But on the supposition that David was longing to be reconciled to Absalom it is by no means easy to explain the following narrative. Why was Joab’s subtle scheme necessary, if David was eager of his own accord to recall Absalom? Why, if he was longing for a reconciliation, did he refuse to admit him to his presence for two whole years after his return?
Read full note →
(2) The words may however be rendered: “And Joab the son of Zeruiah knew that the king’s heart was against Absalom.” In favour of this rendering it may be urged (a) that the preposition generally means against not toward: (b) that in the only other passage where the phrase occurs (Dan_11:28), it unquestionably expresses hostility: (c) that this meaning agrees better with the whole course of the narrative, which leaves the impression that Absalom’s recall was a concession extorted from David by Joab’s cunning. Although David had abandoned the ideas of vengeance which he at first entertained (of course the second explanation of ch. 2Sa_13:39 is the only one which can stand in combination with this rendering) his heart remained set against Absalom, and he shewed no disposition to recall him from exile. This view of the state of David’s feelings towards Absalom at once accounts for Joab’s subtle scheme to convince the king of the hardship of prolonging Absalom’s exile, and for the king’s refusal to see Absalom when he had been persuaded to allow him to return. It may seem inconsistent with the passionate affection which he afterwards displayed for his rebellious son (ch. 2Sa_18:5; 2Sa_18:33), but it is not really so. A violent revulsion of feeling, when Absalom’s life was in danger, and still more when he had perished by a miserable death, would be quite in accordance with David’s impulsive character.
Most commentators however adopt the rendering of the E. V., and suppose that political and judicial reasons prevented David from yielding to the dictates of affection: that, perceiving this, Joab planned his scheme in order to give the king the excuse he desired for recalling his son: that the refusal to see Absalom was prompted by a hope that the “discipline of disapproval” might bring him to a state of penitence for his offence.
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 On vv1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32 (1) Was toward Absalom.—This, like the last verse of…
XIV.
(1) Was toward Absalom.—This, like the last verse of the previous chapter, may be understood in either of two opposite senses: either David’s heart yearned for Absalom (as the Authorised Version, Vulg., LXX., Syr.), or it was hostile to him. The Hebrew preposition is used in both senses, though more frequently in the latter, and unquestionably expresses hostility in the only other place (Dan_11:28) in which this form of the phrase occurs. The verse would then be translated, “And Joab the son of Zeruiah knew that the king’s heart was against Absalom.” Hence his stratagem to obtain his recall, which would otherwise have been quite unnecessary.
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 On vv1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 The king"s heart was toward Absalom. Again there is…
The king"s heart was toward Absalom. Again there is a diversity of view as to the right rendering. The preposition does not usually mean "toward," but "against," and is so rendered in ver. 13. The whole phrase occurs again only in Dan_11:28, and certainly there implies enmity. The whole attitude of David towards Absalom is one of persistent hostility, and, even when Joab had obtained his recall, for two full years he would not admit him into his presence. What has led most commentators to force the meaning here and in 2Sa_13:39 is the passionate burst of grief when news was brought of Absalom"s death following upon the anxious orders given to the generals to be careful of the young man"s life. But David was a man of very warm affections, and while this would make him feel intense sorrow for the death of a son by his brother"s hand, and stern indignation towards the murderer, there would still lie deep in the father"s heart true love towards his sinning child, and Absalom"s fall was sad enough to cause a strong revulsion of feeling. David"s grief would be not merely for the death of his son, but that he should have died so miserably, and in an attempt so shameful. Was not, too, the natural grief of a father made the more deep by the feeling that this was the third stage of the penalty denounced on his own sin, and that the son"s death was the result of the father"s crime?
Vers. 1-20. The facts are:
Read full note →
1. Joab, observing that the king"s heart was still adverse to Absalom,devised, in order to bring him round to a different feeling, that a wise woman from Tekoah should appear before him and plead a cause.
2. The woman appears before the king, and narrates as facts certaincircumstances, namely,
(1) that she was a widow, and that on two of her sons falling into strife, one slew the other;
(2) that all the rest of the family connections were urging that the survivor should be put to death, much to her grief.
1. David, touched with her story, undertakes to grant her request,whereupon the woman, recognizing the usage in such cases, desires to exonerate the king from blame in this exercise of his clemency.
1. The king giving her a renewed assurance of safety, should any reproachher for thus trading on his clemency, she again, by a reference to God"s
2. presence and knowledge, dwells on the royal promise; whereupon he swears most solemnly that the son shall be spared.
3. The woman then ventures to bring the royal concession to her to bear onthe case of Absalom, by suggesting that, in granting her request as a just one, he virtually brings blame on himself for cherishing revengeful feeling against a banished one, and he one of the people of God.
1. She fortifies her argument by alluding to man"s inevitable mortality andto God"s way of dealing with wrong doers, namely, that he devises means of restoring the exile.
2. Reverting to her own suit, she next pretends that the people"s desire forvengeance has caused the fear which prompts this her request, believing, as she does, in the king"s magnanimity and superior discrimination.
3. David, perceiving that she is presenting a parabolic case, now askswhether Joab is not at the origin of it, which, with an Oriental compliment to his discernment, she candidly admits.
Astuteness in human affairs.
There are a few facts which, put together, seem to warrant the conclusion that David was hostile in mind to Absalom, and that therefore the expression in ver. 1, rendered "toward," should be "adverse to," l. These facts are, his evident sorrow for Amnon; the related flight of Absalom and absence for three years, but no mention of any messenger of peace being sent to him; the necessity of the device of the wise woman to awaken kindly interest in the king; and his unwillingness to see Absalom lot two years after having yielded to the force of the argument for his restoration (ver. 28). It was in the endeavour to overcome the king"s hostility that Joab manifested the remarkable astuteness of his nature. Taking Joab"s conduct in this instance as our exemplar, we may get an insight as to what constitutes the astuteness in human affairs which then gave and always has given some men an advantage over others.
I THERE IS A SHREWD OBSERVATION OF EVENTS. Joab was not a mere military man, whose range of observation was limited by his profession. He had his eyes wide open to notice, in their bearing one on the other, the various incidents in the history of Israel, embracing both the private and public life, king and people. The remark that he perceived that the king"s heart was adverse to Absalom is but an index of the man"s character. Some generals would simply have confined their attention to military duties, paying little or no heed to what passed in the mind of the king, and what was the effect of his attitude on the nation. The widely and minutely observant eye is a great blessing, and, when under the government of a holy purpose, is a means of personal and relative enrichment. All men astute in affairs have cultivated it with zeal, and its activity and range account in part for the superiority they have acquired over their fellow creatures. Human life is a voluminous book, ever being laid, page by page, before us; and he who can with simple and steady glance note what is there written, and treasure up the record for future use, has procured an advantage, which, in days to come, will be converted into power. "The wise man"s eyes are in his head; but the fool walketh in darkness". (Ecc_2:14)
II THERE IS A CONSTANT LOOKING AHEAD. This characteristic of Joab is seen in many instances. (e.g. 2Sa_11:16, 18-20 12:28 13:19) He was a man who sought to forecast the issue of events at present transpiring, or conditions that might arise to modify his plans. He seemed to see the complications that might arise should Absalom be kept in perpetual exile, both on account of his fine manly bearing being popular with the people, and of the possible strife should the king die, and the exile then return to contend with a nominee of David"s. The prophetic forecast is a vision of coming reality; the forecast of astuteness is the clever calculation of the bearings of passing events on what may be, the tracking out by anticipation the working on men and things of the various forces now in operation. In so far as a man possesses this quality, he certainly is a power in society, and his opinions with reference to contingencies, and the provision wherewith to meet them, should have weight. The degree to which some men injure themselves and others because they have no prevision, no power of anticipating events, is often very painful. In so far as this kind of prevision can be cultivated in early years, apart from the cunning with which it is sometimes allied, so will be the gain for the entire life.
