2 Samuel 3
2 Samuel 3; Pss 25, 55, 120
The flow of 2 Samuel 3 is quite dramatic. After the author described the gravity of the initial situation between the house of David and the house of Saul, there is a ray of hope for unity when Abner stated a desire to transfer Israel to David’s reign. But in the end, Joab’s revenge over the murder of Asahel, his brother (cf. 2.23-24), caused David further woe—and delayed his rule over a united kingdom.
The text wastes no words in describing the situation that would be detailed throughout the chapter; “The war between the house of Saul and the house of David was long and drawn out, with David growing stronger and the house of Saul becoming weaker” (v. 1). Initially the author provides two significant elements occurring in the north:
- “During the war…Abner kept acquiring more power in the house of Saul” (v. 6)
- Ish-bosheth, the king of Israel, was merely a puppet before Abner’s power. When the king accused Abner of immorality, the latter snapped. Abner’s vengeful reaction helps the reader to understand why he was Saul’s military commander; he said, “May God punish Abner and do so severely if I don’t do for David what the LORD swore to him: to transfer the kingdom from the house of Saul and establish the throne of David” (vv. 9-10). Abner wasn’t simply blowing off some steam at Saul’s son, rather he told David, “Whose land is it? Make your covenant with me, and you can be certain I am on your side to hand all Israel over to you” (v. 12). Since Ish-bosheth, Saul’s son and the ruling king of Israel, was afraid of Abner, his accusation over the concubine eventually cost him the kingdom
David responded favorably to Abner’s request for peace, desiring only that Michal, Saul’s daughter and his first wife, be returned to him (vv. 13-16). Abner, showing the sincerity of his heart, labored for a diplomatic transfer of power to David, meeting face-to-face with Israel’s leaders and David himself (vv. 17-21). All seemed well.
But with the mention of Joab, the tone of the text immediately becomes abrasive. When Joab heard of the king’s covenant with Abner he was livid, saying, “What have you done? Look here, Abner came to you. Why did you dismiss him? Now he’s getting away. You know that Abner son of Ner came to deceive you and to find out about your activities and everything you’re doing” (vv. 24-25). Straightway Joab, unbeknownst to David, instigated a ruse to eliminate the threat posed by Abner:
- He sent messengers to bring Abner back to Hebron (v. 26)
- He pulled Abner aside, “as if to speak to him privately, and there Joab stabbed him in the stomach” (v. 27)
- He killed Abner “in revenge for the death of Asahel, Joab’s brother” (v. 27). Joab was more concerned about himself than the kingdom (v. 30)
David replied to Joab’s aggression in kind; He prophesied, “may the house of Joab never be without someone who has an infection or leprosy or a man who can only work a spindle or someone who falls by the sword or starves” (v. 29). This attitude would characterize David’s reign; he wrote in Ps 25.3: “Not one person who waits for You will be disgraced; those who act treacherously without cause will be disgraced,” and Ps 55.23: “You, God, will bring them down to the pit of destruction; men of bloodshed and treachery will not live out half their days.” David “ordered Joab and all the people who were with him” (v. 31) to mourn over the death of Abner, and the king himself “walked behind the funeral procession” (v. 31). At the burial service he wept aloud and sang a lament for the fallen of Israel (vv. 32-34). David even fasted the day, confirming to all “that the king had no part in the killing of Abner son of Ner (vv. 35-37). David lamented, “I have lived too long with those who hate peace. I am for peace; but when I speak, they are for war” (Ps 120.6-7).
In 2 Samuel 2 David was concerned for all to know that he had nothing to do with the assassination of Abner. If the average Israelite concluded that David sought to establish his reign through less-than-noble means, he would not trust David and the hope of peace between Israel and Judah would be further threatened. As the newly anointed king of Judah, David did all that he could to begin to unify the north and the south, establishing his rule over all of the descendants of Jacob. David’s motives here—as was the case at many points in his reign—are illustrative of Jesus’ words: “Blessed are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God” (Mt 5.9). Nevertheless, David’s early rule also has points of contrast with that of Jesus, forming the drama of the storyline of Scripture. David was set on unifying the territories of Judah and Israel; Jesus recognized that His very presence would bring division. When He sent the 12 to preach the good news solely “to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt 10.6), He said:
“Everyone who will acknowledge Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. Don’t assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. The person who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; the person who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And whoever doesn’t take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me” (Mt 10.32-38).
*For a complete list of references, please see scripturestoryline.com