Now there was long war between Saul’s house and David’s house. David grew stronger and stronger, but Saul’s house grew weaker and weaker.
Parallel Translations
-
Now there was long war between Saul’s house and David’s house. David grew stronger and stronger, but Saul’s house grew weaker and weaker.
-
Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: but David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.
-
Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David; and David waxed stronger and stronger, but the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.
Cross-references (17)
Passages linked to 2 Samuel 3:1 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- 1 Kings 14:30 There was war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually.
- 2 Samuel 2:17 The battle was very severe that day; and Abner was beaten, and the men of Israel, before David’s servants.
- Job 8:7 Though your beginning was small, yet your latter end would greatly increase.
- Proverbs 4:18-19 But the path of the righteous is like the dawning light that shines more and more until the perfect day. The way of the wicked is like darkness. They don’t know what they stumble over.
- Job 17:9 Yet the righteous will hold to his way. He who has clean hands will grow stronger and stronger.
- Psalms 84:7 They go from strength to strength. Every one of them appears before God in Zion.
- Ephesians 6:12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world’s rulers of the darkness of this age, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.
- 1 Kings 15:16 There was war between Asa and Baasha king of Israel all their days.
- 1 Kings 15:32 There was war between Asa and Baasha king of Israel all their days.
- Esther 6:13 Haman recounted to Zeresh his wife and all his friends everything that had happened to him. Then his wise men and Zeresh his wife said to him, “If Mordecai, before whom you have begun to fall, is of Jewish descent, you will not prevail against him, but you will surely fall before him.”
- Matthew 10:35-36 For I came to set a man at odds against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s foes will be those of his own household.
- Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, that you may not do the things that you desire.
- Genesis 3:15 I will put hostility between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel.”
- Psalms 45:3-5 Strap your sword on your thigh, mighty one: your splendor and your majesty. In your majesty ride on victoriously on behalf of truth, humility, and righteousness. Let your right hand display awesome deeds. Your arrows are sharp. The nations fall under you, with arrows in the heart of the king’s enemies.
- Daniel 2:34-35 You saw until a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet that were of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were broken in pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors. The wind carried them away, so that no place was found for them. The stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
- Daniel 2:44-45 “In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, nor will its sovereignty be left to another people; but it will break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it will stand forever. Because you saw that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God has made known to the king what will happen hereafter. The dream is certain, and its interpretation sure.”
- Revelation 6:2 And behold, a white horse, and he who sat on it had a bow. A crown was given to him, and he came out conquering, and to conquer.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (22 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain That is, without intermission enduring two years, which was…
That is, without intermission enduring two years, which was the whole reign of Ishbosheth.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 2Sa 3:1 Now there was long war between the…
2Sa 3:1 Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: but David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.
Ver. 1. Now there was long war.] Continuo iteratis proeliis: there was constant opposition, and continual skirmishing: so there is still betwixt Christ and Antichrist, betwixt the spirit and the flesh: and these will be bickering, whilst the world shall be standing.
Read full note →
And the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.] So do and shall do daily the eastern and western Antichrist. That stone cut out of the mountains without hands, shall bring down those golden images with a powder.
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 Long war; for five years longer; for it is…
Long war; for five years longer; for it is probable that Ish-bosheth was made king presently upon Saul’s death, to give them countenance for their rebellion against David; and the other tribes did not submit to David before seven years were expired.
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 Here is, I. The struggle that David had with…
Here is, I. The struggle that David had with the house of Saul before his settlement in the throne was completed, Sa2 3:1. 1. Both sides contested. Saul's house, though beheaded and diminished, would not fall tamely. It is not strange between them, but one would wonder it should be a long war, when David's house had right on its side, and therefore God on its side; but, though truth and equity will triumph at last, God made for wise and holy ends prolonged the conflict. The length of this war tried the faith and patience of David, and made his establishment at last the more welcome to him. 2. David's side got ground. The house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker, lost places, lost men, sunk in its reputation, grew less considerable, and was foiled in every engagement. But the house of David grew stronger and stronger. Many deserted the declining cause of Saul's house, and prudently came into David's interest, being convinced that he would certainly win the day. The contest between grace and corruption in the hearts of believers, who are sanctified but in part, may fitly be compared to this recorded here. There is a long war between them, the flesh lusted against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh; but, as the work of sanctification is carried on, corruption, like the house of Saul, grows weaker and weaker; while grace, like the house of David, grows stronger and stronger, till it come to a perfect man, and judgment be brought forth unto victory.
II. The increase of his own house. Here is an account of six sons he had by six several wives, in the seven years he reigned in Hebron. Perhaps this is here mentioned as that which strengthened David's interest. Every child, whose welfare was embarked in the common safety, was a fresh security given to the commonwealth for his care of it. He that has his quiver filled with these arrows shall speak with his enemy in the gate, Psa 127:5. As the death of Saul's sons weakened his interest, so the birth of David's strengthened his. 1. It was David's fault thus to multiply wives, contrary to the law (Deu 17:17), and it was a bad example to his successors. 2. It does not appear that in these seven years he had above one son by each of these wives; some have had as numerous a progeny, and with much more honour and comfort, by one wife. 3. We read not that any of these sons came to be famous (three of them were infamous, Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah); we have therefore reason to rejoice with trembling in the building up of our families. 4. His son by Abigail is called Chileab (Sa2 3:3), whereas (Ch1 3:1) he is called Daniel. Bishop Patrick mentions the reason which the Hebrew doctors give for these names, that his first name was Daniel - God has judged me (namely, against Nabal), but David's enemies reproached him, and said, "It is Nabal's son, and not David's," to confute which calumny Providence so ordered it that, as he grew up, he became, in his countenance and features, extremely like David, and resembled him more than any of his children, upon which he gave him the name of Chileab, which signifies, like his father, or the father's picture. 5. Absalom's mother is said to be the daughter of Talmai king of Geshur, a heathen prince. Perhaps David thereby hoped to strengthen his interest, but the issue of the marriage was one that proved his grief and shame. 6. The last is called David's wife, which therefore, some think, was Michal, his first and most rightful wife, called here by another name; and, though she had no child after she mocked David, she might have had before.
Read full note →
Thus was David's house strengthened; but it was Abner that made himself strong for the house of Saul, which is mentioned (Sa2 3:6) to show that, if he failed them, they would fall of course.
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 Now there was a long war between the house…
Now there was a long war between the house of Saul and the house of David,.... The recent battle, though so much in favour of David, did not, put an end to the war between him and Ishbosheth, which lasted five years longer; for it was when Ishbosheth had reigned two years that that battle was fought, and he reigned five years longer; for not till his death, and when David had reigned above seven years in Hebron, was he made king over all Israel; and during this time peace was not made, but the war carried on; though perhaps not in pitched battles, of which we no more read, but in skirmishes:
but David waxed stronger and stronger; he having the advantage in all such skirmishes, and persons continually coming over to his side from the several tribes:
Read full note →
and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker: being always worsted whenever they skirmished with David's men, and by continual revolts from them. This is reckoned an emblem of the kingdoms of Christ and antichrist, the one increasing more and more, as it has and will do, and the other decreasing, and before long will be consumed; and of the two parties in a regenerate man, grace and indwelling sin, the one as to its exercise growing stronger and stronger, and the other as to its influence on the outward conversation weaker and weaker.
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 David's success and sons, ver. 1-5. Abner's quarrel with…
David's success and sons, ver. 1-5. Abner's quarrel with Isbosheth, ver. 6-11. His treaty with David, ver. 12-16. He undertakes to bring Israel over to David, ver. 17-21. Joab murders Abner, ver. 22-27. David's concern and mourning over him, ver. 28-39.
Long war - For five years longer: for it is probable, Isbosheth was made king presently upon Saul's death; and the other tribes did not submit to David before seven years were expired.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Account of the children born to David in Hebron,…
CHAPTER III
Account of the children born to David in Hebron, 1-5.
Read full note →
Abner being accused by Ish-bosheth of familiarities with
Rizpah, Saul's concubine, he is enraged; offers his services
to David; goes to Hebron, and makes a league with him, 6-22.
Joab, through enmity to Abner, pretends to David that he came
as a spy, and should not be permitted to return, 23-25.
He follows Abner, and treacherously slays him, 26, 27.
David hearing of it is greatly incensed against Joab, and
pronounces a curse upon him and upon his family, 28, 29.
He commands a general mourning for Abner, and himself follows
the bier weeping, 30-32.
David's lamentation over Abner, 33, 34.
The people solicit David to take meat; but he fasts the whole
day, and complains to them of the insolence and intrigues of
Joab and his brothers: the people are pleased with his
conduct, 35-39.
NOTES ON CHAP. III
Verse 1. There was long war] Frequent battles and skirmishes took place between the followers of David and the followers of Ish-bosheth, after the two years mentioned above, to the end of the fifth year, in which Ish-bosheth was slain by Rechab and Baanah.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain 2Sa 3:1. There was long war — For five…
2Sa 3:1. There was long war — For five years longer: for it is probable Ish-bosheth was made king immediately upon Saul’s death; and the other tribes did not submit to David before seven years were expired. Between the house of Saul and the house of David — Their enmity continuing throughout the whole reign of Ish-bosheth. It is probable there were many skirmishes between Israel and Judah; but we do not read of any pitched battle.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain War, the particulars of which are not given. (Calmet)…
War, the particulars of which are not given. (Calmet) --- But David’s power continually increased, and he was blessed with many children. (Haydock) --- "Legions and fleets are not such strong bulwarks of the throne, as a numerous family." (Tacitus, Hist. v.)
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).
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain CONTINUED WAR BETWEEN THE HOUSE OF SAUL AND THAT…
CONTINUED WAR BETWEEN THE HOUSE OF SAUL AND THAT OF DAVID, 2Sa_3:1-6.
