Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa 13:1-22
Amnon’s Incest. - 2Sa_13:1-14. The following occurrences are assigned in a general manner to the times succeeding the Ammonitish war, by the words “And it came to pass after this;” and as David did not marry Maacah the mother of Absalom and Tamar till after he had been made king at Hebron (see 2Sa_3:3), they cannot well have taken place before the twentieth year of his reign.

Amnon, the eldest son of David by Ahinoam the Jezreelite (2Sa_3:2), loved Tamar, the beautiful sister of his step-brother Absalom, so passionately that he became ill in consequence, because he could not get near to her as she was a virgin. 2Sa_13:1 and 2Sa_13:2 form one period. וַיֵּצֶר is a continuation of אַהֲרֵי־כֵן וַיְהִי; and the words from וּאַבְשָׁלֹום to בֶּן־דָּוִד are a circumstantial clause. וַיֵּצֶר: literally “it became narrow (anxious) to Amnon, even to making himself ill,” i.e., he quite pined away, not “he pretended to be ill” (Luther), for it was not till afterwards that he did this according to Jonadab’s advice (2Sa_13:5). הִתְהַלֹּות: to make one’s self ill, here to become ill, in 2Sa_13:5 to pretend to be ill.

The clause הִיא בְתוּלָה כִּי is to be joined to the one which follows: “because she was a virgin, and it seemed impossible to him to do anything to her.” The maidenly modesty of Tamar evidently raised an insuperable barrier to the gratification of his lusts.

Albert Barnes
2Sa 13:1
The history here, down to the end of 2 Sam. 23 (excepting a few particulars), is omitted in the Book of Chronicles.

John Gill
2Sa 13:1 And it came to pass after this,…. After the sin of David with Bathsheba, his repentance for it, and pardon of it, and the birth of Solomon as a token of reconciliation; yet after all this the divine threatenings must take place; they had begun already in the death of the child begotten in adultery, and others here follow:

that Absalom the son of David had a fair sister, whose name was Tamar; she was his sister both by father and mother’s side; the mother o, f them was Maacah, the daughter of Talmai king of Geshur; she was a very comely person, her name signifies a palm tree:

and Amnon the son of David loved her; not in an honourable way, to make her his wife, but in a lustful manner, to make an harlot of her; he was David’s eldest son by Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, 2Sa_3:2.

George Haydock
2Sa 13:2 Her. He had seen her on some solemn occasions, when virgins were allowed to go out, well attended. At other times they were so strictly guarded, that Amnon thought it almost impossible to gratify his passion, (Calmet) which made him grow pale. He afterwards feigned himself to be more sickly than he really was, ver. 6. (Haydock)

John Gill
2Sa 13:2 And Amnon was so vexed,…. Distressed, straitened, and perplexed in his mind through unruly and unbridled lusts that raged in him:

that he fell sick for his sister Tamar; as Antiochus son of Seleucus did for his mother in law Stratonice, who, to cure him of it, was delivered to him by his father (s):

for she was a virgin; and so kept very recluse from the company of men, that he could not come at her; so Philo (t), speaking of the Jewish women, and particularly virgins, says, that they were shut up in their chambers, and through modesty shun the sight of men, even those of their own house; hence they are called עלמות, from a word which signifies to hide; and Phocylides (u) the poet advises to the shutting of them up in like manner:

and Amnon thought it hard for him to do anything to her; that it was difficult to have access to her, almost impossible, what he despaired of, and what, if attained to, would be wonderful and amazing; he was at his wits’ end how to contrive any scheme to get at her, and obtain his desire.

(s) See the Universal History, vol. 3. p. 519. Ed. fol. (t) In Flaccum, p. 977. (u) Poem. admon. v. 203, 204.

Albert Barnes
2Sa 13:3
Shimeah - Called Shamma (marginal reference), was Jesse’s third son.
Subtil - literally, wise. The word is generally used in a good sense, but here, and in Job_5:13, it means crafty.

John Gill
2Sa 13:3 But Amnon had a friend,…. Though in the issue his friendship proved his ruin:

whose name was Jonadab, the son of Shimeah, David’s brother; so that they were own cousins, the same with Shammah, 1Sa_16:9,

and Jonadab was a very subtle man; a very penetrating man into the dispositions of men, and could judge by their countenances what they were, and the affections of their minds, and had a talent in forming schemes; he was wise to do evil and was wickedly cunning.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
2Sa 13:4
my brother Absalom’s sister — In Eastern countries, where polygamy prevails, the girls are considered to be under the special care and protection of their uterine brother, who is the guardian of their interests and their honor, even more than their father himself (see on Gen_34:6-25).

John Gill
2Sa 13:4 And he said unto him, why art thou, being the king’s son,

lean from day today?…. Or “morning by morning”, (w); he was the king’s eldest son, heir to the crown, fed at his table, had everything to make him gay and cheerful, and yet pined away; his flesh wasted (x), his countenance waxed wan and pale, and especially in the mornings; in the daytime he met with diversions which, in some measure, took off his thoughts from the object his mind was impressed with, but in the night season they were continually employed about it; so that he could have no rest and sleep, which made him look ruefully in the morning; and this man had a suspicion of his case, and therefore put this and the following question to him:

wilt thou not tell me? who am so nearly related to thee, and who have such a particular value and affection for thee:

and Amnon said unto him, I love Tamar, my brother Absalom’s sister; he does not call her his sister, but Absalom’s sister, to lessen his sin of unlawful love to her, which, being thus closely pressed, and by a friend, he could not conceal.

(w) בבקר בבקר, “in mane in mane”, Montanus. (x) “Fecit amor maciem —–”. Ovid Metamorph. l. 11. Fab. 11. v. 793.

Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa_13:4-5
“Why art thou so wasting away (דַּל, thin, spare, here equivalent to wasting away, looking miserable), king’s son, from morning to morning?” i.e., day by day. “The morning” is mentioned because sick persons look worst in the morning.

The advice given in 2Sa_13:5, - viz., “Lay thee down upon thy bed, and pretend to be ill; and when thy father comes to visit thee, say to him, May my sister Tamar come to me, and give me to eat?” etc., - was very craftily devised, as Amnon’s wretched appearance would favour his pretence that he was ill, and it might be hoped that an affectionate father would gratify him, since even if the wish seemed a strange one, it might easily be accounted for from the marvellous desires of persons who are ill, particularly with regard to food-desires which it is often very difficulty to gratify.

John Gill
2Sa 13:10 And Amnon said unto Tamar, bring the meat into the chamber,…. An inner chamber, at a greater distance, where they might be more secret, and out of the reach of the hearing of any of his domestics:

that I may eat of thine hand; this he pretended, though his design was of another kind:

and Tamar took the cakes which she had made, and brought them into the chamber to Amnon her brother; being quite innocent herself, and having no suspicion of a brother having any ill design upon her, she made no scruple of going into an inner chamber alone with him.

John Gill
2Sa 13:11 And when she had brought them unto him to eat,…. Not only into the chamber, but to the side of the bed or couch where he had laid himself, or sat, in a proper position to answer his purpose:

he took hold of her; by the arm, or threw his hands about her:

and said unto her, come, lie with me, my sister; one would think the relation he observes she stood in to him would have checked him from making so vile a motion.

George Haydock
2Sa 13:12 Folly, or impiety, so directly contrary to the law, Leviticus xviii. 6. and 9. and 11. (Haydock)

John Gill
2Sa 13:12 And she answered him, nay, my brother,…. Which carried in it a reason sufficient for her denial, that he was her brother, and she his sister, and therefore should not offer such an indignity to her:

do not force me; which was another forbidding expression, signifying she would never freely yield to his will; and to force her, to defile her against her will, to commit a rape upon her, would be very criminal indeed:

for no such thing ought to be done in Israel; among God’s professing people, who were better taught and instructed; and to give into such impure practices would bring a dishonour upon them, and upon the religion they professed; she urges the honour of religion, and the reputation of Israel, and the glory of the God of Israel:

do not thou this folly: as all sin is, especially such an impure and indecent action as this.

Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa_13:12-13
Tamar attempted to escape by pointing to the wickedness of such a desire: “Pray, do not, my brother, do not humble me; for they do not such things in Israel: do not this folly.” The words recall Gen_34:7, where the expression “folly” (nebalah) is first used to denote a want of chastity. Such a sin was altogether out of keeping with the calling and holiness of Israel (vid., Lev_20:8.). “And I, whither should I carry my shame?” i.e., shame and contempt would meet me everywhere. “And thou wouldst be as one of the fools in Israel.” We should both of us reap nothing but shame from it.

What Tamar still further said, “Now therefore, I pray thee, speak to the king, for he will not refuse me to thee,” is no doubt at variance with the law which prohibits marriage between step-brothers and sisters (Lev_18:9, Lev_18:11; Lev_20:17); but it by no means proves that the laws of Leviticus were not in existence at the time, nor does it even presuppose that Tamar was ignorant of any such law. She simply said this, as Clericus observes, “that she might escape from his hands by any means in her power, and to avoid inflaming him still more and driving him to sin by precluding all hope of marriage.”

(Note: Josephus adopts this explanation: “This she said, as desirous to avoid her brother’s violent passion at present” (Ant. viii. 8, 1).)
We cannot therefore even infer from these words of hers, that she really thought the king could grant a dispensation from the existing hindrances to their marriage.

John Gill
2Sa 13:13 And I, whither shall I cause my shame to go?…. She desires him to consider hey reputation, which would be lost; was she to go into a corner, into a place the most private and retired, yet she would blush at the thought of the crime committed; and still less able would she be to lift up her face in any public company; nor could she ever expect to be admitted into the matrimonial state; in short, her character would be entirely ruined:

and as for thee, thou shalt be as one of the fools in Israel; as the vilest and basest and most abandoned in the nation; who ought of all men to be most careful of his reputation, being a prince in Israel, and heir apparent to the throne:

now therefore, I pray thee, speak unto the king: to give me to thee in marriage:

for he will not withhold me from thee; this she said, either as ignorant of the law, which forbids such marriages, or as supposing the king had a power to dispense with it, and, rather than he should die for love, would; though she seems to say this, and anything that occurred to her mind, to put him off of his wicked design for the present, holding then she should be delivered from him; besides, she was not his sister by the mother’s side, and, as the Jews say, was born of a captive woman before she was proselyted and married to David, and so was free for Amnon (z); and others say (a) she was the daughter of Maacah by a former husband, and not by David.

(z) Maimon. Hilchot Melacim, c. 8. sect. 8. Kimchi in 2 Sam. xiii. 1. (a) R. Moses Kotzensis, pr. affirm. 122.

John Gill
2Sa 13:14 Howbeit, he would not hearken unto her voice,…. His lust was so inflamed and enraged, that he could not attend to any arguments, though ever so forcible, that were offered to him:

but being stronger than she, forced her, and lay with her; whether she cried out or not, as the law directs in such cases, Deu_22:25; is not said; she might, and nobody hear her and come to her assistance; or she might not choose to expose her brother to his servants.

Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa_13:15-22
Amnon had no sooner gratified his animal passion, than his love to the humbled sister turned into hatred, which was even greater than his (previous) love, so that he commanded her to get up and go. This sudden change, which may be fully explained from a psychological point of view, and is frequently exemplified still in actual life, furnishes a striking proof that lust is not love, but simply the gratification of the animal passions.

John Gill
2Sa 13:15 Then Amnon hated her exceedingly,…. Having gratified his lust, his conscience stung him for it, that he could not bear the sight of the object that had been the instrument of it; and it may be the sharp words she had used, representing him as one of the fools in Israel, and perhaps she used sharper words still after he had abused her, filled him with hatred to her:

so that the hatred wherewith he hated her was greater than the love wherewith he had loved her; a like instance of love being changed into hatred, after the gratification of lust, we have in Honorius towards his sister Placidia (b):

and Amnon said unto her, arise, be gone; without calling her by her name, or owning the relation she bore to him, using her as the basest and vilest of creatures. This conduct was very brutish, as well as imprudent, and foolish to the last degree; had he had any regard to his own reputation, he would never have turned her out of doors so soon, and in such a public manner; but so it was ordered by divine Providence, that his sin might be made known, and so the murder of him for it by Absalom was brought on, and both were suffered as a correction and chastisement to David for his sins of adultery and murder, 2Sa_12:11.

(b) Olympiodorus apud Grotium in loc.