III THERE IS A SEEKING OF PERSONAL ENDS COMBINED WITH PUBLIC GOOD. Selfish cunning looks on, but looks only for self, and cares not for general interests. Astuteness looks on, but seeks deliberately to combine the personal and the general good. The former may be a prominent consideration, but the latter has a real place sincerely given. In Joab we have a striking example of this. Even in the killing of Abner Joab probably felt that the presence of such a rival might bring on troubles in Israel. When, by complicity with David"s sin, (2Sa_11:17) he advanced his own ambition by gaining power over David, he had an idea that the country would be the stronger for king and general to be of one mind. His sending for David to conquer Rabbah (2Sa_12:26-30) promoted his own influence over the king, and at the same time gave the nation the advantage of a regal triumph. No doubt he foresaw that, as Absalom was now the eldest son, he might possibly come to the throne, and hence it was important to secure his favour by being the instrument of procuring his recall; at the same time, he saw it would be better for king and people that this family quarrel should be adjusted. There is no astuteness in pure benevolence, and there is no pure benevolence in astuteness. Its characteristic is that it uses a knowledge of men and things, and an anticipation of coming and possible events, in such a way as to secure personal interests in promoting public good. There is too much conscience for pure selfishness, and too little for pure benevolence. These children of the world are certainly wise in their generation. (Luk_16:8)
IV THERE IS A SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OF HUMAN NATURE, AND OF THE MEANS OF ACTING ON IT. Joab knew men their foibles and their strength. He had acquired that kind of penetration which comes of having much to do with men of divers temperaments and preferences. He knew how to touch David"s natural ambition at Rabbah. (2Sa_12:28-30) He understood how he would feign displeasure and sorrow at the assault which brought about the death of Uriah, and how the courtiers could be put off suspicion. (2Sa_12:20, 2Sa_12:21) He knew that a story appealing to generous, magnanimous feelings would be sure to touch the king"s heart (ver. 2). This knowledge of men is an inestimable treasure for practical purposes. Some persons never acquire it, and consequently are at a great disadvantage in the struggle for life. Others avail themselves of it for low, cunning purposes, which are more becoming fiends than men. The astute man, whose character is toned by a moral aim, uses his knowledge to avoid some and secure the favour of others, and also to bring men round to the furtherance of the objects he has in hand. There is not in such a quality the simplicity which sometimes passes for Christian guilelessness; it may even seem, in some cases, to savour of cunning; but there are instances in which it combines the wisdom of the serpent and the harmlessness of the dove. The Apostle Paul was certainly an astute Christian. He knew men, and how to deal with them on Christian principles. His addresses before his judges and his Epistles bear witness.
GENERAL LESSONS.
1. All who wish to be effective in Christian service should endeavour toextend their knowledge of human nature; for it is said of Christ that he knew what was in man. (Joh_2:25)
2. In seeking a more thorough knowledge of human nature, we shouldavoid the risking the habitual feeling of distrust and suspicion which many of the sad facts of life may well suggest; for our Saviour, who knew all that is in man, the worst and the best, acted in his relations to them on the principle of generous consideration.
3. We should see to it that the intellectual qualities of astuteness are alliedin us with Christian qualities that will save us from low cunning and mere utilitarian motive, and make duty the guide of action.
4. It behoves us to make use of all innocent means women," if need be parables, or direct argument, to bring others to act in accordance with the will of God.
5. In dealing with men we should endeavour to touch the better springs ofaction in their nature, and assume that they are prepared to do justly and generously.
Means to bring back the banished.
The woman of Tekoah showed her wisdom in very deftly blending the argument suggested by Joab with thoughts and pleadings designed to meet the successive replies of the king. To gain her point, she proceeded from the assumption of his natural sympathy with a distressed widow up to the overwhelming argument derived from a consideration of God"s method in dealing with his children when they are, by reason of their sins, banished from his presence, There may seem to be a weakness in the parallel she implies between the case of her sons and the case of Absalom and Amnon, inasmuch as the death of Amnon was brought about by a deliberate design, while the death of the other was a consequence of a sudden strife; but in reality she was right. The strife of her sons was "in the field," but there may have been antecedents which led to that mortal conflict; and, so far as concerned the sons of David, it was to all intents and purposes a family quarrel, brought on by the wrong done to Absalom in the ruin of his sister, and the wise woman evidently regarded the whole affair as a "strife in the field." Provocation had been given by Amnon, and the anger of Absalom, thus aroused, occasioned his death. Amnon would not have died, but for his attack on the honour of Absalom. Two things in the final argument come home to David.
(1) The reference to the ways of God. David, as a pious man and as a righteous ruler, rejoiced in the ways of the Lord; to him they were just and true and wise; they were the professed model of his own conduct. This moral argument to a good man is perfectly irresistible.
(2) The reference to God"s banished ones. David had of late been a banished one. He had known the anguish of being far from his heavenly Father, a spiritual exile, no longer permitted or inclined to the close and blessed fellowship of former times. The widow"s word "banished" brought back the sad remembrance, followed in a moment by the remembrance of the mercy that had blotted out all his sins and restored him to the joys of salvation. Wise woman, thus to touch the deepest and tenderest springs of the heart! Consider what is implied in the blessed words, "He doth devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him.
I MAN"S CONDITION BY REASON OF SIN IS ONE OF BANISHMENT. As truly as Absalom was now banished from David as a consequence of his transgressions, so man is separated from God. The information given us of the fallen angels is slight, but it amounts to this that they are banished because of sin (2Pe_2:4; Jud_1:6) Our first parents were banished from Paradise because of sin. Those who are not welcomed at last to heaven will have to refer the banishment to sin (Mat_7:23 Mat_25:45, Mat_25:46; Rev_21:27) The state of mankind, while sin is loved and followed, is one of alienation. The carnal mind is not subject to the Law of God. We are as sheep going astray. Apart from any positive decree, the fact of sin constitutes moral severance from God. The child wanders, heedless of the Father"s love, and all the moral laws of the universe combine with psychological laws to keep him, while in that state, outside the blessed sphere of fellowship and rest. It was instinctive for Absalom to flee from the face of the king. He banished himself by his deed, and the king could not render it otherwise. It is instinctive for one in sin to rice from the face of the holy God, and the Eternal, though omnipotent, cannot render it otherwise. The constitution of nature renders it inevitable. To suppose that it is an arbitrary arrangement is to imagine an impossibility. No power can make sin equivalent to holiness, and consequently no power can confer on sin the blessedness of the Divine favour.
II GOD NEVERTHELESS REGARDS THE BANISHED AS HIS. Absalom was the son of David, though an exiled wanderer. David felt for him the mingled sorrow and displeasure of a just and good parent. The change of character and position does not destroy natural relationship. Adam was God"s wandering child when, with sad heart, he turned his back on Paradise. The prodigal son is represented as being a son, though wasting his substance with riotous living. Our Saviour, in teaching us how to pray, would have us think of God as our Father. The whole tenor of his life on earth was to cause sinful men to feel that God the Father locks on them as his, even while in rebellion against his will. Had he disowned us in this respect, there would indeed have been no hope. It is much to know, in our sins and errors and dreadful guilt, that we are God"s offspring, that he has a proprietary right in us, and thinks of us as only a father can think of his children. (Eze_33:11)
III GOD MAKES PROVISION FOR BRINGING THE BANISHED BACK TO HIMSELF. "He doth devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him." Wonderful words for that age, and from a widow! The great and precious truth is the comfort of myriads all over the world, and the occasion of wonder and joy in heaven. Such an incidental statement reveals to us that the pious of Israel in those times possessed much fuller and clearer knowledge concerning God and his salvation than they sometimes get credit for, or would be inferred from the outlines of national history contained in the Bible. The history is designed to trace the great historic line along which Christ came, and the fact that God was, through the Jewish people, working out a great purpose to be gradually revealed in Christ. We are not told of all the detailed teaching of holy priests and prophets. We may fairly regard this wonderful statement of the widow as an index of truth widely possessed, distinct from the provision of such means of blessing as the brazen serpent and the cities of refuge. There is a twofold sense in which the expression may be understood.
1. God provides means for the redemption of the world. The Mosaic economy was, in some of its institutions, a shadow of the provision that centres in the cross of Christ. Our salvation is of God. If he does not find means to cover sin and influence our evil hearts, there is no hope. We cannot, and are unwilling. He deviseth means. (Joh_3:16) There is an intimation of the wisdom requisite. Sin produces such confusion in the moral sphere, and runs so against the order of government, and lays so strong a hold on the human heart, that only infinite wisdom could find out the way by which we might come back to God. Hence the atoning sacrifice
2. of Christ, the gift of the Holy Spirit, the appointment of faith as the condition and of preaching as the instrumentality, are all ascribed to the wisdom and goodness of God. It is by the Church thus saved that the wisdom of God is revealed to all ages (Rom_3:23-26 Rom_4:16 Rom_8:14; 1Co_1:21-30; Eph_3:10)
3. God provides means for the restoration of those who backslide from him. By chastisements, by the voice of prophets and conscience, by the pleading of the Spirit, by the varied events of providence causing the erring child to feel how evil and bitter a thing it is to depart from God, he opens a way by which they are brought back again. David knew this. "He restoreth my soul". (Psa_23:3) How wonderfully wise and gentle these means often are is well known to many who once were as sheep going astray, and had lost the blessedness of fellowship formerly known.