1. Long war — A struggle and bitter hostility continued for two years or more. See note on 2Sa_2:10.
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 Ch. 2Sa_3:1-5. Progress of David’s cause. His family
Ch. 2Sa_3:1-5. Progress of David’s cause. His family
2. And unto David, &c.] The list of David’s sons born in Hebron is given again in 1Ch_3:1-3, apparently in an independent form, but with only one important variation. It appears to interrupt the course of the narrative here, but it is quite in accordance with the usual practice of O.T. historians to insert information about the family of a king at critical points in the history of his reign, and moreover it is in place here as a practical evidence of the strengthening of David’s house. Cp. 1Sa_14:49-51; 2Sa_5:13-16.
Read full note →
Amnon] Infamous for the sin which cost him his life, and indirectly proved the source of shame and calamity to his family and nation. See on ch. 13.
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 (1) There was long war.—Not actual fighting of pitched…
(1) There was long war.—Not actual fighting of pitched battles, but a state of hostility, in which Ish-bosheth and David each claimed the allegiance of the whole nation, and this continued until the death of Ish-bosheth. During this time Ish-bosheth was too weak to carry on actual war, and David was content to abide the fulfilment of the promises of the Lord in His own good time.
Waxed stronger.—Time was working in David’s favour, partly, doubtless, on account of Ish-bosheth’s manifest incompetence, partly from a growing appreciation of the character and prowess of David, and a fuller realisation that he was the divinely appointed sovereign. In 1Ch_12:19-22 there is an account of an important accession to David from the tribe of Manasseh on the eve of Saul’s last battle, and a further mention of continued accessions to him “day by day.” As the necessary result of this constant transference of strength to David, “the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.”
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 There was long war. As Ishbosheth reigned only two…
There was long war. As Ishbosheth reigned only two years, and as "the house of Saul" is the phrase used, it seems probable that after Ishbosheth"s murder, during the five years before David"s election to the throne of all Israel, the house of Saul had some puppet representative at Mahanaim, and some commander in Abner"s place. But after the death of this able man matters would go from bad to worse, and, though David probably remained on the defensive, yet the contrast between the peace and good government of Judah and the misery in Israel made all the tribes wish to put an end to a harassing civil war. It is plain, too, that the Philistines, repelled at first by Abner"s skill, had again gained the ascendant, and regarded themselves so completely as the rulers of the country, that they resented immediately with summary violence the bold act of the northern tribes in choosing David to be their common king.
HOMILETICS.
Read full note →
Vers. 1-11.
Rival interests.
The facts are:
1. A desultory war is carried on between the house of Saul and the house of David, in which the latter has the advantage.
2. David has six sons born to him while at Hebron.
3. A quarrel arises between Abner and Ishbosheth, consequent on an accusation resented by Abner.
4. Abner charges his master with ingratitude, and threatens to transfer his allegiance to David.
5. In seeking to give emphasis to his threat, Abner indicates his knowledge of the Divine will concerning David. The object of the historian in vers. 1-5 is obviously to give a representation, from a political point of view, of David prior to the action of Abner in his favour; and in vers. 6-11 to state the circumstance that led to a transfer of Abner"s support from one side to the other. The general effect of the war between the two royal houses and the growth of David"s domestic establishment are the two prominent items of the situation prior to Abner"s change of policy. Judged solely by the standard of the age, they pointed in the direction of advancing influence, but looked at in the light of a higher standard they suggest a qualified prosperity. The general truths embodied in this account of rival interests may be set forth as follows.
I DEFENSIVE ACTION IN A JUST CAUSE IS SOMETIMES THE BEST POLICY. That the cause of David was just is evident to every believer in the truth of the First Book of Samuel, and, as seen there and in the Psalms, the conviction of this governed his conduct. From a purely human point of view it might seem contrary to natural justice to set aside the son of the late king; and the effort of Ishbosheth to urge, by force of arms, his own claim may be a natural sequence of thought and feeling. But kings have no rights apart from the will of God; and, as the sequel shows (ver. 10), both the young king and his general were not unacquainted with the Divine purpose. The right being with David, it might seem strange that he did not press his claim to entire dominion by aggressive war. His skill and valour, the coherence of his following, and the enthusiasm created by his personality, to say nothing of the demoralizing effect on Abner of his own infidelity to conscience, could not but have speedily made him master of all Israel. Instead of that, we find David simply authorizing such conflict as would suffice to hold his own and check the aggressive efforts of the house of Saul. It is interesting to see here the same David as of old, who had such faith in God and the gradual unfolding of his purposes that he would never raise a hand against Saul, or do anything, except in necessary self-defence, that could be construed into hostility. Had not Abner"s evil counsels prevailed with Ishbosheth, David would have lived in peace at Hebron till a mightier hand than his own cleared the way to the throne of a united people. Statesmen would do well to take such an example in many of the painful contingencies that arise. To a just man it is half the victory to be calm and strong in the conviction of his rectitude and the righteousness of his position. There is a watchful Providence cherishing the good and frustrating the evil. Forces under the direction of an evil genius are sure to wear themselves out if only the objects of their hate can hold their own; and the wasting of their strength means the final triumph of the cause of truth and justice. There are seasons in Church life when this policy of pure defence is wise; for at such times God has ends to effect which work in with the scope of more aggressive endeavours.
II A RIGHT CONTENTION WILL COME TO A NIGHT ISSUE. "David waxed stronger and stronger." Of course he did. It could not but be so, for he was a chosen servant, not seeking or doing his own will, but simply placing his life in the hands of God, to work out for his people and for future ages, purposes the precise nature of which he could not understand. No weapon formed against him could prosper. He who contended against him fought against God. The forces of nature were on his side. Never did mortal more vainly contend against late than did Ishbosheth contend against David. The principle involved in this instance is of wide range. Right is sure to prevail in the issue. The disturbing element introduced by sin into the universe causes strife of the most grave character. The whole line of Divine government, so far as we can trace it, seems to be a line of conflict between right and wrong, holiness and sin. The antagonism taken up in Eden runs on and becomes more acute on Calvary, and is apparent now in a "long war" between the children of light and the kingdom of darkness. Time is in favour of righteousness. There is an endurance in truth which cannot be affirmed of error. As perhaps the friends of David thought those years of war very tedious and dispiriting, and sometimes even inconsistent with rightness of claim and purpose, so we may be weary in the greater strife and become disturbed by cruel questionings; yet the issue is sure. "Stronger and stronger" may be affirmed of the kingdom of righteousness on earth. For even the seeming failures and delays only become, in the hands of Providence, the means of acquiring the hardier and more enduring virtues by which at last the final victory shall be won. The same is true of any conflicts in which character is at stake. Our "righteousness shall be brought forth as the light," and our "judgment as the noonday." The parallel may be seen also in the conflict of the "old" End the "new man." The one is on the way to perish; the other is "renewed day by day.
III THE UNEXPRESSED WOES OF LIFE ARE VERY REAL. "There was long war." The sentence is brief, and understandable by a child. It is repeated with careless ease. As a rule, it connotes to the ordinary reader only a general idea of men seeking to slay one another. But to read history aright we ought to bring the faculty of imagination into full play; and it is only as we exercise the historic imagination that we get a glimpse of the sad facts embodied in this simple form of expression. Subjected to the vitalizing power of this faculty, what unexpressed woes rise up to view! What harsh and fierce dispositions! What weary marchings and watchings! What murderous blows and bleeding wounds and agonizing deaths! What widows" wailings and orphans" tears! What losses to homes and nation of strong men and productive toil! This, which applies to the brief statement of the sacred narrative, is equally true of greater woes. Men read of great battles very much as they read algebraic symbols. The real items indicated are not vivid to the mind. Men read also of the banishment of the wicked to outer darkness in the same mechanical way. The hurry of life leaves no time for the imagination to lay hold of the actual facts connoted. Hence the power over the will of mere visible, present realities. Hence the difficulty of getting the "powers of the world to come" to influence motive. Hence, also, the necessity of each man making an effort to bring his mind into actual view of the facts covered by language, and of the preacher and teacher rendering the aid of well-chosen speech to further this effort.
IV CONVENTIONAL STRENGTH MAY BE AN OCCASION OF MORAL WEAKNESS. The historian tells us of the growth of David"s domestic establishment at Hebron. Estimated by the customs prevalent in the East at that time, this acquisition by David of wives and sons was supposed to add to the splendour and stateliness of his regal position. All the paraphernalia of a court, the wide-reaching influence of family connections, and the imposing show of a large household would lead ordinary men to regard him as among the great ones of the earth. The accidental surroundings of life form a delusively important part of what is deemed to be human greatness. We are all children in so far as we are influenced in our judgments on social position and weight of character by the circumstantials of life. Even the more educated are prone to either identify or associate greatness with large establishments. This kind of conventionalism plays an important part in human affairs; but it is not God"s standard. David"s polygamous habits were consistent with the conventional morality of the age, and his domestic establishment projected his public position before the eye of the people in a form accordant to princely fashion; but we know that beneath all the signs of wealth and greatness there were influences at work which could not but weaken his moral three and mar the beauty and sweetness of his private life. Oriental splendour and conventional moralities were indulged in at great moral cost. David in Hebron with many wives and their accompaniments could not be as morally robust as was David in earlier days. The same danger attends all who conform to customs not based on strict principles of purity and godliness. Fashion cannot make righteousness. Goodness may live amidst habits essentially alien to the welfare of the individual and to saints, as surely as life may continue in an atmosphere charged with malarious poisons; but the enervation of the one will be as certain as of the other. The insensibility of the man to the subtle action of the evil is only an aggravation of its action and in no wise a palliation. Modern Christians should severely scrutinize the moral quality of the circumstances and habits in which conventional usage allows them to live. This can only be done by making use of tests absolutely given by God apart from the colouring which custom is apt to give even to Divine laws.