John Gill
2Sa 13:20 And Absalom her brother said unto her,…. Either meeting her in the street, or rather when come to his house:

hath Amnon thy brother been with thee? been rude with thee, and lain with thee, which is the meaning of this modest expression; which he guessed at, having heard of her being sent to his house, and knowing his lustful disposition, and seeing her in such a forlorn condition: he calls him Aminon, for so it is in the Hebrew text, and not Amnon, by way of contempt, as Kimchi observes:

but hold now thy peace, my sister; be silent, take no notice of this matter, say nothing of it to the king, nor any other, keep it in thine own breast, and make thyself easy:

he is thy brother, regard not this thing; it is thy brother that has done it, and not so disgraceful as a meaner person, done in the heat of lust, and a youthful one, and should be forgiven; besides, to divulge it would bring disgrace upon the whole family, and no recompence would be obtained by telling the king of it, since he was his son, his firstborn, and heir to the crown; this he said not out of love of Amnon, but as desirous of gratifying private revenge upon him for it when opportunity should serve.

So Tamar remained desolate in her brother Absalom’s house; not seeing any company, being filled with grief and shame, and none applying to her as a suitor, knowing she was vitiated; how long she continued here, or lived after this, is not certain; no mention is made of her afterwards.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
2Sa 13:19-20
Tamar put ashes on her head, and rent her garment of divers colours … laid her hand on her head, and went on crying — that is, sobbing. Oriental manners would probably see nothing beyond a strong sense of the injury she had sustained, if Tamar actually rent her garments. But, as her veil is not mentioned, it is probable that Amnon had turned her out of doors without it, and she raised her hand with the design to conceal her face. By these signs, especially the rending of her distinguishing robe, Absalom at once conjectured what had taken place. Recommending her to be silent about it and not publish her own and her family’s dishonor, he gave no inkling of his angry feelings to Amnon. But all the while he was in secret “nursing his wrath to keep it warm,” and only “biding his time” to avenge his sister’s wrongs, and by the removal of the heir-apparent perhaps further also his ambitious designs.

2Sa 13:20
So Tamar remained desolate in her brother Absalom’s house — He was her natural protector, and the children of polygamists lived by themselves, as if they constituted different families.

John Gill
2Sa 13:21 But when King David heard of all these things,…. Of Amnon’s ravishing Tamar, and turning her out of doors in that inhuman manner he did, and of her distress upon it:

he was very wroth; with Amnon; but we read not of any reproof he gave him, nor of any punishment inflicted on him by him. Abarbinel thinks the reason why he was not punished was because his sin was not cognizable by a court of judicature, nor was punishable by any way, or with any kind of death inflicted by the sanhedrim, as stoning, burning, &c. nor even by scourging, because there were no witnesses; but the punishment of it was cutting off, i.e. by the hand of God. The Jews say (e) a law was made on this, that virgins or unmarried persons should not be alone; for if this was done to the daughter of a king, much more might it be done to the daughter of a private man; and if to a modest person, much more to an impudent one.

(e) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 21. 1.

Albert Barnes
2Sa 13:21
The Septuagint adds, what is a good explanation, “but he did not vex the spirit of Amnon his son, because he loved him, because he was his first-born.” This want of justice in David’s conduct, and favoritism to Amnon, probably rankled in Absalom’s heart, and was the first seed of his after rebellion.

John Gill
2Sa 13:22 And Absalom spake unto his brother Amnon neither good nor bad,…. That is, said nothing at all to him about the rape of his sister; not that he was sulky with him, and would not converse with him at all; for then Amnon would have mistrusted that he was meditating revenge, and therefore would have been upon his guard; but on the contrary he talked freely, and in appearance friendly, on other things, the better to conceal his hatred of him, and his design to avenge the injury of his sister:

for Absalom hated Amnon; or, “though” (f) he hated him, yet he behaved in this manner towards him:

because he had forced his sister Tamar: who was so by father and mother’s side, and so near and dear unto him, and therefore resented the injury done her.

(f) כי, “quamvis”, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Pool, & Patrick.

John Gill
2Sa 13:23 And it came to pass after two full years,…. Two complete years after the rape was committed; so long Absalom kept it in his mind, and was contriving how to avenge it; he let it alone so long, that it might be thought by the king and Amnon, and all the family, that it was quite worn out of his mind, and entirely forgotten by him, and therefore might the more safely confide in him:

that Absalom had sheepshearers in Baalhazor, which is beside Ephraim; though a prince, the son of a king, he had his flocks, and attended to the care of them, and had shearers to shear them at the proper time of the year, which it now was. The Chinese shear their sheep three times a year, the spring, summer, and autumn; but the first time of shearing yields the best wool (g). The place of shearing them was, no doubt, near where they were kept in Baalhazor, in the plain of Hazor, as the Targum, and so some versions; which was a city in the tribe of Judah, Jos_15:25; and near to Ephraim; not that it was a city in the tribe of Ephraim, as Josephus says (h); but it was near to another city called Ephraim, perhaps the same as in 2Ch_13:19 and in Joh_11:54; it lay to the northeast of Jerusalem, as you go to Jericho, and is thought by Reland (i) to lie between Bethel and Jericho; and, according to Eusebius (k), it was eight miles from Jerusalem; though Jerom (l), through mistake, says twenty; and both these places, according to Bunting (m), were eight miles from Jerusalem; it seems to be the same place that was spoken of in the Misnah (n), called Ephraim in the valley, and which is said to be the second place in the land of Israel for fine flour, and might have its name from its fruitfulness:

and Absalom invited all the king’s sons; to the sheepshearing: that is, to the feast which was usually made at such times, and still is; see Gen_38:12.

(g) Semedo’s History of China, part 1. ch. 3. (h) Antiqu. l. 7. c. 8. sect. 2. (i) Palestina Illustrat. tom. 1. p. 377. (k) Apud Reland, ib. & p. 490. & tom. 2. p. 765. (l) De loc. Heb. fol. 91. A. (m) Travels, &c. p. 143, 363. (n) Menachot, c. 8. sect. l.

George Haydock
2Sa 13:23 Two. Hebrew, “full years.” He waited so long, that he might put his murderous designs in execution with less suspicion. (Haydock) —

Sheep. It was esteemed the best husbandry, “to have fine flocks;” bene pascere: (Cato) even for the nobility. —

Ephraim, or Ephrem; (John xi. 54.) probably near Bethel. (Josephus, Jewish Wars v. 33.) (Calmet) —

Nabal had made a feast on a similar occasion, 1 Kings xxv. Absalom invites his father to avoid suspicion; (Menochius) though he would be glad at his refusing to come, unless perhaps he would not have hesitated to order his brother to be murdered in his very presence, in order to punish both. (Haydock)

John Gill
2Sa 13:27 But Absalom pressed him,…. Which one would think would have increased his suspicion, if he had any, or have raised it in him; but his mind was blinded, that Amnon’s incest might be punished and the threatening to David and his house be fulfilled on account of the affair of Uriah and Bathsheba:

that he let Amnon and all the king’s sons go with him; if he had any suspicion at all, he might choose they should all go, that they might protect and defend him, if any attempt was made upon him; or, as others think, that no exceptions might be taken, as might be, if Amnon had gone alone.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
2Sa 13:28
Absalom had commanded his servants, saying … when Amnon’s heart is merry with wine … kill him, fear not — On a preconcerted signal from their master, the servants, rushing upon Amnon, slew him at the table, while the rest of the brothers, horror-struck, and apprehending a general massacre, fled in affrighted haste to Jerusalem.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
2Sa 13:29
every man gat him up upon his mule — This had become the favorite equipage of the great. King David himself had a state mule (1Ki_1:33). The Syrian mules are, in activity, strength, and capabilities, still far superior to ours.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
2Sa 13:37
Absalom fled, and went to Talmai — The law as to premeditated murder (Num_35:21) gave him no hope of remaining with impunity in his own country. The cities of refuge could afford him no sanctuary, and he was compelled to leave the kingdom, taking refuge at the court of Geshur, with his maternal grandfather, who would, doubtless, approve of his conduct.

John Gill
2Sa 13:38 So Absalom fled,…. This is the third time it is mentioned, and the reason of it here Abarbinel thinks is, that when he first fled to his grandfather, he used to stand openly in the court of his palace, and go with him wherever he went from place to place; but when he understood that his father mourned so for the death of Amnon, he was afraid he would send some person to lay hold on him, and take vengeance on him; and therefore he would go no more with the king from place to place, but went and abode in Geshur always, which was a fortified city, as it follows:

and went to Geshur, and was there three years: and never went out of it, until he was fetched by Joab, as 2Sa_14:23 relates; nor is there anything in 2Sa_13:37 disturbed and mutilated, as Spinosa (r) intimates, but the whole is very expressive and emphatic.

(r) Tractat. Theolog. Politic. c. 9. p. 176.

John Gill
2Sa 13:39 And the soul of King David longed to go forth unto Absalom,…. In like manner it is supplied and paraphrased in the Targum, because the word rendered “longed” is feminine; though it may be used to denote the effeminateness of David’s disposition and carriage on this occasion. Aben Ezra thinks the word “wife”, should be supplied, and then the sense is, that the wife of King David, the mother of Absalom, made supplication to him to send forth one of the young men to fetch Absalom, and that by her importunity to him she stirred up a longing desire in David after him.

Abarbinel observes, from another writer of theirs, that all the three years David was mourning for his son, he went out continually to seek to take vengeance on Absalom; but after that time, the mother of Absalom, or Tamar his sister, or his daughter, was importunate with the king, and restrained him from going forth to seek vengeance on Absalom; and when he was comforted concerning Amnon, that woman found means to restrain him from going out, and he restrained his servants from going forth against Absalom; and so he observes the word is used for withholding or restraining in Psa_40:10; and this agrees with several ancient versions, as the Vulgate Latin,”King David ceased to persecute Absalom;”and the Septuagint,”King David ceased to go out to Absalom;”and the Syriac version,”and King David abstained from going out after Absalom:”

for he was comforted concerning Amnon, seeing he was dead; and could not be brought back from the grave, though Absalom might be from his exile, to which he had an inclination; but he knew not how to do it, consistent with justice and his own honour.

Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa 13:39
“And it (this) held king David back from going out to Absalom, for he comforted himself concerning Amnon, because he was dead.” In adopting this translation of the difficult clause with which the verse commences, we take וַתְּכַל in the sense of כָּלָא, as the verbs כלה and כלא frequently exchange their forms; we also take the third pers. fem. as the neuter impersonal, so that the subject is left indefinite, and is to be gathered from the context. Absalom’s flight to Geshur, and his stay there, were what chiefly prevented David from going out to Absalom. Moreover, David’s grief on account of Amnon’s death gradually diminished as time rolled on. אֶל־אבש צֵאת is used in a hostile sense, as in Deu_28:7, to go out and punish him for his wickedness. The כִּי before נִחַם might also be rendered “but,” as after a negative clause, as the principal sentence implies a negation: “He did not go out against Absalom, but comforted himself.” There is not only no grammatical difficulty in the way of this explanation of the verse, but it also suits the context, both before and after. All the other explanations proposed are either at variance with the rules of the language, or contain an unsuitable thought.

The old Jewish interpretation (adopted in the Chaldee version, and also by the Rabbins), viz., David longed (his soul pined) to go out to Absalom (i.e., to see or visit him), is opposed, as Gusset has shown (in his Lex. pp. 731-2), to the conduct of David towards Absalom as described in 2 Samuel 14, - namely, that after Joab had succeeded by craft in bringing him back to Jerusalem, David would not allow him to come into his presence for two whole years (2Sa_14:24, 2Sa_14:28).

Luther’s rendering, “and king David left off going out against Absalom,” is not only precluded by the feminine תְּכַל, but also by the fact that nothing has been said about any pursuit of Absalom on the part of David. Other attempts at emendations there is no need whatever to refute.

John Gill
2Sa 14:24 And the king said,…. Very probably to Joab, when he informed him of Absalom’s being come to Jerusalem:

let him turn to his own house; depart from the king’s palace, where Joab had brought him, and go to his own house, which was in Jerusalem; for here he had one before he fled to Geshur; see 2Sa_13:20,

and let him not see my face; which he ordered, partly to show his detestation of the crime he had been guilty of, and some remaining resentment in his mind at him on account of it; and partly for his credit among some of the people at least, who might think it was a crime so great as not to go unpunished, though others were of a different mind; and also for the greater humiliation of Absalom, who, the king might think, had not been sufficiently humbled for his sin, or had not truly repented of it:

so Absalom returned to his own house, and saw not the king’s face; in obedience to his father’s orders.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
2Sa 14:28
So Absalom dwelt two full years in Jerusalem, and saw not the king’s face — Whatever error David committed in authorizing the recall of Absalom, he displayed great prudence and command over his feelings afterwards - for his son was not admitted into his father’s presence but was confined to his own house and the society of his own family. This slight severity was designed to bring him to sincere repentance, on perceiving that his father had not fully pardoned him, as well as to convince the people of David’s abhorrence of his crime. Not being allowed to appear at court, or to adopt any state, the courtiers kept aloof; even his cousin did not deem it prudent to go into his society. For two full years his liberty was more restricted, and his life more apart from his countrymen while living in Jerusalem, than in Geshur; and he might have continued in this disgrace longer, had he not, by a violent expedient, determined (2Sa_14:30) to force his case on the attention of Joab, through whose kind and powerful influence a full reconciliation was effected between him and his father.

