Chapter 14

1 Joab, suborning a widow of Tekoah, by a parable to incline the king’s heart to fetch home Absalom, bringeth him to Jerusalem. 25 Absalom’s beauty, hair, and children. 28 After two years, Absalom by Joab is brought into the king’s presence.

1. Toward Absalom. The Hebrew preposition here translated “toward” may also mean “against.” Some believe that the rendering “against” is the intent of the passage, thus making David feel hostile toward his son because of the murder of Amnon. However, see on ch. 13:39. The attitude on the part of David gave rise to Absalom’s alienation from his father (see PP 728). Anxious to return, and bitter over the fact that he was for so long shut away from the affairs of the kingdom he expected would be his at his father’s death, Absalom gave himself over to traitorous plots. It was an unhealthy situation, and Joab set out to correct it.

2. Tekoah. A village about 5 mi. south of Bethlehem, best known as the home of the prophet Amos (Amos 1:1). Since it was near to Bethlehem, the ancestral home of Joab, he may have had personal knowledge of this woman whom he planned to use for carrying out his purpose. Tekoah is identified with the modern TequЖФ.

Feign thyself. It was Joab who contrived the parable and put the words in the woman’s mouth, but it would require great skill to enact the drama before the king.

3. Come to the king. The king was the supreme judge of the land, and accessible to all his subjects. He was expected to assist them in their difficulties.

5. A widow woman. The case was sufficiently unlike that of David so that her story created no suspicion. There were certain basic features in the narrative that were to settle the issue in the mind of David, and on those the emphasis would be placed.

6. Two sons. Corresponding to Amnon and Absalom.

7. Against thine handmaid. The parable here differs purposely from the actual facts so as not to create suspicion. In the case of David it was he who was alienated from Absalom and who refused to grant him permission to return. David believed that because of Absalom’s guilt in shedding his brother’s blood he could not grant him permission to return. In the parable it was the family, not the mother, who were insisting that the murderer be held guilty.

The heir also. There is probably a covert allusion here to Absalom as the heir to David’s throne.

8. Give charge. The woman had gained her point, and David made the promise that her son would be protected.

9. The iniquity be on me. Technically the murderer was guilty, but because of the circumstances David was granting him a reprieve. The woman had gained her point but wished to prolong the discussion so as to make David commit himself further. To do this, she asked that if there were any blood guilt, it be permitted to rest on her and not on David and his throne. In doing this she skillfully drew David into the position where he himself would assume the responsibility. Thus far he had simply put her off with a promise without specifically involving himself.

10. Whosoever saith ought. The cunning words of the woman had drawn from David the promise that he would assume the role of her protector. He was inadvertently allowing himself to be drawn into a position from which it would be difficult to withdraw.

Absalom’s Flight and Usurpation of the Kingdom

11. Let the king remember. Thus far the woman had been entirely successful, but she wished to carry the matter still further. David’s highest regard was for God, and she would not cease until he had committed himself in the presence of God.

As the Lord liveth. With a solemn oath David swore that the life of the son would be protected. He had now committed himself in such a way that he could not withdraw.

12. The woman said. Thus far she had been dealing with a hypothetical case that appeared to concern herself and her son. Having craftily led David on to give a verdict in that case, she now proceeded to apply the matter to Absalom. Her first words were cautious and still somewhat obscure, but she was beginning to drive home to David the matter of his dealings with Absalom.

13. Wherefore then? Since David had followed such a course in this instance, what reason did he have for not following it in another? If he had done right in granting a reprieve to her son, who was worthy of death, what was there to prevent him from granting a reprieve to Absalom, who was guilty of murder?

Against the people. Against Absalom and all Israel with him. Absalom was the heir apparent. He therefore belonged to the people and they to him. A crime against him was a crime against all Israel. In refusing to allow the heir to the throne to return to his land, David was depriving the people of their rights to have with them their prospective king. The wrong against Absalom was a wrong against the nation he was to rule. The woman was still only hinting at what she wanted to say, but her words were sufficiently plain that David could no longer escape their meaning.

As one which is faulty. The woman now came directly to the point. David had just proved himself at fault in his dealings with Absalom by the verdict he had rendered in the case of her son. He had agreed that it was not right that she be deprived of her heir, but he was depriving Israel of its heir. In pronouncing himself in favor of her son he had condemned himself in his conduct toward Absalom.