V UNRIGHTEOUS MEN PAY HOMAGE TO RIGHTEOUSNESS. There can be no question but that Ishbosheth knew well the nature and validity of David"s claims; for the theocratic rule was a reality in Israel during and subsequent to the life of Samuel. It was, therefore, wrong for him to put forth any personal claim of his own. Jonathan"s example had been lost upon him; and yet this man recognized the evil done by Abner in lustful indulgence, and even ventured to protest against it. On the other hand, Abner, while being unrighteous enough to indulge in sinful lust and to abet the invalid claim of Ishbosheth, nevertheless is fired with indignation that the love of gratitude should have been violated by the young monarch. Thus men, pursuing a course which they know to be contrary to the will of God, become, when personal and family matters are involved, zealous, each in his own fashion, for what is right and proper. Truly, man is a strange compound of moral light and darkness. The psychological explanation is a study. It is the habituation to the wrong which renders men so dull to appeals, so insensible to the real demerit of their actions, and it is the latent force of conscience which saves them from being parties to a course on which they have not taken the initial step. Hence our Lord"s reference to the "gnat" and the "camel." The prevalence of this state of moral confusion is very wide even in Christian society. In the same individual may be found great sensitiveness and great obtuseness. The holding of slaves and gain by the sale of them has coexisted with a profound regard for religious worship. Licentious men have had a dread of dishonesty. Multitudes who rob God of the love and obedience due to him are indignant if an ordinary business debt is not paid. The Pharisees could conspire to kill Jesus Christ, and yet feel very unhappy if they omitted any of the ceremonials of religion. It is a common thing for men and women to indulge in envy, jealousy, and ill will, while extremely careful to keep up an external conduct conformable to the requirements of the Decalogue. There is much scope for searching of heart on this subject; and in dealing with it the preacher needs to exercise great discrimination and delicacy of reference. Abner must be made to see himself as Ishbosheth sees him, and vice versa. "Man, know thyself," is a maxim of immense importance to every one.
VI PASSING EVENTS MAY SERVE TO UNVEIL THE WORKINGS OF CONSCIENCE. Viewed from a distance by the people, Abner seemed to be a man who all along was conscientiously and faithfully subordinating his life to the maintenance of a just cause. So far as we can see from the narrative, he had been reticent concerning the mental processes of which he was daily conscious. But the incident of Ishbosheth"s accusation of immorality was as the removing of a veil whereby the actual thoughts of Abner stood revealed. "So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the Lord hath sworn to David, even so I do to him." Thus Abner had known all along that it was God"s will to give the kingdom to David. The ideas and compunctions connected with this central fact had evidently been covered up and suppressed. The real inner life of struggle against right and God was now exposed by his own act. In the case of every man there is always an inner life necessarily hidden by himself from ordinary view. It is a necessity of social existence that each man should be more unknown than known to his fellows. Only where there is perfect holiness would perfect knowledge of others be helpful to love and confidence. But in the case of men pursuing a deliberate course which seems to others to be conscientious, but is known to themselves to be contrary to right, there is a rigid and designed concealment of their self-condemnation. They gain the reputation of being upright, though perhaps misguided, men, while their own conscience gives the lie to this public judgment. An incidental reference, an unguarded hasty admission of fact, an effort to justify an action, may be as a sudden rent in the covering of the real life within, exposing to the view of others a guilty violation of truth, a perpetual conflict against the well-ascertained will of God. This frequent concealment of aft inner guilty life and its possible unveiling by incidental events should be a guide in forming an estimate of conduct, and a warning to evil doers. The self-exposure, also, however incidental, is to be taken as a preintimation of the final exposure when God shall bring hidden things into judgment.
HOMILIES BY B. DALE. Vers. 1-5. (HEBRON.)
The house of David.
1. The theocracy had its chief support in David and his house. On him alsorested the Messianic hope. (2Sa_7:13) Hence the importance which attaches to events of his life that would otherwise have been left unrecorded.
2. "The summary narrative of these seven years presents the still youthfulking in a very lovable light. The same temper which had marked his first acts after Saul"s death is here strikingly brought out. He seems to have left the conduct of the war altogether with Joab, as if he shrank from striking a single blow for his own advancement. When he does interfere, it is on the side of peace, to curb and chastise ferocious vengeance and dastardly assassination. The incidents recorded all go to make up a picture of rare generosity, of patient waiting for God to fulfil his purposes, of longing that the miserable strife between the tribes of God"s inheritance should end" (A. Maclaren).
3. In the house of David, at war with the house of Saul, we see anembodiment of the great conflict between good and evil; a representation of "the household of faith" as opposed to the world, and the spirit as opposed to the flesh. (Gal_5:17) Notice
I ITS PROTRACTED ANTAGONISM. "And there was long war, etc. It:
1. Is rendered necessary by the opposite nature and aims of the contendingparties. "These are contrary the one to the other.
2. Implies a state of constant warfare, and involves many a painful Struggle."what grievous tales of distress are folded up in these brief words!
3. Is permitted by God for wise and beneficent purposes: to test theprinciples of his servants; to exercise their faith and patience; to strengthen, purify, and perfect their character.
4. And must go on to the end. "This is a battle, from which, as it ends onlywith life, there is no escape; and he who fights not in it is of necessity either taken captive or slain" (Scupoli).
II ITS INCREASING STRENGTH. "David waxed stronger and stronger," in the number of his followers, the amount of his resources, the unity and vigour of their employment, the stability of his position, the extent of his influence, the assurance of his success. And all who "strive against sin" within and without also "go from strength to strength:
1. In patiently waiting upon God and faithfully doing his will. "Wait on theLord, be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart". (Psa_27:14)
2. By the bestowment of his grace and the cooperation of his providence, directing, protecting, and prospering them, in accordance with his promises. Their strength is not self-derived, but "cometh from the Lord." "And he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God," etc.; (Zec_12:8) "Greater is he that is in you than he that is in the world"; (1Jn_4:4) "I have all strength in him that giveth me power". (Php_4:13)
3. And thereby they show that God is with them, and that his righteouspurposes concerning them will be accomplished.
III ITS DECLINING OPPONENTS. "And the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker," relatively and proportionately to the growth of David"s, and in consequence of the protracted antagonism and increasing strength of the latter.
1. In wilful separation from God, and seeking their own selfish ends in opposition to his will. (see 2Sa_2:8-12) Those who fall away from God fall into self-division and self-contention (ver. 8); "and a house divided against itself cannot stand.
2. By the immovable might of God against whom they set themselves, (Psa_2:4) and his wrath, which is "revealed from heaven against all ungodliness," etc.. (Rom_1:18) They are like a wave that dashes against a rock and is broken and scattered in foam. "The face of the Lord is against them that do evil". (1Pe_3:12)
3. And thereby they prove that God is against them, and are taught thattheir purposes will assuredly fail and they themselves be overthrown. From the time of his defeat, (2Sa_2:17) if not from the very first, Abner probably felt that the cause in which he had embarked was hopeless. "He recognized now most distinctly in David the rising star in Israel; and, however haughtily his words might sound, he only sought to conceal behind them his despair of Ishbosheth" (Krummacher).
IV ITS PERILOUS RELATIONSHIPS. (Vers. 2-5.) "The increasing political strength of David was shown, as usual among Eastern monarchs, by the fresh alliances through marriage into which he now entered" (Edersheim). In addition to his three wives, Michal, Ahinoam (mother of Amnon), and Abigail (mother of Chileab, who appears to have died early), he had "Maacah the daughter of Talmai king of Geshur" (mother of Absalom and Tamar), Haggith (mother of Adonijah), Abital, and Eglah; and he afterwards still further enlarged the royal household. (2Sa 4:13-16) "None of his sons here mentioned were eminent for virtue, and some of them were notorious for their sins." Polygamy was tolerated by the Law of Moses, (1Sa_1:2) although the king was forbidden (Deu_17:17) to "multiply wives to himself;" and it was practised by David in conformity with ancient and prevalent custom, from political considerations and natural inclinations, without reproof (ch. 12:8); but (as his subsequent history shows) it fostered in him a sensual tendency, undermined his moral strength, and produced innumerable enmities and other evils in his family: "One deadly element of future woe mingled itself with the establishment of the kingdom of David he brought into his family the curse of the harem. An utter lack of discipline was one of its first fruits; and it brought yet deeper ill even than that; for it poisoned all the springs of family life, and tainted it with ever-recurring impurity; working in him and all around him its universal fruits of impurity, jealousy, hatred, incest, and blood" ("Heroes of Hebrews Hist."). "It was the immemorial custom in all those countries for the magnificence and power of a ruler to display itself in the multiplication of his establishment, that is, of his wives; forevery wife involved a separate establishment. It shows the utmost depravity when Christians seek to shelter their own unjust and shameless lives under an appeal to that of David, and that, too, although none of their other proceedings show the smallest trace of David"s noble spirit, and although they are by no means ready to bear as David did the consequences of their shame" (Ewald). "If we want exemplifications of all the miseries and curses which spring from the mixture of families and the degradation of woman in the court and country where polygamy exists, David"s history supplies them. No maxims of morality can be half so effectual as a faithful record of terrible effects like these" (Maurice). In view of these effects we learn that no strength or prosperity can be lasting where "the friendship of the world is cherished, and "the lusts of the flesh are suffered to prevail; and that victory over some opponents may be followed by defeat by other more subtle and dangerous foes. 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 Now there was long war between the house of…
2Sa_3:1-39
Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David.
Read full note →
Progress and termination of the civil war
What grief tales of distress are folded up in these brief words, There was long war! Probably it was only irregular war, without much bloodshed; the war of skirmish and surprise, not of pitched battles, or protracted sieges, or desperate assaults; but many a pillaged town, and many a homestead laid in ashes, and many a heart crushed to despair or maddened to fury, and many a deep and deadly curse, and many a fiendish vow of vengeance, would everywhere follow the track of war. And it was war of the most distressing and demoralising kind--not foreign but civil. Great national wars are usually attended by one counteracting benefit--they soften the keenness of private quarrels. But when parties in the same nation arc fighting with each other, as the tribes of Israel now were, private quarrels, instead of being healed, are only exasperated to greater bitterness.