George Haydock
2Sa 14:29 To him. Joab, like a crafty courtier, would neither disoblige the king nor the prince, and therefore wished not to meddle in this affair; as he might either excite the suspicions of the own, or the resentment of the other. (Calmet)

John Gill 2Sa 14:30
Therefore he said unto his servants,…. That did his business for him in the field, in keeping his flocks, and tilling his ground:

see Joab’s field is near mine: for great personages in those days attended to husbandry:

and he hath barley there, go and set it on fire; it being ripe, and so capable of being fired, and therefore must be some time in March or April, when barley harvest began; he served Joab as Samson did the Philistines, Jdg_15:4; which shows him to be a bold, and revengeful, and ungrateful man, to use his friend, and the general of the king’s army, after this manner:

and Absalom’s servants set the field on fire; as their master had bid them, and which is no wonder; for as they murdered Ammon at his command, they would not stop at burning Joab’s field, when he bid them do it; see 2Sa_13:28.

John Gill 2Sa 14:31
Then Joab arose, and came to Absalom unto his house,…. Provoked at what he had done, and to know the reason of it; and which was answering Absalom’s end:

and said unto him, wherefore have thy servants set my field on fire? which was not only injurious to his property, but a malicious action.

John Gill 2Sa
14:32 And Absalom answered Joab,…. Neither denying the fact, nor being ashamed of it, nor asking pardon for it; but endeavouring to vindicate it, by giving a reason as he thought sufficient for it:

behold, I sent unto thee, saying, come hither, that I may send thee to the king; which was assuming great authority over a person in such an high office as Joab was; had he been king, he could not have used more, to send for him, and command his attendance, and send him on what errand he thought fit, as here:

to say, wherefore am I come from Geshur? why did the king send for me? why did not he let me alone where I was? to what purpose am I brought hither, since I am not admitted to court?

it had been good for me to have been there still; and better, where he lived in a king’s court, and had honour and respect shown him, suitable to his rank; and where he had his liberty, and could go where he pleased; and where this mark of his father’s displeasure, not suffering him to see his face, would not be so manifest as here, and so less disgraceful to him:

now therefore let me see the king’s face; that is, speak to the king, and intercede for me, that I may see his face; which he was so importunate for, not from affection to the king; but that being at court, he might be able to ingratiate himself among the courtiers and others, and carry the point which his ambition prompted him to, supplant the king, and seize the crown:

and if there be any iniquity in me, let him kill me; signifying he chose to die, rather than to live such a life he did: but of being put to death he was not much afraid; presuming partly upon his innocence, thinking that the killing of his brother was no crime, because he was the aggressor, had ravished his sister, and for it ought to die; and since justice was delayed, and not done him, he had committed no iniquity in putting him to death; and partly on his father’s affection to him, which he was sensible of; at least he had reason to believe he would not now put him to death; for had he designed that, he would have ordered it before now, since he had had him so long in his hands.

Keil and Delitzsch 2Sa_14:31-33 When Joab came to Absalom’s house in consequence of this, and complained of it, Absalom said to him, “See, I have sent to thee, to say to thee, Come hither, and I will send thee to the king, to say to him, Wherefore have I come from Geshur? it were better for me that I were there still: and now I will see the king’s face; and if there is any iniquity in me, let him put me to death.” This half forgiving was really worse than no forgiveness at all.

Absalom might indeed very properly desire to be punished according to the law, if the king could not or might not forgive him; although the manner in which he sought to obtain forgiveness by force manifested an evident spirit of defiance, by which, with the well-known mildness of David’s temper, he hoped to attain his object, and in fact did attain it. For (2Sa_14:33) when Joab went to the king, and announced this to him, the king sent for Absalom, and kissed him, as a sign of his restoration to favour.

Nothing was said by Absalom about forgiveness; for his falling down before the king when he came into his presence, was nothing more than the ordinary manifestation of reverence with which a subject in the East approaches his king.

George Haydock

2Sa 15:1

Before him. Romulus instituted the 300 guards, whom he called Celeres, for the like purpose. (Calmet) —

Absalom’s ambition could not wait patiently for the death of his father, who was not yet sixty years old, and had been first anointed forty years before, ver. 7. He looked upon himself as the heir apparent, Amnon being now slain, and Cheliab (or Daniel) either dead, as it is thought, or unfit for government, while Solomon was only eight years old. (Salien) —

The quality of his mother, and his own personal qualifications, made him despise his brethren, and he began to assume the equipage of a king. (Calmet) —

 David considered this as only the effect of juvenile vanity, and he had not a mind to irritate him, without the utmost necessity. (Salien) —

Hebrew, “Absalom prepared for himself a chariot, (Protestants, chariots) and horses,” &c. (Haydock) —

It is not certain whether he had any other horsemen but those who mounted the chariots. Horses were then very scarce in Israel. (Calmet) —

Adonias afterwards imitated his brother’s ambition, during his father’s life; (3 Kings i. 5.) so that evil was continually raised up against David, out of his own house, chap. xii. 11.

John Gill

2Sa 15:1

And it came to pass after this,…. After the reconciliation of David and Absalom, and the latter was admitted to court again:

that Absalom prepared him chariots and horses; to make himself look grand and respectable among the people; perhaps he got these from his grandfather at Geshur in Syria:

and fifty men to run before him; which added to his pomp and magnificence; and such great personages in later time have had; Nero the Roman emperor never went on a journey with less than a thousand calashes or chariots, and a great number of men that ran before him (c): and this was tacitly setting himself up for king, at least preparing for it, as Adonijah afterwards did in the same way and manner, 1Ki_1:5.

(c) Suetonius in Vit. Neron. c. 30. Vid. Senecae, Ep. 87. & 123.

John Gill

2Sa 15:2
And Absalom rose up early,…. Every morning, to show how diligent and industrious he should be, and closely apply himself to business, was he in any office trader the king, and especially when he should be king himself; this he did to ingratiate himself into the affections of the people:

and stood beside the way of the gate; either of the king’s palace, so Josephus (d), or of the city, where courts of judicature are held: the former seems most probable by what follows:

and it was so, that when any man that had a controversy came to the king for judgment; that had a controversy with another man on any account, and came to the king to have it decided according to law, or the rules of justice and equity:

then Absalom called unto him, and said, of what city art thou? which question he asked, only to lead on to some further discourse:
and he said, thy servant is of one of the tribes; that is, of one of the cities of the tribes of Israel, and not of a city of another nation. (d) Antiqu. l. 7. c. 9. sect. 1.
John Gill 2Sa 15:3 And Absalom said unto him,…. After some further talk, and finding he had a suit at law to bring on, and either seeing it drawn up in writing, or hearing his account of it, at once declared, without hearing the other party:

see, thy matters are good and right; thy cause is a good cause, and if it could be heard by proper persons there is no doubt but things would go on thy side, and thou wouldest carry thy cause:

but there is no man deputed of the king to hear thee; the king is grown old himself and his sons are negligent, and do not attend to business, and there are none besides them appointed to hear causes; and he suggested, as appears by what follows, that he was not in commission, but if he was, or should he appointed a judge, he would attend to business, and people should not go away after this manner, without having justice administered unto them,

Albert Barnes

2Sa 15:3
To flatter each man by pronouncing a favorable verdict in his case, to excite a sense of grievance and discontent by censuring the king for remissness in trying the causes brought before him by his subjects, and to suggest a sure and easy remedy for all such grievances, namely, to make Absalom king; all this, coupled with great affability and courtesy, which his personal beauty and high rank made all the more effective, were the arts by which Absalom worked his way into favor with the people, who were light and fickle as himself.

John Gill

2Sa 15:4
Absalom said, moreover,…. To the same persons, at the same time:

oh that I were made judge in the land; by which it appears that he had no office under the king; partly either because of his crime, and so not thought fit, and partly because he appeared to be an ambitious aspiring man, and so it was thought not safe to put him into any office:

that every man that hath any suit or cause might come unto me, and I would do him justice; at once, without any further trouble, or coming often, and in vain, and to no purpose.

John Gill

2Sa 15:5
And it was so, that when any man came nigh to him to do him obeisance,…. To pay his respects, and bow to him, as being the king’s son, a prince of the blood, and heir to the crown, as was supposed:

he put forth his hand, and took him, and kissed him; he put out his hand and shook hands with him, or took him about the neck and kissed him, and by this free, familiar, affable, and courteous manner, strangely won upon and gained the affections of the people, as follows. Fortunatus Schacchus (e) thinks he put forth his hand to be kissed by them, and then kissed them, which was more than was usual.

(e) Eloeochrism. Myrothec. l. 3. c. 34. col. 964.

Adam Clarke

2Sa 15:6
So Absalom stole the hearts - His manner of doing this is circumstantially related above. He was thoroughly versed in the arts of the demagogue; and the common people, the vile mass, heard him gladly. He used the patriot’s arguments, and was every thing of the kind, as far as promise could go. He found fault with men in power; and he only wanted their place, like all other pretended patriots, that he might act as they did, or worse.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown

2Sa 15:2-6
Absalom rose up early, and stood beside the way of the gate — Public business in the East is always transacted early in the morning - the kings sitting an hour or more to hear causes or receive petitions, in a court held anciently, and in many places still, in the open air at the city gateway; so that, as those whose circumstances led them to wait on King David required to be in attendance on his morning levees, Absalom had to rise up early and stand beside the way of the gate. Through the growing infirmities of age, or the occupation of his government with foreign wars, many private causes had long lain undecided, and a deep feeling of discontent prevailed among the people. This dissatisfaction was artfully fomented by Absalom, who addressed himself to the various suitors; and after briefly hearing their tale, he gratified everyone with a favorable opinion of his case. Studiously concealing his ambitious designs, he expressed a wish to be invested with official power, only that he might accelerate the course of justice and advance the public interests. His professions had an air of extraordinary generosity and disinterestedness, which, together with his fawning arts in lavishing civilities on all, made him a popular favorite. Thus, by forcing a contrast between his own display of public spirit and the dilatory proceedings of the court, he created a growing disgust with his father’s government, as weak, careless, or corrupt, and seduced the affections of the multitude, who neither penetrated the motive nor foresaw the tendency of his conduct.

Our Sunday School classes here at church are going through 1 & 2 Samuel this quarter.  We have had such a blessing getting to know God through this portion of Scripture.

One of the great challenges of pastoral ministry is convincing some Christians of their value and purpose in the Kingdom of God. They look at their weaknesses and magnify them rather than as a result they minimize God’s working in their hearts. They neglect to believe that God has gifted them, even in light of Scripture (1 Corinthians 12:28-31).

In our staff meeting last week, I shared with our staff 1 Samuel 30:16-25:

And when he had taken him down, behold, they were spread abroad over all the land, eating and drinking and dancing, because of all the great spoil they had taken from the land of the Philistines and from the land of Judah. [17] And David struck them down from twilight until the evening of the next day, and not a man of them escaped, except four hundred young men, who mounted camels and fled. [18] David recovered all that the Amalekites had taken, and David rescued his two wives. [19] Nothing was missing, whether small or great, sons or daughters, spoil or anything that had been taken. David brought back all. [20] David also captured all the flocks and herds, and the people drove the livestock before him, and said, “This is David’s spoil.”

[21] Then David came to the two hundred men who had been too exhausted to follow David, and who had been left at the brook Besor. And they went out to meet David and to meet the people who were with him. And when David came near to the people he greeted them. [22] Then all the wicked and worthless fellows among the men who had gone with David said, “Because they did not go with us, we will not give them any of the spoil that we have recovered, except that each man may lead away his wife and children, and depart.” [23] But David said, “You shall not do so, my brothers, with what the Lord has given us. He has preserved us and given into our hand the band that came against us. [24] Who would listen to you in this matter? For as his share is who goes down into the battle, so shall his share be who stays by the baggage. They shall share alike.” [25] And he made it a statute and a rule for Israel from that day forward to this day.