Return! O chosen of my love! Fear not to meet thy beckoning Saviour"s view Long ere I called thee by thy name, I knew That very treacherously thou wouldst deal; Now I have seen thy ways, yet I will heal. Return! Wilt thou yet linger far from me? My wrath is turned away, I have redeemed thee. ("Life Mosaic," by F.R. Havergal, p. 72. )
IV GOD"S WAYS IN DEALING WITH HIS BANISHED ONES ARE A MODEL FOR US. The wise woman had spoken of the ways of God with his banished ones in order to induce David to follow in the same course with respect to Absalom the implication being that, when once a good man is reminded of the ways of God, he will without further urging act in the same manner. The parallel between the relation of Absalom to David and the relation of a sinner to God may not in every detail be perfect; but there being a resemblance in the substantial facts banishment of a son because of high-handed deeds of wrong it follows that there should be a resemblance, in the bearing of the earthly father king to his son, to that of God to his sinful child. The two features of God"s bearing toward his own are:
(1) He does not take away life; but
(2) devises means by which those who deserve to die are brought back to him (ver. 14).
The reference evidently is not to the legal code, which in several cases recognizes capital punishment for certain offences, for ends civil and social, but to the general principle and method of God"s dealing with sinful man in his highest relations to himself. He desireth not the death of the sinner, and therefore he, speaking after the manner of men, finds out some way of bringing about a restoration to favour consistent with his own honour and the claims of righteousness. In the New Testament this example is set forth in strong and varied terms (Mat_5:43-48 Mat_6:14, Mat_6:15; Eph_4:31, Eph_4:32) The fact that there is a model in God"s bearing toward us is only half the truth. It is our duty and privilege to act according to it. It is not enough to be kindly disposed. We are to "devise devices take the initiative in seeking to restore those who may have done wrong and merited our displeasure. This is the hard lesson taught by Christ, which even his own people are so slow to learn. When will Christians be as Christ was and act as Christ did? It is often easier to sing hymns, hear sermons, and bow the knee in prayer.
GENERAL LESSONS.
1. The proper course for the poor and sorrowful and oppressed is, after theexample of this widow, to have recourse to him who sitteth as King in Zion; for his ear is ever open to their cry, and there is an open way of access to his throne.
2. In all our approaches to the supreme throne we may, with moreconfidence than was displayed by this widow in David, act on the assumption of a mercy and wisdom that never fail.
3. It is not only a solace to the weary heart, but a sure means of help in ourdomestic cares, if we bring them before the notice of our God.
4. We see how often the best and most exalted of men, in their conduct andfeelings, come far short of the character they should manifest, and how they may require even the teaching which comes from the spirit and deeds of the poor and troubled to raise them to a higher level of life.
5. It is possible for good men to be kind and generous towards others, andat the same time be unaware, till forced to see it, that there are features in their personal conduct day by day not in accord with the general generosity which they recognize and display.
6. We need to be reminded that the death of those we have cared for,should it come about while we are not acting kindly toward them (ver. 14), is an unalterable event, a change which renders acts of kindness impossible as water spilt on the ground cannot be gathered up again; andconsequently we should seize passing opportunities of blessing them.
7. The sinful state of man is as unnatural as is exile to a king"s son, andshould ever be so represented. (Isa_1:2, Isa_1:3)
8. All thanks and praise are due to God, in that he needed not any one toprocure our restoration; all is of his own eternal love and free grace.
9. We should distinguish between the human setting of a truth and the truthitself. To "devise a means" is a human way of expressing the truth that God, from the beginning, before the foundation of the world (Eph_1:4; Rev_13:8) ordained and arranged for our salvation, but that we see the prearrangement coming into form subsequent to the advent of sin, and think of it as being devised to meet that event after its occurrence. We say, "the sun rises," but it does not. Our forms of expression consequent on the appearance of things to us is not the exact utterance of absolute truth.
10. The force of a Divine example, when brought to bear on men who recognize the government of God, will often compel conviction when other means fail.
HOMILIES BY B. DALE. Vers. 1-20. (JERUSALEM.)
The woman of Tekoah.
1. In David "the king" we hero see that fatherly affection may come into conflict with regal justice. He must have perceived the ill effects of sparing Amnon, and felt constrained to punish Absalom. But his grief and resentment were mitigated by the lapse of time. (2Sa_13:39) Nevertheless, though prompted by natural affection to recall his son, he was deterred from doing so by political and judicial considerations. And to overcome his reluctance a stratagem was devised, which, as the sequel shows, was only too successful. For by his weakness towards Absalom "he became guilty of the further dissolution of the theocratic rule in his house and in his kingdom" (Erdmann).
1. In Joab "the son of Zerniah" (2Sa_3:39) we see that a man may promote another"s interest out of regard for his own. (2Sa_3:22-30 2Sa_11:16-21) "He may have been induced to take these steps by his personal attachment to Absalom, but the principal reason no doubt was that Absalom had the best prospect of succeeding to the throne, and Joab
2. thought this the best way to secure himself from punishment for the murder which he had committed. But the issue of events frustrated all such hopes. Absalom did not succeed to the throne, Joab did not escape punishment, and David was severely chastised for his weakness and injustice" (Keil). "Joab formed a project by which the king, in his very capacity of chief judge, should find the glimmering fire of parental love suddenly fanned into a burning flame" (Ewald).
3. In the "wise woman" of Tekoah we see that skilful persuasion may so work upon natural feeling as to induce a course which is neither expedient nor just. The cleverness, insight, readiness of speech, tact, boldness mingled with caution, and perseverance, which she displayed (under the direction of Joab, who perhaps "stood by at some distance whilst she addressed herself to the king," ver. 21) are remarkable. Such qualities may be employed for a good or an evil purpose. In contrast with the reproof of Nathan, her persuasion
(1) was inspired, not by God, but by man;
(2) was addressed, not to conscience, but to pity and affection;
(3) aimed, not to manifest the truth, but to obscure it;
(4) and "to give effect, not to the convictions of duty, but to the promptings of inclination" (Blaikie);
(5) sought to do this, not sincerely and openly, but insincerely and insidiously;
(6) and not by proper motives alone, and honest, though unpleasant speech, but by improper motives and "with flattering lips;" and
(7) produced, not a beneficial, but an injurious effect. In her persuasive address we notice, more particularly
I AN AFFECTING BUT FICTITIOUS APPEAL. (Vers. 4-11.) "And the woman of Tekoah came to the king," etc., making her appeal for help in an acted parable, like that of Nathan. (2Sa_12:1-4) "Parables sped well with David; one drew him to repent of his own sin, another to remit Absalom"s punishment" (Hall). This parable of the hapless son, or the avengers of blood, was intended, adapted, and employed:
1. To excite compassion toward the unfortunate: a son who had slain his brother "unawares" (Num_35:11) in the field, and whose life was
2. imperilled by the avengers, "the old family" (ver. 7); and his widowed mother, whose only stay and comfort he was, whose "live coal which is left" would be quenched, and whose husband"s "name and posterity" would be destroyed. "The power of the discourse lies in the fact that they are represented as already doing what their words show to be their purpose.
3. To procure protection against the avengers; who, according to ancient custom, sought to take his life; (2Sa_3:22-30) their conduct being portrayed as persistently pitiless (ver. 11), "and actuated, not so much by a wish to observe the Law, as by covetousness and a desire to share the inheritance among themselves" (Kirkpatrick); obscurely suggestive of the hostility exhibited toward Absalom. "Her circumstances (as a widow and living at some distance from Jerusalem, which rendered the case difficult to be readily inquired into), her mournful tale, her widow"s weeds, her aged person, and her impressive manner, all combined to make one united impression on the king"s heart" (A. Clarke). "In all this she intended to frame a case as like to David"s as she could do; by determining which in her favour, he might judge how much more reasonable it was to preserve Absalom. But there was a wide difference between her case and his, however plausible soever their likeness might appear" (Patrick).
4. To obtain assurance of preservation from the king; which was given at first as an indefinite promise (ver. 8), afterwards (through her importunity) in a more definite engagement (ver. 10), and finally confirmed by an oath (ver. 11). "Had David first proved and inquired into the matter which with cunning and deceit was brought before him, he would not have given assurance with an oath" (Schlier). "We should learn from David"s example to be more guarded over all our feelings and affections, even such as are in their proper degree essential to a religious character" (Lindsay). "Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause". (Exo_23:3)
II AN EFFECTIVE BUT FALLACIOUS ARGUMENT (vers. 13, 14); based upon the assumed resemblance between the case of the hapless son, of whom she had spoken, and that of Absalom, to whom she alluded as fully as she might venture. For her appeal had "a double sense," or twofold purpose one clear, immediate, feigned, subordinate; the other dark, ultimate, real, supreme; and to the latter she now comes. "And why dost thou think devise such a thing as that of which I am now permitted to speak against people of God? And by the king"s speaking this word "As Jehovah liveth," etc., ver. 11 he is as one that is guilty or, "self condemned", in that the king does not bring back his banished one." "My banished one!" he must have thought, as the main object of the woman"s appeal flashed upon him. But she went on: "For we must die "shall surely, (Gen_2:17) and are as water poured out on the ground that is not gathered up. And God takes not away a soul nephesh, equivalent to "individual life", but thinks thoughts devises devices to the end that he may not banish from him utterly a banished one." She thus sought to persuade the king to recall his son by:
1. The obligation of his oath, in which "he had acknowledged the possibility of an exception to the general rule of punishment for murder;" sworn to save her son, who had killed his brother under severe provocation; and was consistently bound to spare and restore his own son in similar circumstances. But the difference between them, here kept out of view, was fatal to the argument. Absalom"s crime was deliberately planned, executed by his servants under his order, and seen by many witnesses.