1. Before the remarkable change of policy on the part of Abner that led to the termination of the war is recorded, a glimpse is given us of the domestic life of King David (2Sa_3:2-5); and whether it be by design or not, there immediately follows (2Sa_3:6-11) a specimen and illustration of the kind of evils to which that mode of life was liable to give rise. Though polygamy was not allowed to David, it certainly was winked at; it was not imputed to him as guilt; it was not treated as an act of rebellion against Gods law. But, on the other hand, this toleration of polygamy did not and could not prevent the evils to which, from its very nature, it gives rise. There could be no unity in Davids family, none of that delightful feeling of oneness, which gives such a charm to the home. In his own breast, that sense of delicacy, that feeling of chastity, which has such a purifying influence in a family, could scarcely flourish. And further, as the absence of delicacy must have been characteristic of David, so was it also of his children; the unbridled passions of some of his sons gave rise to the most dismal tragedies; and left blots on their name that even time could never wash out.
2. It is immediately after this glimpse of Davids domestic life that we come upon a sample of the kind of evils to which that mode of life commonly gives rise. Saul, too, had his harem; and it seems to have been a rule of succession in the East, that the harem went with the throne; hence to take possession of the one was regarded as setting up a claim to the other. When, therefore, Ishbosheth heard that Abner had taken one of his fathers concubines he seems to have regarded that circumstance as a proof that Abner was setting up a claim to the kingdom for himself. Mistaking the semblance of power for the reality--forgetting that Ishbosheth had but the one, and Abner the other, Ishbosheth denounced the conduct of Abner with great bluntness and rudeness; and gave him such mortal offence that Abner abruptly and peremptorily assured him that he would not strike another blow in his service, but would at once go over to David. The loss of Abner was to Ishbosheth the loss of all. His cause had for some time been a losing one; it was now quite destroyed.
3. The next step in the narrative brings us to Abners proposal to David, to make a league with him for the undisputed possession of the throne. As a preliminary to any further arrangements, David insisted, first of all, that his wife Michael, the daughter of Saul, should be restored to him. Some have pronounced this a harsh condition, especially considering that Michal was now living as the wife of another person, who appears to have been much attached to her, and most unwilling to surrender her. It is undoubted, however, that Michal was not the wife of Phaltiel, but the wife of David; Phaltiel must have known that she was another mans wife when he received her; and it is misplaced compassion to be sorry for a man when called to surrender what he never had a right to take. It may be asked, however, what could have been Davids motive for demanding back Michal, when he had so many wives without her? It might be enough to say in reply that Michal was his wedded wife, and that it would have been disgraceful to David, when he could prevent it, to allow his wife to live in adultery with another. Of all Davids wives, Michal, as the daughter of a king like Saul, was the first in worldly rank; David, therefore, wished to recover her; probably also, he thought, that by having her again for his wife there would be a bond of union between the two royal families of the kingdom that might draw the people together, and save the further shedding of blood. Another consideration appears also to have influenced him. In demanding back Michal he makes special mention of the dowry he had given for her--a hundred foreskins of the Philistines. In mentioning this he probably desired to revive among the people the remembrance of his ancient services and exploits against these inveterate enemies of his country and religion. His recent alliance with the Philistines had brought him into suspicion; he wished to remind his people, therefore, of his ancient bearing towards these enemies, and to encourage the expectation of similar deeds of successful warfare.
4. When the preliminaries between Abner and David were settled Abner appears to have exerted himself with real sincerity and zeal in behalf of David. Most probably he was not sorry for the occasion of his breach with Ishbosheth; Davids was obviously the rising star; probably tie was watching an opportunity to transfer his allegiance from the one to the other. Abner now became as zealous for David as formerly he had been for Ishbosheth; and in holding communication with the elders of Israel and of Benjamin, and urging them very strongly to submit to David, he did him a service which no other living man could then have rendered. The tender heart of the shepherd king was doubtless inexpressibly grieved at the continuance of the war; he would have welcomed with unbounded delight any honourable arrangement that would have prevented further bloodshed; and when Abner was seen using his great influence with the leaders of the tribes in the cause of peace, he must have appeared to David like a very angel of God. When, therefore, at the most critical moment in these negotiations, the impetuous and vindictive Joab thrust his sword through Abners heart--when, to the revolting ferocity of the deed itself, and its glaring outrage on the laws of hospitality, he added the crime of placing in jeopardy a most delicate national negotiation, and exasperating those whom it was most desired to conciliate, Davids mortification must have been unbounded. (W. G. Blaikie, M. A.)
Perpetual war
I. Warring interests.
1. Sauls interests were natural--they were carnal--they were worldly--they were selfish. Davids interests, on the contrary, were Of God--they were spiritual--they were under Gods sovereign direction--they were Divine. Just such is the distinction between the Church of God and the world. What is the result? Why, just warring, jarring, contending interests; for one is in the interest of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the other in the interest of the devil. Sauls house, the carnal, selfish, worldly multitude are all under the influence of the Prince of Darkness, the prince of the power of the air, who rules in the hearts of the children of disobedience; they are all under the sway of their carnal inclinations and affections, and the men of the world ought not to be offended for being told by us what their own consciences must admit to be the fact. On the contrary, the army of David associates with the beloved soldiers of the cross; they are the ransomed of the Lord; they take this blessed book as their guide; the word of command of the Captain of their salvation is imperative, and they call on high for grace, implicity to regard and obey it. The result is that Satans interests arc bolstered up by the former, and real Christianity is maintained by the latter.
2. Let us now take another view of the difference which subsists between the house of Saul and the house of David--I mean an experimental view. And what will you say when I declare unto you that there are both the house of Saul and the house of David in your own hearts--that there are both the house of Saul and the house of David inhabiting this body of flesh and blood--that there are all the vile corruptions and carnal inclinations of the house of Saul; but, blessed be God, there are also the especial graces, and the spiritual implantations of the house of David--an old and new nature--a propensity to every evil, as was the case with Saul, but a panting after every good, as was the case with David.
3. Observe, they are so contrary, so opposed to each other, that they are altogether irreconcilable, and it is quite in vain, therefore, to attempt a reconciliation. He that is born after the flesh will persecute him that is born after the Spirit. What fellowship can light have with darkness? What communion can Christ have with Belial? What oneness, or intimacy, can subsist between him who is a believer and him who is an infidel?
II. The advancing power of the conquering side. David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.
1. The first feature of Davids prosperity lay in this, that his fame and his prowess were advancing and increasing, and his power extending. So with our glorious Lord, Davids antitype; His kingdom is growing and extending, prospering and thriving, His name is exalted, and shall be exalted, and all His household.
2. But what constituted Davids waxing stronger and stronger in the most conspicuous point of view, was the accessions which were constantly being made to his kingdom, and all of which were so many instances, not merely of the increase of his own strength, but of the diminution of the kingdom and power of Saul. The very way in which oar glorious David advances. All the accessions that are made to His kingdom are lawful captives delivered from the terrible power of darkness and translated into His own kingdom.
3. The next point is the warring interests between the two houses that occupy our poor nature. Is it in your power honestly to say that within the circle of your experience the house of David is waxing stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxing weaker and weaker? I want the graces growing in strength. I want to have faith like Abrahams. I want to give glory to God and believe against apparent impossibilities. I want love to be growing like Johns, so that no place will do for me but the bosom of Jesus; I want hope to be victorious, strong and firm, entering within the veil, sure and steadfast. I want humility to lay me at the feet of Christ, and keep axe there. I want the zeal of the house of my beloved Lord to eat me up, and I want the meekness and patience of my Lord to make me quite immoveable to all the provocations of the wicked world through which I am passing. Oh! if the graces of Jesus were thus exercised. If the new man were always thus enthroned. If the new man were always seated uppermost, always thus favoured with supplies of grace from above, how old Adam would groan! How he would be nailed up! How he would be mortified!
II. The results of the warfare. You know how it resulted with David: it resulted in the entire destruction of the house of Saul, in imperishable honours worn by himself and his household, his throne set above all the kingdoms of the earth, and a glorious lasting peace settled and secured. So shall it be with our glorious Christ and His household. All the honours which the covenant of grace provides, which the promises of the word unfold and exhibit, and which the grace of the Spirit can put on and wear, and which must after all return and redound to Jesus precious name, are claimed and appropriated by the followers of the Lamb, the household of David.
1. Moreover, there is a peculiar circumstance in relation to this warfare and its results--that is that with all this fighting, and skirmishing, and wounding, never one soul is killed or destroyed.
2. The throne of our David must become noted for its fame, and be exalted above all others. It must be so established as to reign over all dominions, and put down every authority that opposes it, for it is written that He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. Then comes the glorious consummation, eternal peace. (J. Irons.)
A long war
I. There was war. David ascended the throne of Judah, but not to enjoy peace, as he might have presupposed. The descendants of Saul opposed his election, though ratified by heaven; usurped the throne, and maintained personally, or by their representative and chief agent, Abner, unceasing and bitter opposition to his government. Is it not thus with the Christian, after his decided confirmation in the faith? When we are in Christ, or rather Christ is in us, by virtue of our spiritual elevation, then it is that the enmity between our fallen nature and the true will of God betrays itself in vehement activity.
2. The war was long. With David the literal conflict endured but seven years and six months, till the last opponent of his rightful sway was removed. With every spiritual child of God the war must endure from conversion to death, while one fragment of this infected mortality cleaves to another in animation--so thoroughly, so desperately has the opposition of Satan to Gods rule preoccupied and possessed our natural being.
3. Further, it is mentioned that the house of David waxed stronger and stronger. It must be so with the Christian. The condition of the believer is a growing one: he is perfectly born in Christ at once, but his powers and faculties are matured in action, and his progress is decided. (C. M. Fleury, A. M.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain
CHAPTER I V.
CONCLUSION OF THE CIVIL WAR.
Read full note →
2Sa_3:1-21.
THE victory at the pool of Gibeon was far from ending the opposition to David. In vain, for many a day, weary eyes looked out for the dove with the olive leaf. "There was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David." The war does not seem to have been carried on by pitched battles, but rather by a long series of those fretting and worrying little skirmishes which a state of civil war breeds, even when the volcano is comparatively quiet. But the drift of things was manifest. "David waxed stronger and stronger; but the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker." The cause of the house of Saul was weak in its invisible support because God was against it; it was weak in its champion Ishbosheth, a feeble man, with little or no power to attract people to his standard; its only element of strength was Abner, and even he could not make head against such odds. Good and evil so often seem to balance each other, existing side by side in a kind of feeble stagnation, and giving rise to such a dull feeling on the part of onlookers, that we cannot but think with something like envy of the followers of David even under the pain of a civil war, cheered as they were by constant proofs that their cause was advancing to victory.