Some of the warriors had the strength to pursue the Amalekites after they had captured David’s wives and taken the spoil. Yet, some did not have the strength, so they stayed behind and watched the baggage. Both had a part to play, so both could share in the spoils.

Each of us who are engaged in the Christian battle against the world, the flesh, and the devil (1 John 2:15-17) have varying amounts of strength. But everyone, whether they can go or they can stay, regardless of age or gifting, is able to share in the spoils of God’s Kingdom in Christ.

A New Testament passage which parallels this understanding in Matthew 20:1-16. The master of a house had a vineyard and was in need of workers. He hired some at the beginning of the day, promising a denarius. He hired others at the third hour, sixth hour, ninth hour, then the eleventh hour. At the twelfth hour, when he began paying them for their work, he paid the laborer who only worked an hour a denarius. Those who had worked all day thought they would get 12 times that amount since they worked 12 times as long — but the master gave them what they agreed upon — a denarius as well. Look at the rationale of the master:

But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? [14] Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. [15] Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’ [16] So the last will be first, and the first last.”

The perspective is what matters. Do we look at what we feel we should receive, or do we admire the generosity of the master? By God’s grace, we have Christ, regardless of whether He chose to have us work in His vineyard for decades, or just a few months — He is generous and gracious in that regardless of the time, all Christians will have every bit of the Son and His Spirit that we need.

 Here are some of my notes for Sunday, November 9, 2008 based on the Lifeway Explore the Bible curriculum

 Reference works cited include:

1)IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament by Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas

2) 1, 2 Samuel New American Commentary by Robert D. Bergen

3)The David Story by Robert Alter 

4)International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1915): Studylight online edition; Esword dictionaries module download page

 5) Wycliffe Historical Geography of Bible Lands by Howard F. Vos

2 Sam 5:3
elders: Without a king or other prominent leader, tribes would be ruled by an assembly of elders, who would serve as tribal court and act as representatives of the people in important gatherings. David would likely need the elders’ endorsement before he would be accepted by the people. (BBCOT)

If in 2 Sam 5:1 it was the tribes, the common folk, of Israel accepting David as king, here it is the elders specifically who come to “the king”, presumably to make the forthcoming covenant with him for his reign over them. (Alter)

covenant: In a move like that of 2 Sam 2:4’s compact with Judah, here the tribes of Israel formally declare David their king. This likely included a written document like Samuel drew up at Saul’s proclamation as king in 1 Sam 10:25. (BBCOT)

anointing: This makes David’s third anointing, and like the one with Judah’s tribe, this anointing was symbolic of Israel’s acceptance of David as their king. In the ANE anointing was often part of business contracts and symbolized an increase in status(BBCOT)

It is useful to remember that at this point David was the only credible leader left to Israel, as Abner and Ishbosheth
had been killed. David had several things going for him as king:
1. Proven record of military success.
2. Prophecies calling David Israel’s leader.
3. Already king of the Southern part of the country (Judah).
4. His magnanimous treatment of Saul’s heirs. (Bergen)

2 Sam 5:4-5
David reign is generally placed within 1010-970 BC. And while forty seems a traditional Biblical round number, the careful laying out of the reign’s chronology (”seven years and six months”) makes one think it is more a precise figure. (BBCOT, Alter)

2 Sam 5:6
Jerusalem: The city straddles important roads in both directions:
1. East- West road from near Jericho to the coastal highway that leads from Egypt to Babylon.
2. North- South road from near Beersheba in extreme South to Beth Shan in the North, about two thirds of the way from Jerusalem to the Sea of Galilee along the Jordan’s West Bank.
3. Deep valleys on either side of the Jerusalem ridge and the Gihon spring made the location a good defensible military location

There are Egyptian records of the city as far back as the early second millennium BC. By David’s day the city occupied the North South ridge south of the modern city walls, an area four hundred feet wide and fifteen hundred feet long. That allows an estimated population of about a thousand. The city was built on a erected platform supported by terraces. The city was enclosed by a ten foot wall built some eight centuries before David’s day. (BBCOT)

Jebusites: These were probably non-Semitic people who moved into the area and founded “Jerusalem” around the beginning of the early second millennium BC.(BBCOT)

lame and blind: Some have suggested that by putting lame and blind people on the walls, the Jebusites were seeking to work a form of sympathetic magic that would then blind and lame David’s troops. Yigdal Yadin suggested a blind woman and a lame man were placed before the Jebusite troops, who were sworn to do their duty or suffer the same fate as the blind woman and lame man. Most likely is the common suggestion that the phrase is a reference to the city’s impregnability, so strong even blind and lame people could defend it from David’s forces.(BBCOT, Alter)

A practical reason for David to choose Jerusalem as his capital was that it was centrally located on roads leading to all parts of the country, and a well-fortified city. A religious reason would be that the Jebusites were among the Canaanites God had told the Exodus generation to wipe out, which they and their descendants had failed to do. Thus David would be showing his obedience to God while gaining a strategic capital.(Alter)

2 Sam 5:8
water shaft: Since the nineteenth century discovery of Warren’s Shaft, a water tunnel connecting Jerusalem to the Gihon spring, scholars have assumed that shaft is what David refers to here. The most recent archaeological work has suggested the shaft was never a water tunnel and was not connected underground to Jerusalem in David’s time. Thus scholars are once again unsure exactly how Joab secreted his troops into the city, as revealed in 1 Chron 11:6. (BBCOT)

2 Sam 5:9
City of David: This may match an ancient practice in much of the ANE that made the capital city not only the royal residence but the personal estate of the reigning king and his heirs. This frequently gave the royal cities certain privileges, mainly exemption from various forms of taxation and labor and military drafts.(BBCOT)

supporting terraces (millo): Now generally held to a stepped stone of rock and earth that artificially expanded the narrow ridge top out some two thousand square feet.

2 Sam 5:11
Tyre: From ISBE:”Tyre
tīr (צר, cowr. חר, cōr, “rock”’ Τύρος, túros, “Tyrus”; modern Sur):

1. Physical Features:
The most noted of the Phoenician cities situated on the coast, lat. 33ø 17 minutes, about 20 miles South of Sidon and about 35 North of Carmel. The date of its foundation is uncertain, but it was later than that of Sidon. It is mentioned in the travels of the Egyptian Mohar, dating probably from the 14th century BC, and in the Tell el-Amarna Letters of about the same period. Herodotus describes the temple of Hercules at Tyre and says it was built 2,300 years before his time, which would carry back the beginning of the city to more than 2700 BC. It was a double city, one part on an island, a short distance from the shore, and the other on the mainland opposite. The island city had two harbors, connected by a canal, one looking North and the other South. The island was rocky and the city was fortified on the land side by a wall 150 ft. high, the wall being of less elevation on the other sides. It was an exceedingly strong position, and is referred to in the Bible as the “strong” or “fortified” city (Jos_19:29). The space within the walls was crowded with buildings, and is said to have contained 40,000 inhabitants. The town on the mainland was situated in a plain extending from the Ras el-‛Abyaḍ, on the South to Sarepta on the North, a distance of about 20 miles. It was fertile and well watered, the river Leontes (Litany) passing through it to the sea, about 5 miles N. of Tyre, and the copious fountain of Ras el-‛Ain, 3 miles to the South, furnishing an abundant supply both for the city and the gardens.

2. History:

(1) Tyre was for centuries subordinate to Sidon, but when the Philistines subdued the latter city, probably in the 12th century. (see SIDON), Tyre received an accession of inhabitants from the fugitives which gave it the pre-eminence. From this time dates its great commercial and colonial activity. Its mariners pushed boldly out to the West and founded colonies in Spain and North Africa, some of which, like Gades, Abdera and Carthage, became famous. They extended their commerce more widely than Sidon had ever done and ventured into the Atlantic and reached the coasts of Britain and West Africa. They reached out to the East also, and had their ships in the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, and their land routes threaded all Western Asia (see PHOENICIA). Tyre, like all the Phoenician cities, became subject to Egypt under Thothmes III in the first half of the 15th century BC, and remained so for some 300 years, but it enjoyed practical autonomy under native kings, being only subject to tribute and to furnishing contingents of ships when the Egyptian kings made their expeditions to the North. In the Tell el-Amarna Letters, dating from the first half of the 14th century, we find a certain Abi-melek (or Abi-milki) writing from Tyre to the king of Egypt asking for aid against the Amorite leader, Aziru, and the king of Sidon, who had joined the rebels. The name is Phoenician, and we know that it was the policy of the Egyptian kings to leave the native dynasts on the throne.

(2) After the decline of Egypt, Tyre regained her independence and exercised the hegemony over most of the Phoenician towns, at least as far North as Gebal (Byblus), as appears in the control that Hiram had over the Lebanon forests in the time of David and Solomon. Hiram was evidently desirous of an alliance with Israel, since he sent messengers to David and furnished cedar and workmen to build him a house, apparently without solicitation. The friendly connection between the two kingdoms was advantageous to both, since David and Solomon needed the timber and the skilled artisans that Hiram could furnish, and Hiram needed the food products of the land of Israel (1 Ki 5). Tyre was at this time noted for the skill of its artificers, and its manufactured products were famous throughout the world (see PHOENICIA, 4.). The purple dye and works in bronze were especially famous, and Hiram, the Tyrian artisan, was engaged by Solomon to cast the bronzes required for the temple (1Ki_7:13 ff). Hiram, the king, enlarged and beautified his capital. He united the two small islands on which the city was built by filling up the space between, where he made an open square and built a splendid temple to Melkarth and Astarte. He engaged in commercial enterprises with Solomon (1Ki_9:26-28; 1Ki_10:22), both in pursuance of the friendly alliance and also for the advantage of having the use of the port of Ezion-geber on the Red Sea. His brilliant reign lasted 43 years.

(3) The list of kings who succeeded him contains the names of Baal-azar, Abd-ashtoreth, murdered by his brothers, the eldest of whom succeeded him, followed by Astartus and Aserymus murdered by his brother, Pheles, who was overthrown by the high priest Eth-baal, showing how disturbed the period was. Eth-baal, or Ithobal, was the king who made an alliance with Ahab and gave him Jezebel, his daughter, in marriage, which proved most disastrous both to her and the country because of the introduction of the Baal-worship into Israel. Eth-baal was an energetic monarch, and is said to have rounded Botrys (Batrun). He reigned 32 years, and was followed by Badezor and Mattan, who gave his daughter, Elissa (Dido), in marriage to her uncle Sicharbas and transferred the throne to them; but they were set aside by an uprising of the people, and Pygmalion, son of Mattan, was placed on the throne, and Sicharbas put to death. Elissa fled with a party of nobles, by sea, to Africa and founded the city of Carthage. This happened about the middle of the 9th century BC, Josephus putting it at 860 BC.

(4) In the first half of this century Tyre became subject to Assyria, and her hegemony in Phoenicia came to an end, but her prosperity was not seriously checked as we may infer from Isa_23:8, which was written a century or so later. Assyria was satisfied with the payment of tribute until the time of Tiglath-pileser III (745-727), who laid a heavier hand upon her, and this led Elulaeus, king of Tyre, to form a confederacy of the Phoenician cities against Assyria. Shalmaneser IV subdued all except Tyre, which he distressed by cutting off her water-supply. But the people dug wells and obtained enough to subsist upon for five years, when Shalmaneser was killed and Elulaeus recovered control of his territory. He was not molested by Sargon, but Sennacherib advanced against him with 200,000 men, and Elulaeus fled to Cyprus. The citizens made a successful resistance and Sennacherib did not take Tyre, but it submitted to Esar-haddon, and its king, Baal, obtained the special favor of the Assyrian king, who made him ruler of all the coast cities from Dor to Gebal, and the Lebanon was placed under his control (680-673 BC). It is rather surprising that Baal refused to assist him in his attack upon Egypt and that Esar-haddon did not punish him, probably because he was too much occupied with Egypt. Ashur-banipal, however, did compel him to submit and to give him his daughter, and those of his brothers, as secondary wives, but left him as king of Tyre.

(5) On the decline of Assyria, Tyre regained its independence, and its greatness is indicated by the fact that it resisted Nebuchadnezzar 13 years (598-585); it is uncertain whether the island city was taken, but it evidently came to terms with the king of Babylon (compare Eze_27:26; Josephus, Ant., X, xi, 1 and see The Expository Times, 1899, pp. 378, 430, 475, 520). After this siege Sidon took the lead and Tyre was in a disturbed state: the monarchy was overthrown and suffetes, or judges, took its place for six years, when the old order was restored. The decline of Babylon enabled Tyre to regain her independence for a short period until its submission to the Persians about 525 BC, and thenceforth it was a vassal state during the continuance of the Persian empire.