2. The welfare of the people of God, involved in the preservation and return of the heir to the throne. Although the king"s sons and the whole court were against Absalom (ver. 7), a large party of the people was in his favour. But the general welfare would have been more promoted by his just punishment, or continuance in exile, than by his restoration, as the subsequent history shows.
3. The mortality of men the inevitable and irreparable decease of Amnon, Absalom, the king himself; the consideration of which should induce compassion and speedy help, lest it should be too late. But "even compassion, amiable as it is, will not justify our violation of the Divine Law, or neglecting the important duties of our station" (Scott).
4. The clemency of God; in forbearance and long suffering toward sinful men, and devising means for their restoration to his presence; such as David himself had experienced (2Sa_12:13; Psa_51:11) His example should be imitated. But his forbearance is limited he pardons only those who repent, and punishes the guilty; and for the king to spare the guilty on insufficient grounds, or pardon the impenitent, would be to harden the wicked in their wickedness, and to act contrary to the purpose, for which he is made "an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil." The reasons assigned, though excellent in themselves, were inapplicable and fallacious. The noblest truths may be perverted to a bad purpose. A weak argument appears strong to one who is already disposed to accept its conclusion; and is a sufficient excuse for a course which he is inclined to pursue. By the manner in which her words were received by the king, the "wise woman" perceived that her point was practically gained; enough had been said, and leaving it to work its effect on his mind, she returned to the ostensible occasion of her petition for help; and "now she would go home happy (she said), as if this reference to the king"s behaviour had been only the casual chatter of a talkative woman" (P. Thomson).
III AN APPROPRIATE BUT FLATTERING APOLOGY for intrusion on the king (vers. 15-20); expressive of:
1. The anxious fear and hope with which she had been impelled to makeher request (ver. 15).
2. The joyful anticipation and grateful assurance of rest which she now felt (vers. 16, 17).
3. Devout admiration and praise of the king, on account of his wisdom injudgment; with a prayer for his prosperity: "May Jehovah thy God be with thee!" Fully acknowledging that, as the king surmised, she had acted under the direction of Joab," in order to bring round the face aspect of the matter" (to alter Absalom"s relation to his father), she again commends the discernment of the king: "My lord is wise," etc. (vers. 18-20). "When we are most commended for our discernment we generally act most foolishly; for those very praises cloud and pervert the judgment (Scott). "And the king said unto Joab, Behold now, I have done this thing: go and bring the young man Absalom back" (ver. 21). "The feelings of the father triumphed over the duty of the king, who, as supreme magistrate, was bound to execute impartial justice on every murderer, by the express Law of God (Gen_9:9; Num_35:30, Num_35:31) which he had no power to dispense with (Deu_18:18; Jos_1:8;" 1Sa_10:25) (Jamieson). Although neither the end of the woman"s address nor some of the means are employed can be approved, yet much may be learnt from it concerning the art of persuasion; e.g. the importance of
(1) knowing the character and sentiments of those who are addressed;
(2) having a definite aim in view;
(3) arresting attention and awakening interest and sympathy;
(4) earnestness and fervency of manner;
(5) using argument and illustration adapted to present the matter in the most attractive light;
(6) saying enough and no more, especially on a difficult and delicate subject;
(7) advancing step by step with apersistent determination to succeed. D.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv5, 14, 25, 29, 33 And she answered, I am indeed a widow woman.
2Sa_14:5-20
And she answered, I am indeed a widow woman.
Read full note →
The parable of the woman of Tekoa
The contrast between this parable and the one preceding it is very great. The parable of the ewe-lamb was spoken of by a prophet inspired by God. This one was spoken by a theatrical persons at the instigation of a man of the world, one who, though thoroughly unprincipled, could read human character and discern human motives through a very small crevice. The parable of Nathan was the introduction to a scorching reproof of Davids iniquity, the parable of the Tekoan is full of fulsome flattery. The prophets parable was uttered to induce repentance in David; this one had for its end only the promotion of Joabs schemes of self-interest.
I. The argument of the parable.
1. That those who grant mercy abroad should first begin at home. The first reason which the woman urges why David should forgive his son is the willingness with which he would have forgiven hers. A king who is merciful to his subjects is inconsistent with himself if he is not forgiving towards the members of his own family.
2. That enmity ought to die before those who are at enmity die. For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again (2Sa_14:14). If Absalom were to die before a reconciliation had taken place, the fathers heart would be deeply grieved; and if he himself were to die before his sons return to favour he would go down to his grave mourning the estrangement.
3. The Divine Fathers example in relation to His banished ones.
II. Its immediate and remote results. The immediate result was the recall of Absalom without outward reconciliation. Let him turn to his own house, and let him not see my face (2Sa_14:24). Evils arose from this half-measure. Joab was disappointed, and Absalom was irritated.
Lessons:
1. That the most worthless characters sometimes have the best pleaders. We find this the case occasionally in our law courts. Men with no character, but lacking nothing else, with money and influence in abundance, can have the benefit of the most skilful barristers to bring them out of the grip of the law.
2. That imaginary narratives of human life have most influence when they find a counterpart in our own experience. The power of a story may he very great even when it contains nothing in it that has any likeness to anything that has happened to ourselves.
3. That those who are conscious of having committed great sins are not fit to deal with other offenders. The sin of David included the crimes of both his sons, and the consciousness of this made him weak in purpose, and unsteady in his dealings with them.
4. To restore to favour unconditionally is a sin against the person forgiven. (A London Minister.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv1, 25 2Sa_14:1. “Now Joab,” etc. Most commentators attribute Joab’s action…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES.—
2Sa_14:1. “Now Joab,” etc. Most commentators attribute Joab’s action in this matter to motives of self-interest. It appears highly probably that Absalom was now the heir to the throne (see on 2Sa_13:29), and Joab was therefore anxious to secure his goodwill by being of service to him. “Toward Absalom.” Most scholars, in accordance with the Syriac, the Septuagent, and the Vulgate versions, sustain the English reading here, but Erdmann and Keil contend that the preposition here used has the sense of against in this place. The latter says לֵב, written with צַל and without any verb, only occurs again in Dan_11:28, where it means against. He further remarks that, “if Joab had noticed the re-awakening of David’s good feeling towards Absalom, there would have been no necessity for him to bring the cunning woman from Tekoah to induce him to consent to Absalom’s return. Moreover, David would not in that case have refused to allow Absalom to see his face for two whole years after his return.”
Read full note →
2Sa_14:2. “Tekoah.” Now Tekue, about five miles south of Bethlehem and the home of the prophet Amos. “According to the Talmud, there were important oil plantations in the neighbourhood, and the women there were noted for their shrewdness.” (Philippson.)
2Sa_14:7. “The heir also.” “These words are added to the preceding (we will kill him) by reason of the second thought that characterises the blood-revenge, namely, that while they kill him for blood-vengeance, they wish at the same time to destroy the surviving heir. The woman’s purpose is not only to bring out the design of the kinsman in their blood-avenging as harshly as possible, but also, with reference to David’s hostile feeling to Absalom, to emphasize the point that the latter is the heir to David’s throne, and to save him as such from his father’s anger.” (Erdmann.) “Quench my coal.” “The burning coal with which one kindles a fresh fire to denote the last remnant.” (Keil).
2Sa_14:8. “Go to thine house,” etc. This declaration on the part of the king was perfectly just. If the brothers had quarrelled and one had killed the other in the heat of the quarrel, it was right that he should be defended from the avenger of blood, because it could not be assumed that there was any previous intention to murder. This declaration, therefore, could not be applied as yet to David’s conduct towards Absalom.” (Keil.)
2Sa_14:9. “The Iniquity be on me,” i.e., “If it be wrong not to carry out the blood-shedding.” (Erdmann.)
2Sa_14:11. “Let the king remember the Lord,” etc. Either she desires David to confirm his promise by an oath or she reminds him of the great mercy which God had extended to Himself in pardoning the murder of Uriah.
2Sa_14:13. “Against the people of God.” The ambiguity of this phrase has led some to render it, “Why dost thou propose suck things towards the people of God,” i.e. such protection towards me and my son.” But most critics reject this rendering. Erdmann understands by the people of God, the nation who would suffer by the rejection of one who would one day be their King.