And now we get a glimpse of David's domestic mode of life, which, indeed, is far from satisfactory. His wives were now six in number; of some of them we know nothing; of the rest what we do know is not always in their favour. The earliest of all was "Ahinoam, the Jezreelitess." Her native place, or the home of her family, was Jezreel, that part of the plain of Esdraelon where the Philistines encamped before Saul was defeated (1Sa_26:12), and afterwards, in the days of Ahab, a royal residence of the kings of Israel (1Ki_18:46) and the abode of Naboth, who refused to part with his vineyard in Jezreel to the king (l Kings 21.). Of Ahinoam we find absolutely no mention in the history; if her son Amnon, the oldest of David's family, reflected her character, we have no reason to regret the silence (2 Sam. 13.). The next of his wives was Abigail, the widow of Nabal the Carmelite, of whose smartness and excellent management we have a full account in a former part of the history. Her son is called Chileab, but in the parallel passage in Chronicles Daniel; we can only guess the reason of the change; but whether it was another name for the same son, or the name of another son, the history is silent concerning him, and the most probable conjecture is that he died early. His third wife was Maachah, the daughter of Talmai the Geshurite. This was not, as some have rather foolishly supposed, a member of those Geshurites in the south against whom David led his troop (1Sa_27:8), for it is expressly stated that of that tribe "he left neither man nor woman alive." It was of Geshur in Syria that Talmai was king (2Sa_15:8); it formed one of several little principalities lying between Mount Hermon and Damascus: but we cannot commend the alliance; for these kingdoms were idolatrous, and unless Maachah was an exception, she must have introduced idolatrous practices into David's house. Of the other three wives we have no information. And in regard to the household which he thus established at Hebron, we can only regret that the king of Israel did not imitate the example that had been set there by Abraham, and followed in the same neighbourhood by Isaac. What a different complexion would have been given to David's character and history if he had shown the self-control in this matter that he showed in his treatment of Saul! Of how many grievous sins and sorrows did he sow the seed when he thus multiplied wives to himself! How many a man, from his own day down to the days of Mormonism, did he silently encourage in licentious conduct, and furnish with a respectable example and a plausible excuse for it! How difficult did he make it for many who cannot but acknowledge the bright aspect of his spiritual life to believe that even in that it was all good and genuine! We do not hesitate to ascribe to the life of David an influence on successive generations on the whole pure and elevating; but it is impossible not to own that by many, a justification of relaxed principle and unchaste living has been drawn from his example.
We have already said that polygamy was not imputed to David as a sin in the sense that it deprived him of the favour of God. But we cannot allow that this permission was of the nature of a boon. We cannot but feel how much better it would have been if the seventh commandment had been read by David with the same absolute, unbending limitation with which it is read by us. It would have been better for him and better for his house. Puritan strictness of morals is, after all, a right wholesome and most blessed thing. Who shall say that the sum of a man's enjoyment is not far greatest in the end of life when he has kept with unflinching steadfastness his early vow of faithfulness, and, as his reward, has never lost the freshness and the flavour of his first love, nor ceased to find in his ever-faithful partner that which fills and satisfies his heart? Compared to this, the life of him who has flitted from one attachment to another, heedless of the soured feelings or, it may be, the broken hearts he has left behind, and whose children, instead of breathing the sweet spirit of brotherly and sisterly love, scowl at one another with the bitter feelings of envy, jealousy, and hatred, is like an existence of wild fever compared to the pure tranquil life of a child.
In such a household as David's, occasions of estrangement must have been perpetually arising among the various branches, and it would require all his wisdom and gentleness to keep these quarrels within moderate bounds. In his own breast, that sense of delicacy, that instinct of purity, which exercises such an influence on a godly family, could not have existed; the necessity of reining in his inclinations in that respect was not acknowledged; and it is remarkable that in the confessions of the fifty-first Psalm, while he specifies the sins of blood-guiltiness and seems to have been overwhelmed by a sense of his meanness, injustice, and selfishness, there is no special allusion to the sin of adultery, and no indication of that sin pressing very heavily upon his conscience.
Whether it be by design or not, it is an instructive circumstance that it is immediately after this glimpse of David's domestic life that we meet with a sample of the kind of evils which the system of royal harems is ever apt to produce. Saul too had had his harem; and it was a rule of succession in the East that the harem went with the throne. To take possession of the one was regarded as equivalent to setting up a claim to the other. When therefore Ishbosheth heard that Abner had taken one of his father's concubines, he looked on it as a proof that Abner had an eye to the throne for himself. He accordingly demanded an explanation from Abner, but instead of explanation or apology, he received a volley of rudeness and defiance. Abner knew well that without him Ishbosheth was but a figure-head, and he was enraged by treatment that seemed to overlook all the service he had rendered him and to treat him as if he were some second or third- rate officer of a firm and settled kingdom. Perhaps Abner had begun to see that the cause of Ishbosheth was hopeless, and was even glad in his secret heart of an excuse for abandoning an undertaking which could bring neither success nor honour. "Am I a dog's head, which against Judah do show kindness this day unto the house of Saul thy father, to his brethren, and to his friends, and have not delivered thee into the hand of David, that thou chargest me to-day with a fault concerning this woman? So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the Lord hath sworn to David, even so I do to him, to translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah from Dan even to Beersheba."
The proverb says, ''When rogues fall out, honest men get their own." How utterly unprincipled the effort of Abner and Ishbosheth was is evident from the confession of the former that God had sworn to David to establish his throne over the whole land. Their enterprise therefore bore impiety on its very face; and we can only account for their setting their hands to it on the principle that keen thirst for worldly advantage will drive ungodly men into virtual atheism, as if God were no factor in the affairs of men, as if it mattered not that He was against them, and that it is only when their schemes show signs of coming to ruin that they awake to the consciousness that there is a God after all! And how often we see that godless men banded together have no firm bond of union; the very passions which they are united to gratify begin to rage against one another; they fall into the pit which they digged for others; they are hanged on the gallows which they erected for their foes.
The next step in the narrative brings us to Abner's offer to David to make a league with him for the undisputed possession of the throne. Things had changed now very materially from that day when, in the wilderness of Judah, David reproached Abner for his careless custody of the king's person (1Sa_26:14). What a picture of feebleness David had seemed then, while Saul commanded the whole resources of the kingdom! Yet in that day of weakness David had done a noble deed, a deed made nobler by his very weakness, and he had thereby shown to any that had eyes to see which party it was that had God on its side. And now this truth concerning him, against which Abner had kicked and struggled in vain, was asserting itself in a way not to be resisted. Yet even now there is no trace of humility in the language of Abner. He plays the great man still. "Behold, my hand shall be with thee, to bring about all Israel to thee." He approaches King David, not as one who has done him a great wrong, but as one who offers to do him a great favour. There is no word of regret for his having opposed what he knew to be God's purpose and promise, no apology for the disturbance he had wrought in Israel, no excuse for all the distress which he had caused to David by keeping the kingdom and the people at war. He does not come as a rebel to his sovereign, but as one independent man to another. Make a league with me. Secure me from punishment; promise me a reward. For this he simply offers to place at David's disposal that powerful hand of his that had been so mighty for evil. If he expected that David would leap into his arms at the mention of such an offer, he was mistaken. This was not the way for a rebel to come to his king. David was too much dissatisfied with his past conduct, and saw too clearly that it was only stress of weather that was driving him into harbour now, to show any great enthusiasm about his offer. On the contrary, he laid down a stiff preliminary condition; and with the air of one who knew his place and his power, he let Abner know that if that condition were not complied with, he should not see his face. We cannot but admire the firmness shown in this mode of meeting Abner's advances; but we are somewhat disappointed when we find what the condition was - that Michai, Saul's daughter, whom he had espoused for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, should be restored to him as his wife. The demand was no doubt a righteous one, and it was reasonable that David should be vindicated from the great slur cast on him when his wife was given to another; moreover, it was fitted to test the genuineness of Abner's advances, to show whether he really meant to acknowledge the royal rights of David; but we wonder that, with six wives already about him, he should be so eager for another, and we shrink from the reason given for the restoration - not that the marriage tie was inviolable, but that he had paid for her a very extraordinary dowry. And most readers, too, will feel some sympathy with the second husband, who seems to have had a strong affection for Michal, and who followed her weeping, until the stern military voice of Abner compelled him to return. All we can say about him is, that his sin lay in receiving another man's wife and treating her as his own; the beginning of the connection was unlawful, although the manner of its ending on his part was creditable. Connections formed in sin must sooner or later end in suffering; and the tears of Phaltiel would not have flowed now if that unfortunate man had acted firmly and honourably when Michal was taken from David.
But it is not likely that in this demand for the restoration of Michal David acted on purely personal considerations. He does not seem to have been above the prevalent feeling of the East which measured the authority and dignity of the monarch by the rank and connections of his wives. Moreover, as David laid stress on the way in which he got Michal as his wife, it is likely that he desired to recall attention to his early exploits against the Philistines. He had probably found that his recent alliance with King Achish had brought him into suspicion; he wished to remind the people therefore of his ancient services against those bitter and implacable enemies of Israel, and to encourage the expectation of similar exploits in the future. The purpose which he thus seems to have had in view was successful. For when Abner soon after made a representation to the elders of Israel in favour of King David and reminded them of the promise which God had made regarding him, it was to this effect: "By the hand of My servant David I will save My people Israel out of the hand of the Philistines and out of the hand of all their enemies." It seems to have been a great step towards David's recognition by the whole nation that they came to have confidence in him in leading them against the Philistines. Thus he received a fresh proof of the folly of his distrustful conclusion, ''There is nothing better for me than that I should escape into the land of the Philistines." It became more and more apparent that nothing could have been worse.