(6) It was by no means hindered in its commercial prosperity, and its great strength is seen in the brave and energetic resistance it made to Alexander the Great. All Phoenicia submitted to him without resistance, and Tyre was willing to admit his suzerainty, but declined to receive him into the city. This so angered Alexander that he at once commenced a siege that proved the most difficult undertaking in all his wars. He had no fleet and was obliged to build a mole (causeway) from the mainland to the island, but before he could finish it the Tyrians destroyed it and beat back their assailants handily. Alexander had to do the work all over again, and since he was convinced that without a fleet he would not be able to take the city, he procured ships from the Phoenician towns that had submitted, and with the aid of these was able to blockade the port and prevent the besieged from issuing forth to destroy the new causeway. This was at length pushed up to the very wall of the city, which was finally breached, and the troops of Alexander forced their way in. But even then the defenders would not yield, and the king himself had to lead the assault upon them with his bodyguard and put them all to the sword. Those who died with arms in their hands were 8,000, and the survivors, women, children and slaves, to the number of 30,000, were sold in the open market. He placed over the ruined city, into which he introduced some colonists, a certain Abd-elonim, and left it after having spent about seven months in subduing it.

(7) After the death of Alexander, Tyre passed into the hands of Ptolemy Lagi, and when Antigonus, in 314 BC, took Phoenicia from him, Tyre resisted, and he had to blockade it 15 months before it would yield, showing how quickly it had recovered from its previous disaster. It became a part of the Seleucid kingdom when Antiochus III drove the Ptolemies from Syria (198 BC), and the Seleucid kings regarded it of importance and gave it the right of asylum, and it was allowed the status of a free city by the Romans, Antony recognizing the magistrates and council of Tyre as allies. When the Parthians attacked and took Syria, in 40 BC, Tyre would not submit and was left untouched, being too strong for them. Augustus deprived it of its freedom, but it was given the status of a “metropolis” by Hadrian, and this title appears on its coins.

(8) Tyre is mentioned in the New Testament several times: Christ visited its territory (Mat_15:21; Mar_7:24), and people from there came to hear Him (Luk_6:17). Herod Agrippa I had trouble with Tyre, and a deputation came to visit him at Caesarea (Act_12:20). Paul visited Tyre on his journey from Asia to Jerusalem (Act_21:6-7).
Christianity was accepted by the people of Tyre, so that the 2nd century AD saw a bishopric established there, and in the 4th a council was held there to consider charges against Athanasius, by the party of Arius; he was condemned, a decision which brought the Tyrian church into disrepute. Tyre was already obnoxious to Christians because the anti-Christian philosopher Porphyry was from there. Tyre continued a commercial center, and Jerome says that it was the noblest and most beautiful of the Phoenician cities and an emporium of commerce for almost the whole world (Commentary on Ezekiel). …”

Hiram I, the Great: This famous king of Tyre is the real founder of the famed city, as it was he who united the island and the mainland and began the building projects that made Tyre the economic power and nigh impregnable fortress it later became. His reigning dates are problematical, perhaps 970-935 BC, perhaps more 978-943 BC. Either way, it doesn’t seem likely that he could have provided David men and materials to build his palace early in David’s reign (1010- 970 BC), as Hiram I was likely only about twenty when he came to the throne. There are two basic solutions to this chronological problem:

1. Assume “Hiram” was a royal title name, and the Hiram who dealt with David was actually Abibaal, Hiram I’s father, while Hiram himself dealt only with Solomon.

2. Assume the account in this part of 2 Samuel is topical, not chronological, and that David built his palace late in his reign, when Hiram I could have aided him.(BBCOT, Vos)

3. Assume the bible is correct, and the chronology of Josephus is wrong. This is not improbable, but it is also entirely possible that when Solomon speaks of “you” helping his father David, he is speaking of the city of Tyre, not that same Hiram himself.

Cedar: These trees grow slow and can live as long as three thousand years, and grow as tall as one hundred twenty feet. The wood is very resistant to fungus, making it a long lasting building material. The trees grew in the forests of Lebanon, which were being harvested as early as the 3000 BCs. By David’s time, the forests were small enough to make the wood very valuable indeed. (BBCOT)

David’s palace: No firm candidate for this palace has been excavated. A Phoenician-style palace found in Megiddo gives an idea what the palace might have been like, being a two story building of stone about seventy feet square, with a guard tower, columned porch, multiple halls, a audience chamber, a interior courtyard, and about a dozen smaller rooms on the first floor for residence or administrative purposes. The cedar would have been employed primarily in the paneling in the palace rooms. (BBCOT, Alter)

2 Sam 7:2
Nathan the prophet: While prophet-judges had led Israel after the Conquest, with the creation of the monarchy in Israel prophets became advisors to the king, who would either accept or reject the prophet’s advice. (BBCOT)

house vs tent: It was common ANE practice for a victorious king to build a temple in gratitude to his patron deity. The temple would serve to bring the protection of the deity to the king and his land.(BBCOT)

2 Sam 7:3-5
Divine approval: While kings commonly built temples to their patron deities in the ANE, getting divine approval for the temple was absolutely necessary, as ancient folklore told stories of collapsing temples and the fall of dynasties as the result of kings building temples without divine permission. (BBCOT)

Nathan’s answer to David is presumably made off the cuff, based on God’s great blessing of success on everything David has done so far. That it is not prophetic is made clear that same night. (Alter)

In 7:4 God calls David “my servant”, a term of obvious approval used before of Abraham(Gen 26:24), Moses(Num 12:7-8), and Caleb (Num 14:24) andlater used of Isaiah (Is 20:3), Job (Job 1:8), and the Messiah (Is 52:13, Zech 3:8)(Bergen)

2 Sam 7:8-9
Divine protection: Again, it is typical in the ANE that a patron deity is credited with the successes of a king and his nation. (BBCOT)

2 Sam 7:10-11
God promises to give Israel a permanent nation here, as well as bringing them peace from their foreign enemies, something that had only been temporary under the judges. (Alter)

“House” has a double meaning here. It refers both to the temple itself, and David’s political dynasty, which effectively begins with Solomon, who also builds the temple. (Alter)

2 Sam 7:14
god/king as father/son: Another common trope in ANE is the notion of the king as son of a god, whether that be Egypt’s pharaoh as son of Ra, the Aramean kings being sons of Hadad, and plenty of Mesopotamian rulers being god’s descendants. (BBCOT)

rod, blows: Here God promises to discipline Israel, but with human sources, not supernatural ones. (Alter)

2 Sam 7:15
faithful love: Numerous ANE cultures show that “lords” positive actions toward vassals are called “love, graciousness, kindness”. Love is how friendly relationships between nations was expressed. What was mostly absent was any notion of love from a vassal to a lord. Instead obedience and loyalty were the primary expectations of a vassal. (BBCOT)

2 Sam 7:12-16
The verses have huge implications for both Jews and Christians. On the Christian side, the NT refers back to these verses repeatedly as foundation for seven NT teachings about Jesus:
1. Son of David (Matt 1:1, Acts 13:22-23; Rom 1:3, 2 Tim 2:8, Rev 22:16)
2. Who rises from the dead (Acts 2:30, 13:23)
3. Builder of the House of God (John 2:19-22, Heb 3:3-4)
4. Possessor of a Throne (Heb 1:8, Rev 3:21)
5.Possesor of an eternal kingdom (1 Cor 15:24-25; Eph 5:5; Heb 1:8; 2 Pet 1:11)
6. Son of God (Mark 1:1, John 20 :31; Acts 9:20; Heb 4:14; Rev 2:18)
7. Immaculately conceived as son of God (Luk 1:32-35) (Bergen)

2 Sam 7:21
Note David does not attribute God’s favor to anything he or Israel has done, but rather God’s own will and in order to show fulfillment of his own words spoken to men.

2 Sam 7:23
David doesn’t entirely understand God’s purposes in doing all these things for David and Israel, and can only deem these future and past actions on Israel’s behalf as “great and awesome action” done by God “to make a name for Himself”. David’s humility is on display here, as it should be in any believer before God.

Bibliographical details:
Brettler, M. Z. (2005). How to Read the Bible. Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society.

Publisher’s information:
In his new book, master Bible scholar and teacher Marc Brettler argues that today’s contemporary readers can only understand the ancient Hebrew scripture by knowing more about the culture that produced it. And so Brettler unpacks the literary conventions, ideological assumptions, and historical conditions that inform the biblical text and demonstrates how modern critical scholarship and archaeological discoveries shed light on this fascinating and complex literature.

Brettler surveys representative biblical texts from different genres to illustrate how modern scholars have taught us to ‘read’ these texts. Using the ‘historical-critical method’ long popular in academia, he guides us in reading the Bible as it was read in the biblical period, independent of later religious norms and interpretive traditions. Understanding the Bible this way lets us appreciate it as a fascinating text that speaks in multiple voices on profound issues.

In his afterword, the author discusses how the historical-critical method can help contemporary Jews relate to the Bible as a religious text in a more meaningful way.

‘At last, a book that successfully bridges the gap between the discoveries of biblical scholarship and the needs of contemporary readers! How to Read the Bible is an extraordinary book – both erudite and accessible.’ – Carol Meyers, Mary Grace Wilson Professor in the Department of Religion, Duke University

‘An introduction to the Hebrew Bible I can recommend with enthusiasm and confidence. Marc Brettler’s new book is a model of educational clarity, judicious discussions, and critical analysis. He is an authoritative guide into the Bible’s many genres, stylistic intricacies, and religious teachings.’ – Michael Fishbane, Nathan Cummings Professor of Jewish Studies, University of Chicago

‘Brettler offers a discussion that is explicitly and specifically concerned for Jewish faith, but his work will be instructive for others as well, especially Christians who struggle with the same issue[s]. Brettler’s contribution is a welcome one, reflecting deep learning, judicious judgment, and shrewd interpretation.’ – Walter Brueggemann, William Marcellus McPheeters Professor of Old Testament, Columbia Theological Seminary

‘Marc Brettler’s How to Read the Bible is a marvelous and unique introduction to the Bible for contemporary readers. In a clear and readable style Brettler helps us understand the Bible in its own context, clarifying its world view and religious sensibility and opening up the cultural context and historical background of the age in which it was born. Brettler shows the way that modern biblical scholarship can help us understand and appreciate the foundational book of Jewish civilization.’ – Barry W. Holtz, Theodore and Florence Baumritter Professor of Jewish Education, Jewish Theological Seminary

A GUIDE TO READING THE BIBLE THROUGH THE EYES OF ITS WRITERS

This book is the first ‘Jewishly sensitive’ introduction to the historical-critical method of interpreting the Bible. Unlike other such introductory texts, the Bible that this book speaks about is the Jewish one – with the three-part TANAKH arrangement, the sequence of books found in modern printed Hebrew editions, and the chapter and verse enumerations used in most modern Jewish versions.

Marc Zvi Brettler received his B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. in Near Eastern and Judaic Studies from Brandeis University, where he is now Dora Golding Professor of Biblical Literature and chair of the Department of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies. His main areas of research are religious metaphors and the Bible, biblical historical texts, and women and the Bible. He is the author of several books and co-editor of The Jewish Study Bible.