2Sa_14:14. “We must needs die,” etc. Thenius refers these words to Amnon’s death with the meaning, “he had to die sometime, and all you can now do against the murderer will not restore him to life.” But most writers understand the woman to mean “Absalom may die in banishment and then your pardon may come too late,” or “As life is so short and uncertain do not embitter it by enmity.” “Neither doth God respect,” etc. Rather. “God doth not take away any soul, but thinks thoughts, not to banish a banished one.” “An argument from God’s procedure with the sinner. He does not take away the soul (life) of one that is banished, condemned for sin, so as thus to banish him for ever. These words must have brought to David’s recollection God’s mercy towards himself.” (Erdmann.) “This is one of the noblest and profoundest declarations of the Scripture. God, who has determined us to death, nevertheless does not deprive us of life, of personality, but has the holy purpose to receive against the banished, the sinful.” (Philippson.) “This (last) explanation makes the first half of the verse merely introductory to the thought in the second, merely a relative sentence containing an affirmation about God; this is not so probable as the view which makes the first half a separate argument. The argument, though powerful, is false; the human Judge cannot set aside the demands of justice, though God may pardon the sinner.” (Translator of Lang’s Commentary.)
2Sa_14:15. “The people have made me afraid,” i.e. Her kinsfolk who demanded her son. “The woman returns again to her own affairs, to make the King believe that nothing but her destress led her to speak thus.” (Keil.)
2Sa_14:17. “Comfortable,” literally, for rest, i.e., shall give me rest. “Angel of God.” “The angel of the covenant, the mediator of divine grace to the covenant nation.” (Ked.) “To discern good and bad.” “This affirms two things.
1. In every case brought before him, the king, he will impartially hear both sides.
2. He helps the oppressed.” (Erdmann.) “There is a great deal of artifice in all this. For to presume upon the kindness of another and expect gracious answers from their noble qualities is very moving.” (Patrick).
2Sa_14:19. “None can turn to the right,” etc., i.e. The king always hits the right point. She compliments the king on the sagacity which enabled him to penetrate the secret.
2Sa_14:20. “To fetch about this form,” etc. Erdmann translates this, “To turn the face of the thing, i.e., to change the relation of Absalom to his father.” Keil renders, “To turn the appearance of the king,” understanding thereby, to disguise the affair in the finest way.
2Sa_14:23. “Hath fulfilled the request.” These words are generally understood to indicate that Joab had repeatedly pleaded for Absalom’s return.
2Sa_14:24. “Let him not see my face.” “This was no real pardon. David’s anger still continued. It is a natural surmise that this was because Absalom showed no repentance and did not ask for forgiveness.” (Erdmann.) “His own house.” His being obliged to send for Joab suggests that Absalom was confined to his house.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—2Sa_14:1-24
THE RETURN OF ABSALOM
I. The most mischievous reasoning is that which is a compound of truth and falsehood. When an argument is wholly founded on an untruth, the conscience not entirely blinded can pass sentence upon it without hesitation, and if a man yield to such an argument, he does so with his eyes wide open. But where, as in the case before us, many undeniable facts are pleaded in favour of acts which at best are of doubtful character, only the most honest and unprejudiced can see through the delusion. The assertions of this wise woman were perfectly true. Those who grant mercy abroad should begin at home, and enmity ought to die before those who are at enmity die. The long forbearance and abounding mercy of God are also blessed and undeniable facts, and all these considerations might have been lawfully urged upon David in relation to any private act in which Absalom had sinned only against his father. But he had transgressed that Divine law which it was David’s special duty to uphold, and against which the king sinned when he permitted it to be violated with impunity. No human executor of law is actuated by a feeling of personal enmity, but is simply a representative of laws, which, if they are just, are necessary safeguards of society, and as such, are approved and even commanded by God. Such a man fails in his duty both to God and man if he allow personal feelings to influence his conduct either for or against the offender. We cannot gather from the history (see Critical Notes) what David’s real feelings were in relation to his son, and therefore cannot tell what effect the argument of this parable had upon him; but it is an excellent sample of many of the sophistries by which people in all ages and under all circumstances seek to justify what is contrary to justice when it is agreeable to their inclinations and likely to promote their interests.
II. Those who are conscious of having committed great sins are not fit to deal with other offenders. The immediate result of this parable was a half-measure which made matters worse than they were before, and leave us in as much doubt as ever as to David’s real motives and feelings. It was more trying and irritating to Absalom to be banished from his father’s presence in Jerusalem than in Geshur, and if his message to him was defiant there was reason in it, for it seemed mockery to recall him merely to make him a prisoner or keep him in disgrace at home. But all David’s weakness and unsteadiness of purpose in dealing with his sons arose from the consciousness that when one became an adulterer and the other a murderer, they were only following his example. Such a man is as unfit to deal rightly with a transgressor as he who is smitten with paralysis is unable to administer corporal chastisement.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
2Sa_14:14. It is by right of this apt beautiful saying that the wise woman of of Tekoah holds an earthly immortality. Ah, how God must have bound us each to each; what subtle far-reaching links must bind all the children of Adam into one; how solemn and mysterious an influence the humblest of us may exert on all, when the obscure prophetess of that dark age and distant land can still touch our hearts and shape our thoughts … The larger and more general application, the principle of the words I take to be, “Don’t fret over the inevitable, the irreparable. The past is past and cannot be recalled; therefore be more intent on a wise use of the present. Instead of crying over spilt water or trying in vain to gather it up from the dust, betake you to the fountain of living water, drink of the untainted perennial spring. Let your feet wear a track that shall guide other feet to its pure waters. Let your example be a standing invitation to your neighbours, that they also may repair to the fountain which no dust can defile, and drink of the clear life-giving waters which flow on for ever.”
1. Apply this principle to the limited facts of death and bereavement … Fretting will not alter the inevitable. We must accept it whether with our will or against it. Let us then accept it with a patient cheerfulness which will take the sting out of it. ’Tis weak, ’tis useless, to sit down and weep over spilt water, when we have yet a long steep path to climb, and many around us who look to us for guidance and refreshment.… But it is not difficult to understand how many might say, “Why remind me that it is of no use to cry over spilt water?” I know it, and hence my tears. I weep the more because I weep in vain.” … But we may find in the wise woman’s words a larger and more consolatory meaning than any of which she was conscious.… For, observe; this spilt water of hers—what after all becomes of it? Though we cannot raise it up again, it nevertheless does rise again; no particle of it is lost. For a little while it lies in the dust and helps to make that fruitful. But it will be gathered up again; it must be. It will be drawn up into the skies to form a gracious cloud, which by and bye will fall in enriching showers and will be again lifted to the skies, again to fall, again to rise—so passing into a life of perpetual service.… And God, our sun, will shine upon our departed ones and will raise, purify, and ennoble them, consecrating them to an eternal service.… II. If we bring the more general application of this principle home to our experience, we shall find it has instruction for all, and not only for the bereaved.… As we recall the past, and as the years pass, and the inevitable changes ensue, we are too apt to spend time in crying over spilt water and in trying to gather it up again, and when we are haunted with the ghosts of lost opportunities and past sins, we are filled with a regret singularly like the sorrow of bereavement, and like that it is very apt to weaken us still more, and to interpose between us and the duties we have still to discharge.… It is vain to mourn that we are what we are. The weaker we are the more need to husband our strength; the more frequent and ample the opportunities we have missed, the more we should strive to improve those which are still open to us.… We are assuredly to repent of our sins and mistakes, but the true cleansing virtue of repentance does not lie in the tears we shed but in the amendment which, trusting to a higher strength than our own, we hopefully attempt. And in nothing perhaps is the healthy bracing spirit of the gospel more conspicuous than in this, that when we are truly sorry for our sins, we find that it is a sorrow that worketh life; that while we are still mourning over our manifold offences it virtually says, “Leave all those with Him who has made an atonement for the sin of the world.”.… Nay, more, though we cannot gather up the spilt water, God can and does. The sun of His love shines down on the earth on which it has fallen, and lo, it rises from the earth in new and purer forms! All the useful and helpful elements of our past experience are gathered up by Him, and detached from the polluting dust with which they were blent, and the very tears we have shed are drawn up into the spiritual heaven, to fall in fertilising showers on ground barren but for them; and as they fall the Sun of Righteousness shines full upon them, and lo, a new bow of hope stretches across our brightening heaven, giving us the welcome assurance that, unfruitful as we have been in the past, henceforth seed-time and harvest shall never fail us.—(Samuel Cox, abridged).
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.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 2Sa 14:14
2Sa 14:14
I. God’s heaviest punishment is separation from Himself. There are degrees of separation—degrees in intensity and degrees in duration. There are two great divisions: the banished and the expelled. The banished wish to come back, the expelled do not; the banished have lost peace, the expelled have forfeited life.