One is tempted to wonder if David ever sat down to consider what would probably have happened if, instead of going over to the Philistines, he had continued to abide in the wilderness of Judah, braving the dangers of the place and trusting in the protection of his God. Some sixteen months after, the terrible invasion of the Philistines took place, and Saul, overwhelmed with terror and despair, was at his wits' end for help. How natural it would have been for him in that hour of despair to send for David if he had been still in the country and ask his aid! How much more in his own place would David have appeared bravely fronting the Philistines in battle, than hovering in the rear of Achish and pretending to feel himself treated ill because the Philistine lords had required him to be sent away! Might he not have been the instrument of saving his country from defeat and disgrace? And if Saul and Jonathan had fallen in the battle, would not the whole nation have turned as one man to him, and would not that long and cruel civil war have been entirely averted? It is needless to go back on the past and think how much better we could have acted if unavailing regret is to be the only result of the process; but it is a salutary and blessed exercise if it tends to fix in our minds - what we doubt not it fixed in David's - how infinitely better for us it is to follow the course marked out for us by our heavenly Father, with all its difficulties and dangers, than to walk in the light of our own fire and in the sparks of our own kindling.
It appears that Abner set himself with great vigour to fulfill the promise made by him in his league with David. First, he held communication with the representatives of the whole nation, "the elders of Israel," and showed to them, as we have seen - no doubt to his own confusion and self-condemnation - how God had designated David as the king through whom deliverance would be granted to Israel from the Philistines and all their other enemies. Next, remembering that Saul was a member of the tribe of Benjamin, and believing that the feeling in favour of his family would be eminently strong in that tribe, he took special pains to attach them to David, and as he was himself likewise a Benjamite, he must have been eminently useful in this service. Thirdly, he went in person to Hebron, David's seat, to speak in the ears of David all that seemed good to Israel and to the whole house of Benjamin." Finally, after being entertained by David at a great feast, he set out to bring about a meeting of the whole congregation of Israel, that they might solemnly ratify the appointment of David as king, in the same way as, in the early days of Saul, Samuel had convened the representatives of the nation at Gilgal (1Sa_11:15). That in all this Abner was rendering a great service both to David and the nation cannot be doubted. He was doing what no other man in Israel could have done at the time for establishing the throne of David and ending the civil war. Having once made overtures to David, he showed an honourable promptitude in fulfilling the promise under which he had come. No man can atone for past sin by doing his duty at a future time; but if anything could have blotted out from David's memory the remembrance of Abner's great injury to him and to the nation, it was the zeal with which he exerted himself now to establish David's claims over all the country, and especially where his cause was feeblest - in the tribe of Benjamin.
It must have been a happy day in David's history when Abner set out from Hebron to convene the assembly of the tribes that was to call him with one voice to the throne. It was the day long looked for come at last. The dove had at length come with the olive leaf, and peace would now reign among all the tribes of Israel. And we may readily conceive him, with this prospect so near, expressing his feelings, if not in the very words of the thirty-seventh Psalm, at any rate in language of similar import:
"Fret not thyself because of evil-doers,
Neither be thou envious against them that work unrighteousness
For they shall soon be cut down like the grass,
And wither as the green herb.
Trust in the Lord and do good;
Dwell in the land, and follow after faithfulness.
Delight thyself also in the Lord,
And He shall give thee the desires of thine heart
Commit thy way unto the Lord,
Trust also in Him, and He shall bring it to pass.
And He shall make thy righteousness to go forth as the light,
And thy judgment as the noonday.
Rest in the Lord and wait patiently for Him;
Fret not thyself because of him that prospereth in his way.
Because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.
For evil-doers shall be cut of;
But those that wait on the Lord, they shall inherit the land."
But a crime was now on the eve of being perpetrated destined for the time to scatter all King David's pleasing expectations and plunge him anew into the depths of distress.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain 2Sa_3:1. “The war.” “Not continual fighting, but the state…
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES—
2Sa_3:1. “The war.” “Not continual fighting, but the state of hostility in which they continued to stand towards one another.” (Keil.)
Read full note →
2Sa_3:3. “Chiliab.” Called Daniel in 1Ch_3:1. “Probably had two names.” (Keil.) “Geshur.” A small independent kingdom in Syria.
2Sa_3:4. Nothing is known of the origin of these wives of David, nor of the one mentioned in the following verse.
2Sa_3:5. “David’s wife.” This appendage to Eglah has led some to conjecture that Michal is here intended; but Keil and others think it merely serves as a fitting conclusion to the list.
2Sa_3:6. “That Abner,” etc. Keil here reads and Abner, making 2Sa_3:6-7 into one sentence, expanded by the introduction of circumstantial clauses; the conjunction before said (i.e. Ishbosheth said), must then be translated that. “Wherefore hast thou.” As the harem of an Oriental king becomes the property of his successor, such an act on the part of Abner Would be an act of political treason.
2Sa_3:8. “Then was Abner very wroth,” etc. He neither admits nor denies the charge, and most expositors regard him as guilty of the act; but as Erdmann remarks, it “seems rather the outflow of passionate self-will and presumptuous contempt towards Ishbosheth” than an attempt to secure the throne. His subsequent conduct towards David seems to contradict the idea that he had such an intention.
2Sa_3:9. “As the Lord hath sworn.” We have no record of any formal Divine oath such as Abner here speaks of. “But the promise of God is equivalent to an oath, as God is the true God, who can neither lie nor deceive” (1Sa_15:29, etc.).
2Sa_3:10. “From Dan even to Beersheba,” i.e., throughout the entire land, from north to south. (Jdg_20:1, etc.)
2Sa_3:11. “And he could not answer,” etc. “This characterises Ishboseth sufficiently for the whole situation. Having with an effort plucked up courage to ask that reproachful question, he here shows the greatest feebleness, cowardice, and timidity towards Abner. This also contributes to the explanation of what is said in 2Sa_3:1 concerning the house of Saul.” (Erdmann.)
2Sa_3:12. “On his behalf.” Two general renderings of this phrase are found in the ancient versions, viz., in his place, equivalent to the English version, and “immediately” or “on the spot.” Keil adopts the first, but Erdmann the latter, remarking that it accords well with. Abner’s passionate excitement in 2Sa_3:9, and that the former translation makes a superfluous phrase. “Whose is the land?” Some expositors (Schmidt, Keil, Ewald, etc.) understand Abner to declare by this question that the land belonged to David by virtue of his anointing; but others (Erdmann, Thenius, etc.) think that the following words indicate that Abner considered the land was virtually in his hand. “This,” says Erdmann, “is quite in keeping with his proud, haughty nature, as hitherto manifested in his words and conduct, and also with the facts of the case, since, in fact, the whole land, except Judah, was still subject to Saul’s house, that is, to him (Abner) as dictator.”
2Sa_3:13. “One thing I require.” “This condition was imposed by David, not only because Michal had been unjustly taken away by Saul, … so that he could demand her back again with perfect justice, … but probably on political grounds also, namely, because the renewal of his marriage to the king’s daughter would show to all Israel that he cherished no hatred in his heart towards the fallen king.” (Keil.) “He was led to a re-union partly by love (‘she loved him,’ 1Sa_18:27; 1Sa_19:11 sq.), and … as king he could not, in the presence of the people, leave Michal in a relation into which she had been forced against her will.” (Erdmann.)
2Sa_3:15. “Phaltiel.” (See 1Sa_25:44.)
2Sa_3:16. “Bahurim.” A village near Jerusalem, north east, on the road between the Mount of Olives and Gilgal. Phaltiel followed his wife to the border of David’s kingdom.
2Sa_3:17. “Ye sought for David in times past.” “A striking testimony to the fact that outside of Judah also there had been a favourable sentiment towards David, against which Abner had energetically established and hitherto maintained Ishbosheth’s authority.” (Erdmann.) (See 1 Chronicles 12) “The Lord had spoken.” “Abner either had some expression used by one of the prophets (Samuel or Gad) in his mind … or he regarded the anointing of David by Samuel by command of the Lord, and the marvellous success of all that David had attempted, as a practical declaration on the part of God.” (Keil.)
2Sa_3:19. “The ears of Benjamin,” Because the family of Saul belonged to this tribe, and they had enjoyed many advantages in consequence. See 1Sa_22:7. “Also … also.” These denote mutualness, and point out the close connection and relation between the negotiation carried on with Benjamin as the tribe most important for David, and the earnest conversation that Abner therefore had with David (in the ears of David).
2Sa_3:20. “Twenty men.” “As representatives of all Israel.” (Keil.) “A feast.” “Not merely an entertainment, but of the nature of a league.” (Patrick.)
2Sa_3:21. “I will arise,” etc. The gradation in these words is characteristic of the rapidity, excitedness, and energy that we everywhere find in Abner.” (Erdmann.) “A league.” “This was not to consist in the establishment of a constitution after the nature of a constitutional monarchy, which is wholly foreign to the theocratic kingdom; but they are to vow to obey David as the king given them by the Lord, he promising to govern them as the theocratic king.” (Erdmann.) “Thine heart desireth.” David had indicated the desire of his heart in his message to the Jabeshites. (Erdmann.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—2Sa_3:1-21
ABNER’S REVOLT TO DAVID
I. When the will of God and the will of men are contending, however long the struggle, the issue is not doubtful. In the preceding chapter we have the history of a contest in which the combatants were so equally matched that neither could conquer the other, but death claimed victory over both. This is not so very uncommon a case where there is an equality of resolution and resource and patience, and where neither side has any right to call in reinforcements from the God of right. But that episode in the warfare between Judah and Israel was not a type of the final issue of the struggle. It was the will of God that that struggle should be protracted for years, both to perfect the patience and faith of David, and to show the men of Israel where their true interest lay. But even had the men of Judah been as inferior to their opponents in bravery and skill as they probably were in numbers—if every one of lshbosheth’s supporters had been an Abner and their number multiplied a thousandfold—it could have availed nothing in the long run, for they were fighting against the purpose and plan of God. This must be the issue of every contest of a like character. It may be good for the servants of God that the struggle be lengthened from years into centuries, but victory on the side of those who are on the side of God is only a question of time.