Table of contents:
Preface … ix
Abbreviations … xiii

1. Reading as a Jew and as a Scholar … 1
2. What Is the Bible, Anyway? … 7
3. The Art of Reading the Bible … 13
4. A Brief History of Israel … 19
5. With Scissors and Paste: The Sources of Genesis … 29
6. Creation vs. Creationism: Genesis 1–3 as Myth … 37
7. The Ancestors as Heroes … 49
8. Biblical Law: Codes and Collections … 61
9. Incense Is Offensive to Me: The Cult in Ancient Israel … 73
10. ‘In the Fortieth Year … Moses Addressed the Israelites’: Deuteronomy … 85
11. ‘The Walls Came Tumbling Down’: Reading Joshua … 95
12. ‘May My Lord King David Live Forever’: Royal Ideology in Samuel and Judges … 107
13. ‘For Israel Tore Away from the House of David’: Reading Kings … 117
14. Revisionist History: Reading Chronicles … 129
15. Introduction to Prophecy … 137
16. ‘Let Justice Well Up like Water’: Reading Amos … 149
17. ‘They Shall Beat Their Swords into Plowshares’: Reading (First) Isaiah … 161
18. ‘I Will Make This House like Shiloh’: Reading Jeremiah … 173
19. ‘I Will Be for Them a Mini-Temple’: Reading Ezekiel … 185
20. ‘Comfort, Oh Comfort My People’: The Exile and Beyond … 199
21. ‘Those That Sleep in the Dust … Will Awake’: Zechariah, Apocalyptic Literature, and Daniel … 209
22. Prayer of Many Hearts: Reading Psalms … 219
23. ‘Acquire Wisdom’: Reading Proverbs and Ecclesiastes … 231
24. ‘Being But Dust and Ashes’: Reading Job … 243
25. ‘Drink Deep of Love!’: Reading Song of Songs … 257
26. ‘Why Are You So Kind … When I Am a Foreigner?’: Reading Ruth vs. Esther … 267
27. The Creation of the Bible … 273
Afterword: Reading the Bible as a Committed Jew … 279

Notes … 285
Sources Cited … 339
Index of Subjects … 361
Index of Biblical Passages and Other References … 372

You may also be interested to read the review (in French) by Pierre Keith, published in the Review of Biblical Literature.

Buy this book from Amazon. Or perhaps you may be looking for some other titles in biblical studies.

There is something amazing about a spiritual covenant between two people, especially when in this case it refers not to the marriage covenant. Alternatively, there is immense gravity in distorting a spiritual covenant with sin. To explore this concept and others I will be turning to Jonathan & David:

• 1 Samuel 18:1-4
• 1 Samuel 19:1-7
• 1 Samuel 20:1-42
• 1 Samuel 23: 15-18
• 1 Samuel 31:1-2
• 2 Samuel 1:1-27
• 2 Samuel 4:4
• 2 Samuel 9:1-13
• 2 Samuel 21:7-15

Here are some of my notes for Sunday, November 2, 2008 based on the Lifeway Explore the Bible curriculum

 Reference works cited include:

1)IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament by Walton, Matthews, and Chavalas

2) 1, 2 Samuel New American Commentary by Robert D. Bergen

3)The David Story by Robert Alter 

4)International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1915): Studylight online edition; Esword dictionaries module download page

2 Sam 1:17
Lament is the Hebrew “qina”. The content and the beginning of each refrain with “How” mark this as a typical Hebrew dirge.(Bergen)

The cynical see David’s political purpose as primary here: write a public lament for the previous rulers to show David himself did not desire their death.(Alter)

2 Sam 1:18
To teach the Bow: Hebrew “qeshet”, bow, is absent from the Greek Old Testament, which becomes “to teach it”. Robert Alter changes qeshet to qashot, “the hard things”, in his translation. “Hard things” would presumably be a reference to the realities of war and politics; death and defeat.(Alter)

Book of Jashar: The only other reference to this book is Joshua 10:13. “Yashar” might be either a noun or adjective “Upright”, or a verb, “Singing, Songs”. (Alter, BBCOT)

Ordering Judah’s men to learn this dirge fulfills in part atleast David’s promise not to let Saul and Jonathan’s names wiped out. It glorifies and preserves the memory of Israel’s first royal line deals with national issues of war, death, and loss. (Bergen)

2 Sam 1:19
Glory/Gazelle found in different translations here are from the same Hebrew word “sebi” and is plainly a purposeful double meaning.(Alter)

2 Sam 1:20
Gath– From ISBE: “gath (גּת, gath; Septuagint Γέθ, Géth, “winepress”): One of the five chief cities of the Philistines (Jos_13:3; 1Sa_6:17). It was a walled town (2Ch_26:6) and was not taken by Joshua, and, although many conflicts took place between the Israelites and its people, it does not seem to have been captured until the time of David (1Ch_18:1). It was rendered famous as the abode of the giant Goliath whom David slew (1Sa_17:4), and other giants of the same race (2Sa_21:18-22). It was to Gath that the Ashdodites conveyed the ark when smitten with the plague, and Gath was also smitten (1Sa_5:8, 1Sa_5:9). It was Gath where David took refuge twice when persecuted by Saul (1Sa_21:10; 1Sa_27:2-4). It seems to have been destroyed after being taken by David, for we find Rehoboam restoring it (2Ch_11:8). It was after this reoccupied by the Philistines, for we read that Uzziah took it and razed its walls (2Ch_26:6), but it must have been restored again, for we find Hazael of Damascus capturing it (2Ki_12:17). It seems to have been destroyed before the time of Amos (Amo_6:2), and is not further mentioned in the Old Testament or Macc, except in Mic_1:10, where it is referred to in the proverb, “Tell it not in Gath” (compare 2Sa_1:20). Since its destruction occurred, probably, in the middle of the 8th century bc, it is easy to understand why the site has been lost so that it can be fixed only conjecturally.”

Actually, Gath is currently identified with Tell Es Safi, and is even now being excavated by Aren Meir.

Ashkelon–From ISBE:”Ashkelon ask´ke-lon, esh´ka-lon, as´ke-lon (the King James Version Eshkalon, (Eshkalonites; Jos_13:3); Askelon, (Jdg_1:18; 1Sa_6:17; 2Sa_1:20); אשׁקלון, ‘ashḳelōn; modern Askelan): A maritime town between Jaffa and Gaza, one of the five chief cities of the Philistines. The Ashkelonites are mentioned by Joshua (Jos_13:3), and the city was taken by the tribe of Judah (Jdg_1:18). One of the golden tumors (the King James Version “emerods”) sent back with the ark by the Philistines was from Ashkelon (1Sa_6:17). David couples Ashkelon with Gath in his lament over Saul and Jonathan (2Sa_1:20) indicating its importance, and it is joined with Gaza, Ashdod and Ekron in the denunciations of Amos (Amo_1:7, Amo_1:8). It is referred to in a similar way by Jeremiah (Jer_25:20; Jer_47:5, Jer_47:7). Zephaniah (Zep_2:4, Zep_2:7) speaks of the desolation of Ashkelon and Zechariah announces the fear of Ashkelon on the destruction of Tyre (Zec_9:5). The city is mentioned in the Tell el-Amarna Letters, and a certain Yitia is referred to as king. It revolted against Rameses II and was subdued, and we have mention of it as being under the rule of Assyria. Tiglath-pileser III names it among his tributaries, and its king, Mitinti, is said to have lost his reason when he heard of the fall of Damascus in 732 bc. It revolted in the reign of Sennacherib and was punished, and remained tributary to Assyria until the decay of that power. In Maccabean times we learn of its capture by Jonathan (1 Macc 10:86; 11:60, the Revised Version (British and American) “Ascalon”). Herod the Great was born there (BJ, III, ii, 1ff). In the 4th century ad it was the seat of a bishopric. It became subject to the Moslems in the 7th century and was taken by the Crusaders. It was taken in 1187 by Saladin, who dismantled it in 1191 to make it useless to Richard of England, into whose hands it was expected to fall. Richard restored it the next year but it was again destroyed by Saladin. It was an important fortress because of its vicinity to the trade route between Syria and Egypt.”

2 Sam 1:20
Philistine daughters rejoice: Even today in many cultures it is the women’s role to celebrate victories won by the men.

Uncircumcised: Many ANE cultures practiced circumcision, but not the Philistines. Still, the term is less about physical realities than ethnic identification. Circumcision was a major sign of Israelites’ obedience to their covenant with God, so it served as shorthand for identification of Jews and non-Jews.(BBCOT)

The exact meaning of this verse eludes me. Is David telling the Philistines not to rejoice in victory lest they anger the Israelites, and/or telling the Israelites not to give comfort to the Philistines by speaking of Israel’s loss?

2 Sam 1:21
Hills of Gilboa: David calling for the area where Saul and Jonathan died to be barren is in order that it serve as a physical monument to their death. Gilboa is only ever spoken of in the OT in connection with Saul (1 Sam 28:4, 31:1-8; 2 Sam 1:6, 21:12, 1 Chr 10:1,8). (Alter, Bergen, BBCOT)

unanointed shield: Israelite shields at this time were made of wood, with leather stretched over them and even metal plates attached in some cases. Oil was used to clean the blood from the shields, keeping the metal plates rust free and/or keeping the leather supple. (Alter, BBCOT)

Shield can refer to both the defensive weapon and a human defender, and the reference to anointing with oil invokes samuel’s anointing as king.(Bergen)

2 Sam 1:22
David here praises Saul and Jonathan’s military prowess, identifying Jonathan with his bow and Saul with his sword, both of which defended Israel as good leaders of ancient times would, in battle.(Bergen)

2 Sam 1:23
they were not parted in life or death: Hard to know what exactly David meant by this, other than to praise Saul and Jonathan for working together for Israel. In actual fact Saul and Jonathan were plainly at odds often, specifically over David, and Saul nearly killed Jonathan twice. (Alter)

2 Sam 1:24
who clothed, who decked: This is praise for the economic effect of Saul’s reign, which allowed Israel’s women to wear better clothes and jewelry, likely because Saul’s opened trade routes to Israel by keeping the Philistines at bay.(BBCOT)

2 Sam 1:25
“How the mighty have fallen” is repeated, beginning a new section, mourning Jonathan alone. David’s grief is shown by here by the fact that he himself mourns, rather than telling Israel’s women to mourn. (Bergen)

2 Sam 1:26
In a warrior, male-dominated culture such as ancient Israel, it is not surprising to see David extolling his relationship with Jonathan above his relationship with women. Ancient marriages were arranged, seeking an increase in wealth or influence, or at least the creation of a large family of sons who could support the family unit. Romance was a byproduct of ancient marriage, not a primary purpose.

Jonathan was David’s brother by marriage and by mutual affection and affinities.

It is also useful to remember David is using hyperbole throughout this lament to honor the dead.(Bergen, Alter)

2 Sam 1:27
Third repetition of refrain, “How the mighty are fallen”, signaling final section.

weapons of war: “perished” is the typical translation of the weapons’ fate here, but it seems David is using an image a broken sword and bow to symbolize Saul and Jonathan’s death, so perhaps “destroyed” or “lost” is more appropriate.

2 Sam 2:1
Apparently with the addition of Abiathar the high priest David began the practice of consulting God in major decisions, through use of the ephod’s urim and thummim. (1 Sam 23:9-12, 30:7-8)

From ISBE:”Urim and Thummim ū´rim and thum´im (והתּמּים האוּרים, hā-’ūrīm weha-tummīm (article omitted in Ezr_2:63; Neh_7:65); perhaps “light and perfection,” as intensive plurals):
1. Definition:
Articles not specifically described, placed in (next to, or on (Hebrew ‘el; Septuagint epí; Samaritan-Hebrew ‛al)) the high priest’s breastplate, called the “breast-plate of decision” (English Versions of the Bible, “judgment”). (Exo_28:30; Lev_8:8). Their possession was one of the greatest distinctions conferred upon the priestly family (Deu_33:8; Ecclesiasticus 45:10), and seems to have been connected with the function of the priests as the mouthpiece of Yahweh, as well as with the ceremonial side of the service (Exo_28:30; compare Arabic kahīn, “soothsayer”).

2. Use in the Old Testament:
Through their use, the nature of which is a matter of conjecture, the divine will was sought in national crises, and apparently the future foretold, guilt or innocence established, and, according to one theory, land divided (Bābhā’ Bathrā’ 122a; Sanhedrin 16a). Thus, Joshua was to stand before Eleazar who was to inquire for him after the judgment (decision) of the Urim (Num_27:21). It seems that this means was employed by Joshua in the matter of Achan (Jos_7:14, Jos_7:18) and overlooked in the matter of the Gibeonites (Jos_9:14). Though not specifically mentioned, the same means is in all probability referred to in the accounts of the Israelites consulting Yahweh after the death of Joshua in their warfare (Jdg_1:1, Jdg_1:2; Jdg_20:18, Jdg_20:26-28). The Danites in their migration ask counsel of a priest, perhaps in a similar manner (Jdg_18:5, Jdg_18:7). It is not impossible that even the prophet Samuel was assisted by the Urim in the selection of a king (1Sa_10:20-22).

During Saul’s war with the Philistines, he made inquiry of God with the aid of the priest (1Sa_14:36, 1Sa_14:37), Ahijah, the son of Ahitub, who at that time wore the ephod (1Sa_14:3). Although on two important occasions Yahweh refused to answer Saul through the Urim (1Sa_14:37; 1Sa_28:6), it appears (from the Septuagint version of 1Sa_14:41; see below) that he Used the Urim and Thummim successfully in ascertaining the cause of the divine displeasure.