Read full note →
II. Banishment is judicial, but it is not final. It is bitter, but it is curative. It is severe, but it is love. The banished must beware lest they go off further and further to remoter lands, lengthening and deepening their own punishment, till they get out of reach, beyond sound of recall and the circle of attraction, and then their banishment may become punishment.
III. God is always devising how His banished may be restored. His Son died that there might be a welcome to all the banished ones, and that expulsion might be a word unknown in heaven’s vocabulary.
J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 10th series, p. 97.
References: 2Sa 14:14.—Parker, vol. vii., p. 237; S. Cox, Expositor’s Notebook, p. 9; M. Daniell, Penny Pulpit, No. 2491; Homiletic Magazine, vol. xii., p. 22; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvi., No. 950. 2Sa 14:25.—Expositor, 2nd series, vol. viii., p. 176. 2Sa 14:29-31.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. x., No. 563. 2Sam 14-18.—Parker, vol. vii., p. 174. 2Sa 15:6.—Ibid., p. 238. 2Sa 15:10.—F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 401. 2Sa 15:13.—T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit; vol. xxii., p. 395.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Alexander MacLaren 1905 · Public Domain On v14 2 Samuel
2 Samuel
GOD’S BANISHED ONES
Read full note →
2Sa 14:14.
David’s good-for-nothing son Absalom had brought about the murder of one of his brothers, and had fled the country. His father weakly loved the brilliant blackguard, and would fain have had him back, but was restrained by a sense of kingly duty. Joab, the astute Commander-in-chief, a devoted friend of David, saw how the land lay, and formed a plan to give the king an excuse for doing what he wished to do. So he got hold of a person who is called ‘a wise woman’ from the country, dressed her as a mourner, and sent her with an ingeniously made-up story of how she was a widow with two sons, one of whom had killed the other, and of how the relatives insisted on their right of avenging blood, and demanded the surrender of the murderer; by which, as she pathetically said, ‘the coal’ that was left her would be ‘quenched.’ The king’s sympathy was quickly roused-as was natural in so impulsive and poetic a nature-and he pledged his word, and finally his oath, that the offender should be safe.
So the woman has him in a trap, having induced him to waive justice and to absolve the guilty by an arbitrary act. Then she turns upon him with an application to his own case, and bids him free himself from the guilt of double measures and inconsistency by doing with his banished son the same thing-viz. abrogating law and bringing back the offender. In our text she urges still higher considerations-viz. those of God’s way of treating criminals against His law, of whom she says that He spares their lives, and devises means-or, as the words might perhaps be rendered, ‘plans plannings’-by which He may bring them back. She would imply that human power and sovereignty are then noblest and likest God’s when they remit penalties and restore wanderers.
I do not further follow the story, which ends, as we all know, with Absalom’s ill-omened return. But the wise woman’s saying goes very deep, and, in its picturesque form, may help to bring out more vividly some truths-all-important ones-of which I wish to beg your very earnest consideration and acceptance.
I. Note, then, who are God’s banished ones.
The woman’s words are one of the few glimpses which we have of the condition of religious thought amongst the masses of Israel. Clearly she had laid to heart the teaching which declared the great, solemn, universal fact of sin and consequent separation from God. For the ‘banished ones’ of whom she speaks are no particular class of glaring criminals, but she includes within the designation the whole human race, or, at all events, the whole Israel to which she and David belonged. There may have been in her words-though that is very doubtful-a reference to the old story of Cain after the murder of his brother. For that narrative symbolises the consequences of all evil-doing and evil-loving, in that he was cast out from the presence of God, and went away into a ‘land of wandering,’ there to hide from the face of the Father. On the one hand, it was banishment; on the other hand, it was flight. So had Absalom’s departure been, and so is ours.
Strip away the metaphor, dear brethren, and it just comes to this thought, which I seek to lay upon the hearts of all my hearers now-you cannot be blessedly and peacefully near God, unless you are far away from sin. If you take two polished plates of metal, and lay them together, they will adhere. If you put half a dozen tiny grains of sand or dust between them, they will fall apart. So our sins have come between us and our God. They have not separated God from us, blessed be His name! for His love, and His care, and His desire to bless, His thought, and His knowledge, and His tenderness, all come to every soul of man. But they have rent us apart from Him, in so far as they make us unwilling to be near Him, incapable of receiving the truest nearness and blessedness of His presence, and sometimes desirous to hustle Him out of our thoughts, and, if we could, out of our world, rather than to expatiate in the calm sunlight of His presence.
That banishment is self-inflicted. God spurns away no man, but men spurn Him, and flee from Him. Many of us know what it is to pass whole days, and weeks, and years, as practical Atheists. God is not in all our thoughts.
And more than that, the miserable disgrace and solitude of a soul that is godless in the world is what many of us like. The Prodigal Son scraped all his goods together, and thought himself freed from a very unwelcome bondage, and a fine independent youth, when he went away into ‘the far country.’ It was not quite so pleasant when provisions and clothing fell short, and the swine’s trough was the only table that was spread before him. But yet there are many of us, I fear, who are perfectly comfortable away from God, in so far as we can get away from Him, and who never are aware of the degradation that lies in a soul’s having lowered itself to this, that it had rather not have God inconveniently near.
Away down in the luxurious islands of the Southern Sea you will find degraded Englishmen who have chosen rather to cast in their lot with savages than to have to strain and work and grow. These poor beach-combers of the Pacific, not happy in their degradation, but wallowing in it, are no exaggerated pictures of the condition, in reality, of thousands of us who dwell far from God, and far therefore from righteousness and peace.
II. Notice God’s yearning over His banished ones.
The woman in our story hints at, or suggests, a parallel which, though inadequate, is deeply true. David was Absalom’s father and Absalom’s king; and the two relationships fought against each other in his heart. The king had to think of law and justice; the father cried out for his son. The young man’s offence had neither altered his relationship nor affected the father’s heart.
All that is true, far more deeply, blessedly true, in regard to our relation, the wandering exiles’ relation, to God. For, whilst I believe that the highest form of sonship is only realised in the hearts of men who have been made partakers of a new life through Jesus Christ, I believe, just as firmly and earnestly, that every man and woman on the face of the earth, by virtue of physical life derived from God, by virtue of a spiritual being, which, in a very real and deep sense, still bears the image of God, and by reason of His continued love and care over them, is a child of His. The banished son is still a son, and is ‘His banished one.’ If there is love-wonderful as the thought is, and heart-melting as it ought to be-there must be loss when the child goes away. Human love would not have the same name as God’s unless there were some analogy between the two. And though we walk in dark places, and had better acknowledge that the less we speak upon such profound subjects the less likely we are to err, yet it seems to me that the whole preciousness of the revelation of God in Scripture is imperilled unless we frankly recognise this-that His love is like ours, delights in being returned like ours, and is like ours in that it rejoices in presence and knows a sense of loss in absence. If you think that that is too bold a thing to say, remember who it was that taught us that the father fell on the neck of the returning prodigal, and kissed him; and that the rapture of his joy was the token and measure of the reality of his regret, and that it was the father to whom the prodigal son was ‘lost.’ Deep as is the mystery, let nothing, dear brethren, rob us of the plain fact that God’s love moves all around the worst, the unworthiest, the most rebellious in the far-off land, and ‘desires not the death of a sinner, but rather that he may turn from his iniquity and live.’
And it is you, you, whom He wants back; you whom He would fain rescue from your aversion to good and your carelessness of Him. It is you whom He seeks, according to the great saying of the Master, ‘the Father seeketh’ for worshippers in spirit and in truth.
III. Note the formidable obstacles to the restoration of the banished.
The words ‘banished’ and ‘expelled’ in our text are in the original the same; and the force of the whole would be better expressed if the same English word was employed as the equivalent of both. We should then see more clearly than the variation of rendering in our text enables us to see, that the being ‘expelled’ is no further stage which God devises means to prevent, but that what is meant is that He provides methods by which the banished should not be banished-that is, should be restored to Himself.
Now, note that the language of this ‘wise woman,’ unconsciously to herself, confesses that the parallel that she was trying to draw did not go on all fours; for what she was asking the king to do was simply, by an arbitrary act, to sweep aside law and to remit penalty. She instinctively feels that that is not what can be done by God, and so she says that He ‘devises means’ by which He can restore His banished.
That is to say, forgiveness and the obliteration of the consequences of a man’s sin, and his restoration to the blessed nearness to God, which is life, are by no means such easy and simple matters as people sometimes suppose them to be. The whole drift of popular thinking to-day goes in the direction of a very superficial and easy gospel, which merely says, ‘Oh, of course, of course God forgives! Is not God Love? Is not God our Father? What more do you want than that?’ Ah! you want a great deal more than that, my friends. Let me press upon you two or three plain considerations. There are formidable obstacles in the way of divine forgiveness.