II. Men who consult God’s will in some acts of their life are sometimes strangely forgetful to do it in others. We take it as certain that David consulted only his own desires or his own idea of what would conduce to his honour and prosperity when he multiplied the number of his wives, and even took one at least from outside his own nation. Although we have no reason to suppose he broke any express Divine command in so doing, yet it was evidently a violation of God’s original intention, and an imitation of the customs of the heathen monarchs, and such an alliance with them was in direct opposition to that separation from them and their ways which is commanded by the law of Moses. If he had been as careful to inquire of the Lord concerning this matter as he was in others, how much domestic misery might he have escaped. But all good men omit sometimes to obey the command, “In all thy ways acknowledge Him,” and, following their own inclination instead of hearkening to the voice of God, sow seeds of evil which afterwards yield them very bitter fruit. (On this subject see also on 2Sa_1:2.)
III. A good deed done from a wrong motive is of no value to the doer. By their fruits ye shall know them (Mat_7:16) is the word of Divine wisdom, and yet it is quite true, as F. W. Robertson remarks, that we must not always judge a man by his deeds, but the deeds by the man. The repentance which follows when a good man does wrong must be taken into account, and the motive that goes before when a bad man does right must be considered, before passing judgment. When Abner came over to David’s side he was performing an act of tardy justice, but it was not the fruit of repentance. It was prompted by no desire to repair the wrong of the past, but by a determination to avenge an offence in the present. The same motive moved him to make friends with David as induced him to set Ishbosheth upon the throne, and, therefore, no more moral value can be attached to the one action than to the other. The declaration, “the Lord hath sworn to David” did not come from the lips of one who consulted the Divine will, but from one who made his own ambition his rule of life, and Abner only confesses his guilt when he utters it, because he makes it plain that he did not sin through ignorance.
IV. Those who receive from others what they have no right to bestow will find punishment in being compelled to relinquish it. Two men in this chapter are in this case. Ishbosheth received his crown, and Phaltiel his wife from men who were wronging others when they bestowed them, and the issue in both is what it must ever be under such circumstances. Every gift given by man which is not at the same time given by God is not bestowed upon its righful owner, and will sooner or later be taken from the unlawful possessor to become the property of him to whom it belongs. However far and with whatever force a stone is thrown into the air, we feel that its return to the earth is certain. Whatever may be the height to which it ascends, we know there will come a moment when its return journey will begin, and its fall will be more rapid than its rise. So, however great may be the power and strength which is behind unjust promotion, and however long we may hold a gift which belongs to another, there is a law above all others which can only be held at abeyance for a limited time, and when that limit has been reached the law will assert its dominion, and the work of restitution will often be as sudden as it is painful. Phaltiel must have known he was wronging David to take his wife, and Ishbosheth knew also that he had no right to the throne, but the one thought himself secure in the power of Saul, and the other trusted to the ability of Abner. The day of reckoning came for both, and they had both cause to bitterly regret they had accepted favours from men who had no right to bestow them.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
2Sa_3:1. What grievous tales of distress are folded up in these brief words. Probably it was only irregular war, without much bloodshed; the war of skirmish and surprises, not of pitched battles or protracted sieges, or desperate assaults; but many a pillaged town and many a homestead laid in ashes, and many a heart crushed in despair or maddened to fury, and many a deep and deadly curse and fearful vow of vengeance would everywhere follow the track of war. And it was war of the most distressing and demoralising kind.—not foreign, but civil. Great national wars are usually attended by one counteracting benefit—they soften the keenness of private quarrels. But when parties in the same nation are fighting with each other, private quarrels, instead of being healed, are only exasperated in greater bitterness. In the painful war, therefore, in which David was engaged, he was deprived of the comfort of reflecting that whatever ravages it was producing abroad, it was drawing men’s hearts closer to each other at home, and sweetening the breath of domestic society.—Blaikie.
2Sa_3:8. In the variance of these two, we see there is no solid and constant friendship among the wicked, for that which is in God is only like unto Him, immutable and sure, and worthy of the name of amity, the other being more properly conspiracies.—Guild.
2Sa_3:13. In David’s yielding and acceptation of Abner’s offer we see that, albeit he hath a good cause, yet he neglects no occasion of secondary means offered, which is an example of imitation, for as men are said to contemn God who rely altogether upon seconds, so are they to be thought to tempt God, who altogether reject the use of lawful seconds.—Guild.
2Sa_3:16. From this occurrence it is clear that, among the wild briars of unsettled family relationships by which Israel was then overgrown, here and there also the flowers of a true genuine love and fidelity were to be met with. They bloomed, indeed, in the house of David, but their growth was not unhindered, and he did not remain untouched by the curse which the Lord had attached to the crime of polygamy in Israel.—Krummacher.
2Sa_3:18. Abner wins the heart of Israel, by showing God’s charter for him whom he had so long opposed. Hypocrites make use of God for their own purposes, and care only to make Divine authority a colour for their own designs. No man ever heard Abner godly till now; neither had he been so at this time, if he had not intended a revengeful departure from Ishbosheth. Nothing is more odious than to make religion a stalking-horse to policy.—Bishop Hall.
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 2Sa 3:33
2Sa 3:33
I. The first mark of folly about Abner’s death is his strange simplicity and wonderful credulity. He had been used to court life; he had been continually by the king’s side, and therefore he must have learned that the art of political speaking is to conceal your thoughts, and that courtiers’ tongues shroud by language the intentions of the heart. Strange that a man like Abner, who had passed through such a school as two courts, should have believed so readily the message which Joab sent him. No man was ever more off his guard, or walked more deliberately into a trap. In the same way, it is marvellous how unsuspicious men are of sin’s designs. Sin seems to sing like an enchantress, like the sirens who sang to Ulysses; and the shrewdest and the cleverest men are irresistibly, almost imperceptibly drawn toward it, and they who would see through a deception of another sort in a moment, seem, like Abner, utterly blinded in this respect.
Read full note →
II. Note the next thing in Abner’s folly—his unused advantages. Abner was a prisoner to nobody but himself. No cord bound his arms; no iron fetters were upon his feet. Yet with hands unused and feet unemployed, he stands still like a fool to be killed.
We have had many advantages. We have the Bible, the message of the Gospel, the noble examples of parents and friends. If we die without hope, it may well be said as a requiem over us, "Died Abner as a fool dieth?"
III. Abner’s very position made his folly the greater. Hebron was one of the cities of refuge. Joab spoke with him outside the gate, so Abner was within one step of safety when he was slain. Jesus Christ, the true city of Hebron—the real city of refuge—is close by us now, and if we die unsaved, like Abner. we shall die with the shadow of security lying athwart our prostrate forms.
A. G. Brown, Penny Pulpit, No. 922.
References: 2Sa 3:38.—J. Hiles Hitchens, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xix., p. 281; H. Grey, A Parting Memorial, p. 112. 2Sa 3:39.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. vi., No. 334; Parker, vol. vii., p. 231. 2Sam 3—Ibid., p. 86. 2Sa 4:1.—Ibid., p. 232. 2Sa 4:4.—J. Ker, Sunday Magazine, 1875, p. 279. 2Sa 4:9-12.—Parker, vol. vii., p. 98. 2Sam 4—Ibid., p. 106. 2Sa 5:1-7.—F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 253. 2Sa 5:3.—T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxii, p. 125. 2Sa 5:10.—Parker, vol. vii., p. 232. 5:11-6:23.—W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 154.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain Abner is Treacherously Murdered by Joab
Abner is Treacherously Murdered by Joab
3. Chileab] We read nothing more of him and he probably died as a child. In 1Ch_3:1 he is called Daniel. Geshur] a kingdom on the border of Bashan, where Absalom afterwards took refuge (2Sa_13:37) It must not be confused with the Geshur of 1Sa_27:8.
Read full note →
4. Adonijah] see 1 Kings 1.
7. Rizpah] see 2Sa_21:8-11. Gone in unto my father's concubine] According to Eastern ideas this was equivalent to laying claim to the throne: see 2Sa_12:8; 2Sa_16:22; 1Ki_2:22.
8. Am I a dog's head, which against Judah?] RV 'Am I a dog's head that belongeth to Judah?' i.e. a despised enemy. Do shew kindness this day] RV 'This day' (i.e. at the very time you bring this trivial charge) 'do I shew kindness': see on 1Ki_2:17. This woman] LXX 'a woman.' It was the question of a mere woman.
9. Except.. even so I do to him] RV 'if. I do not even so to him,' i.e. support David instead of Ish-bosheth.
12. On his behalf] RM 'where he was.' Whose is the land? saying] LXX omits.
13. Except thou first bring Michal] see 1Sa_25:44.
16. Bahurim] in Benjamin, on the road from Jerusalem to the Jordan. It was probably the last town in the dominions of Ish-bosheth.
17. Ye sought for David] It would thus seem that even in northern Israel there was a strong party, who wished to make David king on the death of Saul. It was probably the personal influence of Abner that decided the day in favour of Ish-bosheth. The whole passage clearly shows how weak was the hereditary principle, and how completely the 'king' was still regarded merely as a military leader and 'judge.' The element of popular choice is more fully emphasised here than in Judges (except for the Abimelech episode).
19. Benjamin] as being Saul's fellow-tribesmen they would be specially attached to the royal house and need additional persuasion.
21. Make a league with thee] as they did with Saul (1Sa_10:25) and as they tried to do with Rehoboam (1Ki_12:4). Before making him king, they wished to see their rights safeguarded.
22. From pursuing a troop] RV 'from a foray.' David had probably arranged a time when Joab was absent.
24. Why is it that thou hast sent him away?] As a kinsman of Asahel, Joab thought that David should have avenged his death.
27. For the blood of Asahel his brother] According to Eastern ideas Joab was bound to avenge his brother's murder. Neither Judaism, Christianity, nor Mohammedanism has been able to eradicate this feeling. But the Law provided a remedy in the Cities of Refuge (see Num_35:11). In the case before us, Joab was probably influenced by the fear that Abner would interfere with his authority: see on
29. On all his father's house] According to Jewish ideas the family was involved in the fate of the ancestor: cp. 2Sa_21:6; 2Ki_5:27. Leaneth on a staff] rather, 'that holdeth the spindle': cp. Pro_31:19. It was despicable work for a man.