The accusation of Doeg and the answer of the high priest (1Sa_22:10, 1Sa_22:13, 1Sa_22:15) suggest that David began to inquire of Yahweh through the priesthood, even while he was an officer of Saul. After the massacre of the priests in Nob, Abiathar fled to the camp of David (1Sa_22:20), taking with him the ephod (including apparently the Urim and Thummim, 1Sa_23:6) which David used frequently during his wanderings (1Sa_23:2-4, 1Sa_23:9-12; 1Sa_30:7, 1Sa_30:8), and also after the death of Saul (2Sa_2:1; 2Sa_5:19, 2Sa_5:23; 2Sa_21:1).

After the days of David, prophecy was in the ascendancy, and, accordingly, we find no clear record of the use of the Urim and Thummim in the days of the later kings (compare, however, Hos_3:4; Ecclesiasticus 33:3). Still, in post-exilic times we find the difficult question of the ancestral right of certain priests to eat of the most holy things reserved till there would stand up a priest with Urim and with Thummim (Ezr_2:63; Neh_7:65; 1 Esdras 5:40; Ṣōtāh 48b).

3. Older (Traditional) Views:
Though Josephus sets the date for the obsolescence of the Urim and Thummim at 200 years before his time, in the days of John Hyrcanus (Ant., III, viii, 9), the Talmud reckons the Urim and Thummim among the things lacking in the second Temple (Ṣōtāh 9 10; Yōmā’ 21b; Yeru Ḳid. 65b). Both Josephus and the Talmud identify the Urim and Thummim with the stones of the breastplate. The former simply states that the stones shone whenever the shekhīnāh was present at a sacrifice or when the army proceeded to battle.

“God declared beforehand by those twelve stones which the high priest bare on his breast, and which were inserted into his breastplate, when they should be victorious in battle; for so great a splendor shone forth from them before the army began to march, that all the people were sensible of God’s being present for their assistance” (Ant., III, viii, 9).

The Talmudic explanation suggests that by the illumination of certain letters the divine will was revealed, and that in order to have a complete alphabet, in addition to the names of the tribes, the breastplate bore the names of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. and the words shibhṭē yeshūrun. A later scholar even suggests that the letters moved from their places to form words (Yōmā’ 73a,b). Characteristically enough the Talmud prescribes rules and suggestions for the consultation of the non-existing Urim and Thummim: that the one asking must be a man of public importance, that the question must pertain to the public weal; that the priest must face the shekhīnāh (west); that one question be asked at a time, and so forth (same place).

It is difficult to tell just how much, if anything, of a lingering tradition is reflected in the view that the Urim and Thummim and stones of the breast-plate were identical. In the absence of other ancient clues, however, it is not safe to reject even the guesses of the Jews of the second temple in favor of our own. We do not even know the meaning of the word ḥōshen, so confidently translated “pouch” or “receptacle” by opponents of the older view, without any basis whatever. On the other hand the theory of identification was widespread. Even Philo leans toward it in his De Monarchia, although in his Vita Mosis (iii) he seems to have in mind two small symbols representing Light and Truth embroidered on the cloth of the ḥōshen or hung round the neck of the high priest, similar to the Egyptian symbol of justice. Another very old view is that the Urim and Thummim consisted of a writing containing the Ineffable Name (Pseudo-Jonathan on Exo_28:20; compare Rashi and Nachmanides at the place).

4. Recent (Critical) Views:
The view most generally held today is that the Urim and Thummim were two sacred lots, one indicating an affirmative or favorable answer, the other a negative or unfavorable answer (Michaelis, Ewald, Wellhausen, Robertson Smith, Driver, G. F. Moore, Kennedy, Muss-Arnolt). The chief support of this view is found, not in the Massoretic Text, but in the reconstruction by Wellhausen and Driver of 1Sa_14:41 ff on the basis of the Septuagint: “If this fault be in me or in Jonathan, my son, give Urim (dós dḗlous), and if it be in thy people Israel, give Thummim (dós hosiótēta).” The following sentence clearly suggests the casting of lots, possibly lots on which the names of Saul and Jonathan were written, and “Jonathan” was taken. Efforts have been made to support the view that the Urim and Thummim themselves were sacred lots on the basis of analogous customs among other peoples (e.g. pre-Islamic Arabs (Moore in EB) andBabylonians (W. Muss-Arnolt in Jewish Encyclopedia and AJSL, July, 1900)).

 It must be borne in mind, however, that whatever the lot-theory has to recommend it, it is inconsistent not only with the post-Biblical traditions, but also with the Biblical data. For those who are not inclined to give much weight to the passages connecting the Urim and Thummim with the high priest’s apparel (Exo_28:30; Lev_8:8, both “P”), there is of course no difficulty in dissociating the two, in spite of the fact that for the use of this system of divination the one thing necessary in the historical passages on which they rely seems to be the ephod. Still, if we are to think of two lots, one called and possibly marked “Urim” and the other “Thummim,” it is difficult to get any meaning from the statement (1Sa_14:37; 1Sa_28:6) that Yahweh did not answer Saul on certain occasions, unless indeed we surmise for the occasion the existence of a third nameless blank lot. A more serious difficulty arises from the fact that the answers ascribed to the Urim and Thummim are not always the equivalent of “yes” or “no” (compare Jdg_1:2; Jdg_20:18; 1Sa_22:10; 2Sa_5:23; 2Sa_21:1), even if we omit from consideration the instances where an individual is apparently pointed out from all Israel (compare the instances of the detection of Achan and the selection of Saul with that of Jonathan, above).

5. Etymology:
If we turn to etymology for assistance, we are not only on uncertain ground, but when Babylonian and other foreign words are brought in to bolster up a theory abput anything so little understood as the Urim and Thummim, we are on dangerous ground. Thus, Muss-Arnolt is ready with Babylonian words (urtu, “command,” and tamītu, “oracular decision”); others suggest tmē, the Egyptian image of justice; still others connect Urim with ‘ārar, to curse,” in order to make it an antonym of tummīm, “faultlessness.” It is generally admitted, however, that, as pointed in the Massoretic Text, the words mean “light” and “perfection,” on the basis of which the Talmud (Yōmā’ 73b) as well as most of the Greek versions translated them (dḗlōsis kaí alḗtheia; phōtismoí kaí teleiótētes), although Symmachus in one place (Deu_33:8), who is followed by the Vulgate, connects Urim with the word Tōrāh and understands it to mean “doctrine” (teleiótēs kaí didachḗ). Though loth to add to the already overburdened list of conjectures about these words, it appears to the present writer that if Urim and Thummim are antonyms, and Urim means “light,” it is by no means difficult to connect Thummim with darkness, inasmuch as there is a host of Hebrew stems based on the root -tm, all indicating concealing, closing up, and even darkness (compare אטם, חטם, חתם, עתם, טמה, טמן (see Job_40:13), סתם and תמם even and cognate Arabic words in BDB). This explanation would make Urim and Thummim mean “illuminated” and “dark” (compare Caster in Hastings, ERE, IV, 813), and, while fitting well with the ancient theories or traditions, would not be excluded by the recent theory of lots of opposite purport.”

2 Sam 1:1

David’s city at this time was Ziklag, a Philistine- held border city given him by Achish, king of Gath. It was plainly too close to Philistine territory for the comfort of a new Israelite king. (Alter)

From ISBE: “Ziklag zik´lag (צקלג, ciḳelagh, צקלג, ciḳelāgh (2Sa_1:1), ציקלג, cīḳelagh (1Ch_12:1, 1Ch_12:20); usually in the Septuagint Σεκελάκ, Sekelák, or Σικελάγ, Sikelág): A town assigned (Jos_19:5; 1Ch_4:30) to Simeon, but in Jos_15:31 named, between Hornah and Madmannah, as one of the cities of the Negeb of Judah, “toward the border of Edom.” It is said (1Sa_27:6) to have remained a royal city. In Neh_11:28 it is in the list of towns reinhabited by the returning children of Judah. Its chief associations are with David. Achish the Philistine king of Gath gave it to David as a residence (1Sa_27:6 f; 1Ch_12:1, 1Ch_12:20); it was raided by the Amalekites, on whom David took vengeance and so recovered his property (1Sa_30:14, 1Sa_30:26); here the messenger who came to announce Saul’s death was slain (2Sa_1:1; 2Sa_4:10). The site of this important place is not yet fixed with certainty; Conder proposed Zucheilīka, a ruin 11 miles South-Southeast of Gaza, and 4 miles North of Wâdy es-Sherī‛ă, which may be the “Brook Besor” (1Sa_30:9, 1Sa_30:10, 1Sa_30:21); Rowland (1842) proposed ‛Aslūj, a heap of ruins South of Beersheba and 7 miles to the East of Bered. Neither site is entirely satisfactory.”

From ISBE: “Hebron hē´brun (חברון, ḥebhrōn, “league” or “confederacy”; Χεβρών, Chebrō̇n): One of the most ancient and important cities in Southern Palestine, now known to the Moslems as el Khalîl (i.e. Khalîl er Rahmān, “the friend of the Merciful,” i.e. of God, a favorite name for Abraham; compare Jam_2:23). The city is some 20 miles South of Jerusalem, situated in an open valley, 3,040 ft. above sea-level.

I. History of the City
Hebron is said to have been founded before Zoan (i.e. Tanis) in Egypt (Num_13:22); its ancient name was Kiriath-arba, probably meaning the “Four Cities,” perhaps because divided at one time into four quarters, but according to Jewish writers so called because four patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Adam were buried there. According to Jos_15:13 it was so called after Arba, the father of Anak.

1. Patriarchal Period: Abram came and dwelt by the oaks of MAMRE (which see), “which are in Hebron” Gen (Gen_13:18); from here he went to the rescue of Lot and brought him back after the defeat of Chedorlaomer (Gen_14:13 f); here his name was changed to Abraham (Gen_17:5); to this place came the three angels with the promise of a son (Gen_18:1 f); Sarah died here (Gen_23:2), and for her sepulcher Abraham bought the cave of Machpelah (Gen_23:17); here Isaac and Jacob spent much of their lives (Gen_35:27; Gen_37:14); from here Jacob sent Joseph to seek his brethren (Gen_37:14), and hence, Jacob and his sons went down to Egypt (Gen_46:1). In the cave of Machpelah all the patriarchs and their wives, except Rachel, were buried (Gen_49:30 f; Gen_50:13).

2. Times of Joshua and Judges: The spies visited Hebron and near there cut the cluster of grapes (Num_13:22 f). HOHAM (which see), king of Hebron, was one of the five kings defeated by Joshua at Beth-horon and slain at Makkedah (Jos_10:3 f). Caleb drove out from Hebron the “Three sons of Anak” (Jos_14:12; Jos_15:14); it became one of the cities of Judah (Jos_15:54), but was set apart for the Kohathite Levites (Jos_21:10 f), and became a city of refuge (Jos_20:7). One of Samson’s exploits was the carrying of the gate of Gaza “to the top of the mountain that is before Hebron” (Jdg_16:3).

3. The Days of the Monarchy
David, when a fugitive, received kindness from the people of this city (1Sa_30:31); here Abner was treacherously slain by Joab at the gate (2Sa_3:27), and the sons of Rimmon, after their hands and feet had been cut off, were hanged “beside the pool” (2Sa_4:12). After the death of Saul, David was here anointed king (2Sa_5:3) and reigned here 7 1/2 years, until he captured Jerusalem and made that his capital (2Sa_5:5); while here, six sons were born to him (2Sa_3:2). In this city Absalom found a center for his disaffection, and repairing there under pretense of performing a vow to Yahweh, he raised the standard of revolt (2Sa_15:7 f). Josephus mistakenly places here the dream of Solomon (Ant., VIII, ii, 1) which occurred at Gibeon (1Ki_3:4). Hebron was fortified by Rehoboam (2Ch_11:10).

4. Later History
Probably during the captivity Hebron came into the hands of Edom, though it appears to have been colonized by returning Jews (Neh_11:25); it was recovered from Edom by Simon Maccabeus (1 Macc 5:65; Josephus, Ant, XII, viii, 6). In the first great revolt against Rome, Simon bar-Gioras captured the city (BJ, IV, ix, 7), but it was retaken, for Vespasian, by his general Cerealis who carried it by storm, slaughtered the inhabitants and burnt it (ibid., 9).