If there are to be any pardon and restoration at all, they must be such as will leave untouched the sovereign majesty of God’s law, and, untampered with, the eternal gulf between good and evil. That easygoing gospel which says, ‘God will pardon, of course!’ sounds very charitable and very catholic, but at bottom it is very cruel. For it shakes the very foundations on which the government of God must repose. God’s law is the manifestation of God’s character; and that is no flexible thing which can be bent about at the bidding of a weak good-nature. I believe that men are right in holding that certainly God must pardon, but I believe that they are fatally wrong in not recognising this-that the only kind of forgiveness which is possible for Him to bestow is one in which there shall be no tampering with the tremendous sanctions of His awful law; and no tendency to teach that it matters little whether a man is good or bad. The pardon, which many of us seem to think is quite sufficient, is a pardon that is nothing more noble than good-natured winking at transgression. And oh! if this be all that men have to lean on, they are leaning on a broken reed. The motto on the blue cover of the Edinburgh Review, for over a hundred years now, is true: ‘The judge is condemned when the guilty is acquitted.’ David struck a fatal blow at the prestige of his own rule, when he weakly let his son off from penalty. And, if it were possible to imagine such a thing, God Himself would strike as fatal a blow at the justice and judgment which are the foundations of His throne, if His forgiveness was such as to be capable of being confounded with love which was too weakly indulgent to be righteous.
Further, if there are to be forgiveness and restoration at all, they must be such as will turn away the heart of the pardoned man from his evil. The very story before us shows that it is not every kind of pardon which makes a man better. The scapegrace Absalom came back unsoftened, without one touch of gratitude to his father in his base heart, without the least gleam of a better nature dawning upon him, and went flaunting about the court until his viciousness culminated in his unnatural rebellion. That is to say, there is a forgiveness which nourishes the seeds of the crimes that it pardons. We have only to look into our own hearts, and we have only to look at the sort of people round us, to be very sure that, unless the forgiveness that is granted us from the heavens has in it an element which will avert our wills and desires from evil, the pardon will be very soon needed again, for the evil will very soon be done again.
If there are to be forgiveness and restoration at all, they must come in such a fashion as that there shall be no doubt whatsoever of their reality and power. The vague kind of trust in a doubtful mercy, about which I have been speaking, may do all very well for people that have never probed the depths of their own hearts. Superficial notions of our sin, which so many of us have, are contented with superficial remedies for it. But let a man get a glimpse of his own real self, and I think that he will wish for something a great deal more solid to grip hold of, than nebulous talk of the kind that I have been describing. If once we feel ourselves to be struggling in the black flood of that awful river, we shall want a firmer hold upon the bank than is given to us by some rootless tree or other. We must clutch something that will stand a pull, if we are to be drawn from the muddy waters.
People say to us, ‘Oh, God will forgive, of course!’ Does this world look like a place where forgiveness is such an easy thing? Is there anything more certain than that consequences are inevitable when deeds have been done, and ‘that whatsoever a man sows that shall he also reap’ and whatsoever he brews that shall he also drink? And is it into a grim, stern world of retribution like this that people will come, with their smiling, sunny gospel of a matter-of-course forgiveness, upon very easy terms of a slight penitence?
Brethren, God has to ‘devise means,’ which is a strong way of saying, in analogy to the limitations of humanity, that He cannot, by an arbitrary act of His will, pardon a sinful man. His eternal nature forbids it. His established law forbids it. The fabric of His universe forbids it. The good of men forbids it. The problem is insoluble by human thought. The love of God is like some great river that pours its waters down its channel, and is stayed by a black dam across its course, along which it feels for any cranny through which it may pour itself. We could never save ourselves, but
‘He that might the vengeance best have took,
Found out the remedy.’
IV. And so the last word that I have to say is to note the triumphant, divine solution of these difficulties.
The work of Jesus Christ, and the work of Jesus Christ alone, meets all the requirements. It vindicates the majesty of law, it deepens the gulf between righteousness and sin. Where is there such a demonstration of the awful truth that ‘the wages of sin is death’ as on that Cross on which the Son of God died for us and for all ‘His banished ones’? Where is there such a demonstration of the fixedness of the divine law as in that death to which the Son of God submitted Himself for us all? Where do we learn the hideousness of sin, the endless antagonism between God and it, and the fatal consequences of it, as we learn them in the sacrifice of our Lord and Saviour? Where do we find the misery and desolation of banishment from God so tragically uttered as in that cry which rent the darkness of eclipse,’ My God! My God! why hast Thou forsaken Me?’
That work of Christ’s is the only way by which it is made absolutely certain that sins forgiven shall be sins abhorred; and that a man once restored shall cleave to his Restorer as to his Life. That work is the only way by which a man can be absolutely certain that there is forgiveness, in spite of all the accusations of his own conscience; in spite of all the inexorable working out of penalties in the system of the world which seems to contradict the fond belief; in spite of all that a foreboding gaze tells, or ought to tell, of a judgment that is to follow.
Brethren, God has devised a means. None else could have done so. I beseech you, realise these facts that I have been trying to bring before you, and the considerations that I have based upon them, so far as they commend themselves to your hearts and consciences; and do not be content with acquiescing in them, but act upon them. We are all exiles from God, unless we have been ‘brought nigh by the blood of Christ.’ In Him, and in Him alone, can God restore His banished ones. In Him, and in Him alone, can we find a pardon which cleanses the heart, and ensures the removal of the sin which it forgives. In Him, and in Him alone, can we find, not a peradventure, not a subjective certainty, but an external fact which proclaims that verily there is forgiveness for us all. I pray you, dear friends, do not be content with that half-truth, which is ever the most dangerous lie, of divine pardon apart from Jesus Christ. Lay your sins upon His head, and your hand in the hand of the Elder Brother, who has come to the far-off land to seek us, and He will lead you back to the Father’s house and the Father’s heart, and you will be ‘no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household of God.’
Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 Absalom's Return from Geshur
Absalom's Return from Geshur
After waiting for two years, Absalom forces Joab to use his influence to bring about a reconciliation between him and his father.
Read full note →
2. Tekoah] 6 m. S. of Bethlehem. It was the home of the prophet Amos (Amo_1:1).
7. We will destroy] She purposely makes the case appear as bad as possible. My coal] The word means a glowing piece of wood. The surviving son is compared to a spark left when the rest of the fire has gone out. The passage casts an interesting light on the informal and almost casual administration of justice. According to Hebrew custom the youth had no claim to a reprieve; on the other hand, the extinction of a family was an admitted calamity.
9. The iniquity be on me] i.e. if the king is breaking the law of God, she is willing to bear the punishment: cp. Gen_9:6.
11. Let the king', etc.] She wishes him to ratify his promise by an oath,
13. As one which is faulty] The king's merciful disposition towards the son of a stranger condemned his severity to his own son.
14. We must needs die, etc.] Life may end at any time, and when ended cannot be recalled. Hence the regret that follows harsh judgment when the offender is dead. Neither doth God, etc.] RV 'neither doth God take away life, but deviseth means, that he that is banished be not an outcast from him.' God is so far from taking away life that He is anxious that the outcast should not be lost, but should be enabled to return. It is possible that the woman was hinting at the contrast between David's treatment of Absalom and God's treatment of David: see 2Sa_12:13.
15. The people] i.e. her family. The woman still keeps to her fictitious tale.
20. To fetch about this form of speech] RV 'to change the face of the matter'; i.e. the present position of Absalom.
25. His beauty] Absalom inherited the personal beauty of his father (1Sa_16:12). The fact is also mentioned in the case of Tamar (2Sa_13:1) and of Adonijah (1Ki_1:6).
26. The king's weight] We do not know the exact weight of the king's shekel, but probably 40 shekels were roughly equivalent to an English pound. This notice is inserted to distinguish it from the sacred shekel.
27. Three sons] It would appear from 2Sa_18:18 that none of them lived to grow up.
29. Joab had risked a good deal in sending the woman of Tekoah, and he did not choose to venture a second attempt.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On vv11, 20, 24, 27 revengers Heb. goel, Redemp. (Kinsman type). (See Scofield "Isa…
revengers Heb. goel, Redemp. (Kinsman type). (See Scofield "Isa 59:20").
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 4. David and Absalom
4. David and Absalom
CHAPTER 14
Read full note →
1. Joab’s scheme (2Sa 14:1-3)
2. The woman of Tekoah before the king (2Sa 14:4-20)
3. Joab brings Absalom to Jerusalem (2Sa 14:21-24)
4. Absalom’s beauty (2Sa 14:25-27)
5. Absalom sees his father (2Sa 14:28-33)
In all these records of those sad events we hear not a word that David inquired of the Lord. Joab now appears upon the scene again and that for evil, though he did not mean to do evil to the king. He concocts a scheme by which Absalom is to be brought back into the favor of the king. This he must have tried many times before, for verses 19 and 22 indicate this. It seems almost as if Joab imitated Nathan, when he came with his message to David. But God had not sent him and David’s conscience was not touched. The wisdom he used was not the wisdom from above, but the wisdom of a cunning man. The whole story was deception and “the wise woman” of Tekoah lent herself as a willing instrument. And David finds out that it is all a plot and, blinded by a mere love for Absalom, without thinking of the claims of God in this case, he becomes a willing victim to the scheme of Joab. And so Absalom was brought back. The King commands, “Let him turn to his own house, and let him not see my face.” It was an evil hour when it happened. Absalom’s rebellion and the king’s exile were the fruit of the unscrupulous plot of Joab.