31. Mourn before Abner] i.e. precede the bier. This was all the punishment David was strong enough to inflict.
33. Died Abner as a fool dieth?] i.e. as one who runs into needless danger, or meets his death when engaged in a shameful conspiracy: see on 1Sa_25:25.
35. Till the sun be down] The regular time for ending a fast, as it still is in Mohammedan countries. The Hebrew day was reckoned from sunset to sunset.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain 4. Abner’s Deeds and End
4. Abner’s Deeds and End
CHAPTER 3
Read full note →
1. The long war and its results (2Sa 3:1)
2. David’s family (2Sa 3:2-5)
3. Abner’s defiant deed (2Sa 3:6-7)
4. Abner and Ish-bosheth (2Sa 3:8-11)
5. Abner’s defection to David (2Sa 3:12)
6. David’s request (2Sa 3:13-16)
7. Abner with David (2Sa 3:17-22)
8. Abner’s end (2Sa 3:23-30)
9. David’s lamentation over Abner (2Sa 3:31-39)
The first verse speaks of the long war between the house of Saul and the house of David. And David waxed stronger and stronger. The weakness of the king in giving way to the flesh is next faithfully recorded; his self-indulgence in his different marriages. Alas! he began his sowing in the flesh from which later he was to reap such a sad harvest. Six sons are mentioned, born to David by his six wives. Three of these sons became a source of sorrow and grief to him. Ammon’s vile deed is found in chapter 13. Absalom was a still greater trial to him, Adonijah became the rival of Solomon (1Ki 1:5). In this record of taking these different women as wives, in this gross indulgence of the flesh, he prepared himself for the great sin of his life. Disorder and much confusion followed. Abner’s deed in taking Rizpah insulted Saul’s house and Ish-bosheth protested and Abner’s fury came upon the weakling whom he had made king. Then suddenly Abner professed belief in David’s God-given kingdom. His arrogant pride is seen in verse 10; as if it was in his power to set up the throne of David over all Israel, from Dan to Beer-sheba. The poor counterfeit king was silenced. Then we see Abner entering negotiations with David. Had David again relapsed that he fell in with Abner? We do not hear a word that he inquired of the Lord. He makes a condition under which Abner is to see his face. Michal, Saul’s daughter, the first wife he had, who was now the wife of Phaltiell is to be brought to him. He then received her after his request to Ish-bosheth, while her husband accompanied her as far as the border of Judah. The subsequent history, Michal’s mockery, shows that it was a mistake for David to take her back. How different all would have been if David had inquired of the Lord.
Abner, the shrewd schemer, was then entertained by David in a great banquet at which occasion he offered to make David ruler over all Israel. And David listened and sent him away in peace. But was it God’s way and God’s plan to have His anointed made king through such an instrument? Abner’s death frustrating his plans gives the answer. Joab, moved by envy, jealousy and bitter hatred, slew Abner in the same way as he had slain his brother Asahel. He died for the blood of Asahel he had shed. An insinuation is made as if Joab’s deed was justified as the avenger. This however could not be sustained by the law for Abner’s death in slaying Asahel was in self-defence. But David cleared himself from so abominable a deed. “I and my kingdom are guiltless before the LORD forever from the blood of Abner.” A public mourning is instituted in which Joab is forced to partake and the king lamented over Abner. “And all the people took notice of it, and it pleased them, as whatsoever the king did pleased all the people.” The king’s wise behaviour had its effect upon the people and thus his kingdom was strengthened.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain Abner Leaves Ishbosheth for David
Abner Leaves Ishbosheth for David
v. 1. Now, there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David, literally, "the war was protracted," a state of war continued to exist, since neither acknowledged the other as king, although outward hostilities were apparently not renewed; but David, patiently waiting and relying upon the promise of Jehovah, waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker; David gained in adherents in the same measure as Ishbosheth lost them.
Read full note →
v. 2. And unto David were sons born in Hebron; and his first-born was Amnon, of Ahinoam, the Jezreelitess;
v. 3. and his second, Chileab (or Daniel, 1Ch 3:1), of Abigail, the wife of Nabal, the Carmelite; and the third, Absalom, the son of Maacah, the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur, a small principality in Syria;
v. 4. and the fourth, Adonijah, the son of Haggith; and the fifth, Shephatiah, the son of Abital;
v. 5. and the sixth Ithream, by Eglah, David’s wife. The three women mentioned last are otherwise unknown. These were born to David in Hebron, the fruit of his strange polygamous marriages.
v. 6. And it came to pass, while there was war between the house of Saul and the house of David, while the state of hostility continued, that Abner made himself strong for the house of Saul, his strong influence enabled the house of Saul to maintain itself.
v. 7. And Saul had a concubine whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah; and Ishbosheth said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father’s concubine? The reproof was given because Abner, by his action, had presumed upon royal rights, for in the ancient Orient claim to the harem was claim to the throne, the suspicion thus being that he aspired to be king.
v. 8. Then was Abner very wroth for the words of Ishbosheth, for he seems to have been self-willed and presumptuous in his conduct toward the weak man whom he had made king, and said, Am I a dog’s head, a low, contemptible person, which against Judah, who sides with Judah? (I) do show kindness this day unto the house of Saul, thy father, to his brethren, and to his friends, and have not delivered thee in to the hand of David, that thou chargest me today with a fault concerning this woman? Ishbosheth owed position, kingdom, everything to Abner, who seems to have been on his side merely out of loyalty for Saul; but there was no personal bond between them, and Abner regarded the charge flung into his face as an insult.
v. 9. So do God to Abner, and more also, a strong oath of a vigorous, autocratic man, except, as the Lord hath sworn to David, even so I do to him,
v. 10. to translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, to take it away and transfer it, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba, from the extreme north to the extreme south of Canaan. Abner had evidently recognized the fact, even before this, that Ishbosheth was wholly unfit for the kingly rule, and the latter’s charge now brought matters to a head.
v. 11. And he, Ishbosheth, could not answer Abner a word again, because he feared him, he was too feeble, too cowardly, to back up his reproof with action.
v. 12. And Abner sent messengers to David on his behalf, as an embassy representing him, saying, Whose is the land? His pride caused him to intimate that he was the real master of Israel. Saying also, Make thy league with me, and, behold, my hand shall be with thee to bring about all Israel unto thee, to get all the northern tribes to acknowledge David, with the expectation that he would be given a high position in the army of the united country.
v. 13. And he, David, said, Well; I will make a league with thee; but one thing I require of thee, this was his one condition upon whose fulfillment he insisted, that is, Thou shalt not see my face except thou first bring Michal, Saul’s daughter, when thou comest to see my face. It was not merely that Michal was his lawful wife, but David had also a political reason in his union with Israel’s princess, namely, that of gaining the favor of the northern tribes.
v. 14. And David sent messengers to Ishbosheth, Saul’s son, saying, Deliver me my wife Michal, which I espoused to me for an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that being the purchase price, the morning gift which Saul had demanded, 1Sa 18:25,
v. 15. And Ishbosheth, who would not have been able to refuse the demand of David even if he had been so inclined, sent and took her from her husband, even from Phaltiel, the son of Laish, the man who seems to have taken her in good faith, 1Sa 25:44.
v. 16. And her husband went with her along weeping behind her to Bahurim, on the boundary of Judah, his behavior showing that he was truly fond of Michal. Then said Abner, who, in accordance with David’s condition, had taken charge of this mission, unto him, Go, return. And he returned.
v. 17. And Abner, even before he restored Michal to her rightful husband, had communication with the elders of Israel, saying, Ye sought for David in times past, literally, "yesterday as well as the day before," to be king over you, their dissatisfaction with Ishbosheth had probably been voiced more than once;
v. 18. now, then, do it: for the Lord hath spoken of David, saying, By the hand of My servant David I will save My people Israel out of the hand of the Philistines and out of the hand of all their enemies. This was the promise implied in the prophetic tradition and the duty laid upon the king chosen by Jehovah.
v. 19. And Abner also spake in the ears of Benjamin, here distinguished from the northern tribes, because its members had been very strongly attached to the house of Saul; and Abner went also to speak in the ears of David in Hebron all that seemed good to Israel, and that seemed good to the whole house of Benjamin. In return for their recognition of David’s royal authority they wanted the same advantages as the men of Judah; they were fully ready to acknowledge him.
v. 20. So Abner came to David to Hebron, and twenty men with him, as representatives of all Israel, as witnesses of the covenant. And David made Abner and the men that were with him a feast, a formal festival meal.
v. 21. And Abner said unto David, I will arise and go, and will gather all Israel unto my lord the king that they may make a league with thee, acknowledging him as the chosen king of Jehovah, through whom, as His instrument, the Lord Himself would rule over His people, and that thou mayest reign over all that thine heart desireth, over the entire people of God. And David sent Abner away; and he went in peace, regarded by David as a true friend to his cause. Even the adversaries of God and Christ are often instrumental in carrying out the counsel of God and in furthering the cause of Christ. And many a person who first strongly opposed the Lord has been brought to a better understanding and has embraced the good cause.
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 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 Samuel gives information about the war between David and the supporters of Saul. (See: Background Information)
Read full note →
house
Here "house" is used to mean "supporters."
grew stronger and stronger
This metaphor means the number of people supporting David increased. (See: Metaphor)
grew weaker and weaker
This metaphor means the number of people supporting Saul's family decreased. (See: Metaphor)
translationWords
house
Saul (OT)
house of David
David
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 3:1-39 The house of David increased, while Saul’s house…
3:1-39 The house of David increased, while Saul’s house dwindled. The crucial occasion came when Abner, the real political power in Saul’s camp, switched allegiance to David, taking a considerable number of his northern kinsmen with him.
3:1 a long war: This civil war likely continued for most of the seven-plus years that David ruled from Hebron. The truce called by Joab and Abner (2:26-28) was short-lived.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.