During the Muslim period Hebron has retained its importance on account of veneration to the patriarchs, especially Abraham; for the same reason it was respected by the Crusaders who called it Castellum ad Sanctum Abraham. In 1165 it became the see of a Latin bishop, but 20 years later it fell to the victorious arms of Saladin, and it has ever since remained a fanatic Moslem center, although regarded as a holy city, alike by Moslem, Jew and Christian.”

There are several reasons Hebron was an excellent choice for David’s new headquarters city:
1. Largest city of the region: Important since David was bringing six hundred men and their families with him, perhaps as many as a thousand new residents.
2. City of refuge (Josh 21:13): It was set side as a haven city for accused murderers, which doubtless many of David’s opponents suspected of David in the death of Saul and his sons.
3. City set aside for the priesthood: Abiathar’s membership in David’s group doubtless helped the city accept David. (Bergen)

Hebron lies about twenty miles South of Jerusalem, and is a good location for a city due to over twenty springs in the area providing water. The archaeological site covers some twelve acres, seems to have been founded about 1200 BC, and shows signs of having enlarged and strengthened its fortifications in the archaeological period associated with David. (BBCOT)

2 Sam 2:3
The size of David’s following may have overwhelmed Hebron’s resources, so the men and their families also settled towns, which refers to the settlements located near Hebron, but outside its walls.(Bergen)

2 Sam 2:4a
The leaders of Judah, Southern Israel, anointed David, symbolizing David’s rule over Judah and the people’s acceptance of his rule. That still left the Northern portions of Israel to the Philistines and Ishbosheth. David was likely following a policy of slow steps to becoming king of all covenantal Israel.(Bergen, Alter)

2 Sam 2:4b
David learned of how the men of Jabesh-Gilead buried Saul and his sons, whose corpses the Philistines had put on public display on one of their city walls.(1 Sam 31:8-13). Saul had won Jabesh-Gilead’s loyalty at the beginning of his reign by leading them in victory against Nahash the Ammonite (1 Sam 11:1-11)(Bergen, BBCOT)

2 Sam 2:5-6
David sent messengers to the men who buried saul, saying their act of loving loyalty (Hebrew “hesed”) would be matched in response by God and David himself.

2 Sam 2:7
David calls for the men of Jabesh-Gilead to be strong and brave yet again, for Saul, to whom they were loyal even after his death , is dead, and David is now is anointed king of parts of Judah. Thus David is asking for them to recognize himself as their king. This has its shrewd political point. As some of Saul’s earliest and most devoted followers, the men of Jabesh-Gilead’s accceptance of David as king would go a long ways to legitimize his kingship in the rest of Israel’s eyes.(Bergen, Alter)

Kingship in Israel was historically a tribal, not national affair. Abimelech (Jud 9) was the first instance of this, and even in Saul’s reign there were parts of traditional Israelite territory that likely couldn’t support him for Philistine occupation or nearness. Now after Saul’s death and defeat at Gilboa, central Israel was likely dominated by the Philistines. Also, the area had historically been dominated by a city state form of government, not the larger nation form of their neighbors Egypt and Babylon. (BBCOT)

HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF 2 SAMUEL

This book is a division of 1 Samuel.  Please read the 1 Samuel summary to get an understanding of 1 and 2 Samuel books entirety.

This book follows David’s reign as king, after Saul has fallen.

Has a total of 24 chapters.

SUMMARY OF THE BOOK OF 2 SAMUEL

David’s Triumphs, (2 Samuel 1-10) - David is crowned king over Judah, and one of Saul’s sons Ishbosheth is king over Israel.  When Ishbosheth is murdered, they ask David to be king over Israel as well.  What begins is his rule over both nations and leads them to victory over enemy nations, with God’s merciful hand upon him.

David’s Troubles, (2 Samuel 11-20) - David’s downfall begins with his lust for a beautiful woman named Bathsheba.  He commits adultery, then has her husband murdered.  David asks for forgiveness and God forgives, but states that trouble will arise in David’s own household because of it.  What begins is the rebellion of his children: the rape of his daugther, the death/murder of his two sons.  Then Judah and Israel threaten to split apart, and David has to try and control another upheaval amonst the people, apart from the ones his sons has rot. (20)

Non-chronological appendix during David’s reign:

Famine in the Land, (2 Samuel 21) - A 3-year famine in the land ensues because of Saul.

Song of David, (2 Samuel 22) - Song of David praising the Lord, when he was delivered from Saul’s hand.

Brave Warriors, (2 Samuel 23) - A record of exploits of David’s bravest warriors.

David’s Sinful Census, (2 Samuel 24) - David’s sinful census and the ensuing plague.

In a previous post, I made available Bible study materials from 1 Samuel.  I now have the 2 Samuel studies uploaded.  They are not in one PDF, like 1 Samuel.  My apologies for that.

2 Samuel PDFs

God’s Heart - 1:1-27
David’s Kingship Begins - 2:1-5:5
Moving Up - 5:6-25
David’s King - 6:1-7:29
David’s Reign - 8:1-10:19
Divine Grace - 11:1-12:31
Human Disgrace - 13:1-39
Trouble at Home - 14:1-33
The Word Fulfilled - 15:1-19:43
Success Against Rebellion - 20:1-26
God’s Faithfulness - 21:1-22
Singing Praises - 22:1-23:7
Disguised Mercy - 24:1-25

Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa 1:17-18
David’s elegy upon Saul and Jonathan. - An eloquent testimony to the depth and sincerity of David’s grief for the death of Saul is handed down to us in the elegy which he composed upon Saul and his noble son Jonathan, and which he had taught to the children of Israel. It is one of the finest odes of the Old Testament; full of lofty sentiment, and springing from deep and sanctified emotion, in which, without the slightest allusion to his own relation to the fallen king, David celebrates without envy the bravery and virtues of Saul and his son Jonathan, and bitterly laments their loss. “He said to teach,” i.e., he commanded the children of Judah to practise or learn it. קֶשֶׁת, bow; i.e., a song to which the title Kesheth or bow was given, not only because the bow is referred to (2Sa_1:22), but because it is a martial ode, and the bow was one of the principal weapons used by the warriors of that age, and one in the use of which the Benjaminites, the tribe-mates of Saul, were particularly skilful: cf. 1Ch_8:40; 1Ch_12:2; 2Ch_14:7; 2Ch_17:17. Other explanations are by no means so natural; such, for example, as that it related to the melody to which the ode was sung; whilst some are founded upon false renderings, or arbitrary alterations of the text, e.g., that of Ewald (Gesch. i. p. 41), Thenius, etc. This elegy was inserted in “the book of the righteous” (see at Jos_10:13), from which the author of the books of Samuel has taken it.

John Gill
2Sa 1:18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow,…. These words, with what follow in this verse, are rightly put into a parenthesis, since they do not begin nor make any part of the elegiac song, or lamentation of David; and are here inserted to show, that, amidst his sorrow and lamentation, he was not unmindful of the welfare of the people, and to provide for their defence and security; and therefore gave orders that care should be taken, especially in the tribe of Judah, which was his own tribe, and where he had the greatest authority, and for whom he might have the chiefest concern, that they should be trained up in military exercises, learn the art of war, and the use of every weapon of war, particularly of the bow, which, being a principal one, may be put for all; and which may be the rather mentioned, because the Philistines were expert in the use of it, and seemed to have done much execution with it in the recent battle, see 1Sa_31:3. They are said (p) to be the inventors of it; though Pliny (q) ascribes it to others; and it may be the people of Israel and of Judah had of late neglected to learn the use of it, and to make use of it, and instead of that had taken to other sort of arms in fighting; for that that was not unknown to them, or wholly disused, is clear from this song, 2Sa_1:22; see also 1Ch_12:2. Moreover, as the Philistines, especially the Cherethites, were expert in archery, David found ways and means to get some of them afterwards into his service, and by whom he might improve his people in the art, see 2Sa_8:18; though some (r) are of opinion that the word “keshet”, or bow, was the title of the following lamentation or song, taken from the mention of Jonathan’s bow in it; which song the children of Judah were to be taught to sing; but then, as has been observed by some, for this there would have been no need of the following reference, since the whole this song is here recorded:

behold, it is written in book of Jasher); which the Targum calls the book of the law; and Jarchi and Ben Gersom restrain it to the book of Genesis, the book of the upright, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and suppose respect is had to the prophecy concerning Judah, Gen_49:8, but Kimchi, extending it to all the five books of Moses, adds his blessing, in Deu_33:7. In the Arabic version it is explained of the book of Samuel, interpreted the book of songs, as if it was a collection of songs; which favours the above sense. Jerom (s) interprets it of the same book, the book of the righteous prophets, Samuel, Gad, and Nathan: hut this book seems to have been a public register or annals, in which were recorded memorable actions in any age, and had its name from the uprightness and faithfulness in which it was kept; and in this were set down the order of David for the teaching the children of Judah the use of the bow, and perhaps the method which he directed to for instruction in it; See Gill on Jos_10:13.

(p) Bedford’s Chronology, p. 245. (q) Nat. Hist. l. 7. c. 56. (r) See Gregory’s Notes and Observations, &c. ch. 1. and Weemse of the Judicial Laws, c. 44. p. 171. (s) Trad. Heb. in 2 lib. Reg. fol. 77. D.

Keil and Delitzsch
2Sa 1:19
The ode is arranged in three strophes, which gradually diminish in force and sweep (viz., 2Sa_1:19-24, 2Sa_1:25-26, 2Sa_1:27), and in which the vehemence of the sorrow so gradually modified, and finally dies away. Each strophe opens with the exclamation, “How are the mighty fallen!” The first contains all that had to be said in praise of the fallen heroes; the deepest mourning for their death; and praise of their bravery, of their inseparable love, and of the virtues of Saul as king. The second commemorates the friendship between David and Jonathan. The third simply utters the last sigh, with which the elegy becomes silent. The first strophe

John Gill
2Sa 1:20 Tell it not in Gath,…. One of the five principalities of the Philistines, and the chief of them, being raised to a kingdom, and whose king was at the head of the armies of the Philistines that engaged with Saul. This is not to be understood of a command of David, who could not hinder the victory the Philistines had got over Israel being known at Gath, and talked of with pleasure there, but a wish it had not:

publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon; another of the principalities of the Philistines, and the sense the same as before:

lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph; it being usual in those times and countries for women, young women more especially, to express their joy, on occasion of victories obtained, by singing and dancing, Jdg_11:34.

John Gill
2Sa 1:21 Ye mountains of Gilboa,…. On which fell Saul and his sons, and many of the people of Israel, 2Sa_1:6,

let there be no dew, neither let there be rain upon you; which is not to understood as a real imprecation; for David would never curse any part of the land of Israel, for which he had so great a regard; but only as a poetical figure, expressing his concern for, and abhorrence of what happened on those mountains; much less did this in reality take place, as some have feigned, as if never dew nor rain descended on them (t) afterwards; which has been refuted by travellers, particularly Borchard (u), who, speaking of this mountain, says, that as he was upon it, there was such a violent shower fell, that he was wet through his clothes; and in the year 1273, laying all night upon this hill, there was a great dew fell upon him:

nor fields of offerings; of heave offerings; the meaning is, that he could wish almost that those hills were not fruitful, and that they brought no fruit to perfection, so much as that heave offerings for the service of the sanctuary might be taken; which is expressive of great sterility and scarcity, see Joe_1:13,

for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away; mighty men were obliged to cast away their shields and flee, which were greatly to their reproach and scandal, and to that of the whole nation: it was always reckoned very scandalous, and a great crime, even punishable with death, to cast away a shield, both with the Greeks and others (w): yea, also

the shield of Saul, as though he had not been anointed with oil; as if he was not the anointed king of Israel, but a common soldier: or else this respects his shield, as if that was not anointed, as shields used to be, that they might be smooth and glib, and missile weapons, as arrows and others, might not pass through them, but slide off, see Isa_21:5; though Gersom gives a different turn, that Saul’s shield being in continual use, needed not to be anointed, as those did which for a time had been laid aside. Abarbinel interprets these words thus, that he, who was the shield of the mighty, even Saul himself, was vilely cast away, or become loathsome; and that his shield was anointed, not with oil, but with the blood of the slain, and the fat of the mighty, connecting them with the words following.

(t) Cippi Heb. p. 34. (u) Apud Hottinger not. in ib. see Bunting’s Travels, p, 131. (w) Isocrates de Pace, p. 364. Horat. Carmin. l. 2. Ode 7. Tacitus de Mor. German. c. 6. Alex. ab Alex. Genial. Dier. l. 2. c. 13.

John Gill
2Sa 1:22 From the blood of the slain, from the fat of