Absalom’s physical beauty was great with magnificent hair. (The statement that his hair weighed 200 shekels is undoubtedly the error of a scribe who copied the manuscript. The Hebrew letters which stand for 20 and for 200 are similar. It should no doubt be 20 shekels.) He was thus fitted to do the work of winning the people to himself and became the leader of a rebellion. The deed he had done in avenging the crime against his sister was most likely looked upon by the mass of the people as a noble and heroic deed. That behind the beautiful exterior there was a proud, violent and evil spirit may be seen in his deed, when after Joab’s refusal to come to him, he set the barley field of Joab on fire. Then a reconciliation between David and Absalom followed: “Once more we notice here the consequences of David’s fatal weakness, as manifested in his irresolution and half measures. Morally paralysed, so to speak, in consequence of his own guilt, his position sensibly and increasingly weakened in popular estimation, that series of disasters, which had formed the burden of God’s predicted judgments, now followed in the natural sequence of events. If ever before his return from Geshur Absalom had been a kind of popular hero, his presence in Jerusalem for two years in semi-banishment must have increased the general sympathy.”
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv1, 21 The Wise Woman of Tekoah
The Wise Woman of Tekoah
v. 1. Now, Joab, the son of Zeruiah, perceived that the king’s heart was toward Absalom, or, more exactly, against Absalom; David continued in his aversion to the slayer of the crown prince.
Read full note →
v. 2. And Joab, either from genuine goodness of heart or with the shrewdness which sought to get into the good graces of Absalom and the people, sent to Tekoah, some fire or six miles south of Bethlehem, and fetched thence a wise woman, one known for the readiness of her speech, for her boldness and shrewdness, and said unto her, I pray thee, feign thyself to be a mourner, and put on now mourning apparel, and anoint not thyself with oil, but be as a woman that had a long time mourned for the dead, one whose greatness of sorrow caused her to continue her mourning for a very long time;
v. 3. and come to the king and speak on this manner unto him. So Joab put the words in her mouth, giving her exact and detailed instructions concerning her behavior and speech.
v. 4. And when the woman of Tekoah, in accordance with the instructions received, spake to the king, she fell on her face to the ground and did obeisance, her great humility serving to draw the king’s attention to her, and said, Help, O king!
v. 5. And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? Her feigned distress caused him deep concern. And she answered, I am indeed a widow woman, and mine husband is dead, the double statement being intended to arouse sympathy.
v. 6. And thy handmaid had two sons, and they two strove together in the field, and there was none to part them, to act as arbitrator and deliverer between them, but the one smote the other and slew him.
v. 7. And, behold, the whole family, the entire relationship, is risen against thine handmaid, and they said, Deliver him that smote his brother that we may kill him for the life of his brother whom he slew, according to the law of blood-vengeance; and we will destroy the heir also, namely, the remaining son, whose death would make the other relatives the heirs; and so they shall quench my coal which is left, a figurative expression for the one son through whom her house could be built up, and shall not leave to my husband neither name nor remainder upon the earth. "The woman’s purpose was not only to bring out the design of the kinsmen in their blood-avenging as harshly as possible, but also, with reference to David’s hostile feeling to Absalom, to emphasize the point that the latter was the heir to David’s throne, and to save him as such from his father’s anger. "
v. 8. And the king said unto the woman, in granting her request, Go to thine house, and I will give charge concerning thee, to protect her son from the pursuing relatives.
v. 9. And the woman of Tekoah said unto the king, My lord, O king, the iniquity be on me and on my father’s house, namely, in case some wrong should be connected with the fact that the unintentional murder was not avenged, and the king and his throne be guiltless, no blame should be attached to David’s government.
v. 10. And the king said, Whosoever saith aught unto thee, bring him to me, and he shall not touch thee any more. The matter was to be adjusted so that no one would dare to annoy the woman any more.
v. 11. Then said she, pursuing the advantage she had gained till now, I pray thee, let the king remember the Lord, thy God, she pleaded with the king for his interference to the point of assuring her son’s safety by an oath, that thou wouldest not suffer the revengers of blood to destroy any more, lest they destroy my son. The destruction already wrought should not be increased. And he, David, said. As the Lord liveth, there shall not one hair of thy son fall to the earth. As her appeals grew in fervor, so his assurances in emphasis.
v. 12. Then the woman said, Let thine handmaid, I pray thee, speak one word unto my lord the king. She acted as if she had another matter to present. And he said, Say on.
v. 13. And the woman said, Wherefore, then, after voicing such sentiments as she had just obtained from him, hast thou thought such a thing against the people of God? She has some difficulty in making the application to the king’s own case, because she cannot speak openly, but may only, in passing, allude to Absalom. Her implication was that on account of the attitude of David toward Absalom at least some of the people were suffering. For the king doth speak this thing, in announcing the decision in her own case, as one which is faulty, in that the king doth not fetch home again his banished. To be just, he must apply the same mildness in the case of Absalom which he decided for in her case.
v. 14. For we, men in general, and Absalom in particular, must needs die and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again, which fate may come upon Absalom before David is aware of the fact; neither doth God respect any person, in calling him away by death at the time appointed by Him; yet doth he devise means that His banished be not expelled from Him, literally, "And not takes away God a soul but He thinks out plans not to banish a banished one"; He does not cut off the life of the sinner outright, but is merciful and changes His sentence of rejection in the case of a repentant sinner.
v. 15. Now, therefore, that I am come to speak of this thing unto my lord the king, it is because the people have made me afraid, namely, by their demand to deliver her son to the avenger of blood; and thy handmaid said, I will now speak unto the king; it may be that the king will perform the request of his handmaid. Thus she skillfully returned to her own case.
v. 16. For the king will hear to deliver his handmaid out of the hand of the man that would destroy me and my son together out of the inheritance of God. This was the point which was so awful in her sight, that of being cut off from the people of the Lord.
v. 17. Then thine handmaid said, The word of my lord the king shall now be comfortable, serve for her reassurance; for as an angel of God, the great Angel of the Covenant, so is my lord the king to discern good and bad, to hear the crying of his oppressed subjects and to come to the assistance of those who were in trouble; therefore the Lord, thy God, will be with thee.
v. 18. Then the king answered and said unto the woman, since he had drawn his own conclusions from the skill with which she presented her matter, Hide not from me, I pray thee, the thing that I shall ask thee. And the woman said, Let my lord the king now speak.
v. 19. And the king said, Is not the hand of Joab with thee in all this? The entire manner in which the case had been presented and handled reminded him of his general. And the woman answered and said, with a sincere acknowledgment of the king’s sagacity, As thy soul liveth, my lord the king, none can turn to the right hand or to the left from aught that my lord the king hath spoken, David, according to her praise, always hit the nail on the head; for thy servant Joab, he bade me, and he put all these words in the mouth of thine handmaid.
v. 20. To fetch about this form of speech, literally, "to turn about entirely the face of this matter," to change the relation then obtaining between David and Absalom, to bring about a reconciliation, hath thy servant Joab done this thing; and my lord is wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to know all things that are in the earth. The woman certainly made use of fine tact and wisdom. It is a noble thing to act as advocate for another and to intercede where this will bring about better relations. Where such sagacity succeeds in convincing others, it is well-pleasing to God.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1, 4, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, 18, 21, 23, 25, 28, 30, 32 This word is used here to mark a break…
Now
This word is used here to mark a break in the main story line. Here the author tells about a new person in the story.
Read full note →
Zeruiah
See how you translated this man's name in 2 Samuel 2:13.
perceived
This means Joab discerned or understood what David was thinking.
sent word to Tekoa and had a wise woman brought
This means that Joab sent someone with a message to Tekoa and had him bring back a woman to him. This can be written in active form. AT: "sent someone with a message to Tokoa and had him bring a wise woman back" (See: Metonymy and Active or Passive)
Tekoa
This is the name of a place. (See: How to Translate Names)
the dead
This refers to someone who has died, not dead people in general. AT: "someone who has died" (See: Nominal Adjectives)
translationWords
Joab
Absalom
king
heart
send
word
wise
mourn
anoint
oil
die
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 On vv2, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 26, 27, 29, 33 14:2 The woman with a reputation for great wisdom…
14:2 The woman with a reputation for great wisdom was summoned to carry out a delicate mission in the royal court (cp. 20:16).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.