The king doth not fetch. These words show clearly that David was responsible for the continued banishment of Absalom. All that was needed to bring him home was that David extend the invitation. The people wanted him, Absalom was anxious to return, and even the royal household would welcome him back. But David himself stood in the way. This was interpreted as a wrong, not only against Absalom, but against the nation at large.

Banished. From the Heb. nadach, “to impel,” “to thrust.” The root occurs in Deut. 30:3–5, Jer. 40:12, Micah 4:6, and Zeph. 3:19, where it is applied to the people of God driven into a heathen land.

14. We must needs die. Death is the common lot of all. A harsh treatment of Absalom cannot bring Amnon back from the dead. His blood has been spilt on the ground and cannot be gathered again. Then why not forget the past and restore Absalom to his home and kindred and to his rights to the throne?

Neither doth God respect any person. Literally, “God will not take away the life.” God is kind, loving, and forgiving. When anyone sins and afterward truly repents, the Lord is willing to forgive him his sin and restore him again to divine favor. These words constitute a fitting portrayal of God’s love toward the sinner, and show that the people of Israel had a reasonable familiarity with the plan of salvation. David himself had grievously sinned and had stood in need of mercy. It was only because of the great mercy of Heaven that he still remained alive and retained his throne. These words of the wise woman of Tekoah deeply touched the heart of David and moved him to mercy.

15. Have made me afraid. There is an intriguing and appealing ambiguity about these words. Is the woman talking of herself and her fears of the actions of her neighbors? Or does she mean this in regard to what she has said concerning Absalom and the attitude of the nation as a whole? She is still, in a manner, keeping up the pretense of reality, but she is also speaking directly to the heart of the king in relation to his dealings with Absalom. The ambiguity seems to be intentional, and it is that which gives to her words such a striking and touching appeal. In standing before the king she stands as a representative of the people. Her voice is the voice of the nation. Understanding the sentiment of Israel as a whole, she feels a pressure that she cannot resist, and it is this that gives her such boldness before the king. Surely David would not show greater consideration to her petition as a humble woman than he would show to her as uttering the wishes and desires of all the people.

16. The king will hear. The king had already heard and granted her appeal, as far as she and her son were concerned. But the king would also hear her appeal in regard to the case for which she specifically had come. She was now speaking indirectly in behalf of Absalom and was appealing to David to permit him to return. In fact she was telling David that this appeal was already heard and her petition already answered. The king would hear—of that she was supremely confident. Who was there who could resist such an appeal?

17. Comfortable. Literally, “for rest,” that is, they would set the disputants at peace.

An angel of God. Or “messenger of God.” The Hebrew word here translated “angel,” malФak, occurs 213 times in the OT and in the KJV is translated “angel” 111 times, “messenger” 98 times, and “ambassador” 4 times (see v. 20; ch. 19:27; 1 Sam. 29:9).

Be with thee. The closing words of her appeal are almost like a benediction. In doing what was right David would have the presence and blessing of God. She spoke as if in the name of God and assured the king that in responding to this call of right and reason, he would have God with him.

19. The hand of Joab. David had no difficulty in penetrating the woman’s disguise and understanding the source of the stratagem. Joab was close to David, and had probably previously expressed his convictions, but thus far without results. Knowing his persistence and craftiness, David immediately felt that Joab must be the one responsible for the woman’s visit.

21. Bring the young man. Joab had attained his purpose, and the king wisely commissioned him to carry the tidings to Absalom and to bring him home.

22. Thanked the king. Joab had good reason for thanking the king. If David had granted an unfavorable decision, Joab would have been held accountable for the situation.

24. Not see my face. Absalom’s murder of Amnon was not yet forgotten, and for the sake of the nation and Absalom himself, David felt it necessary to show his abhorrence of the crime that had been committed.

Saw not the king’s face. Being at home but not being allowed to see the face of his father or to appear with his brethren at the court began to prey upon the mind of Absalom. He felt that he was being wronged, and the people came to sympathize with him. In the eyes of the nation he was a hero who was to be praised for an act of right and justice rather than a criminal to be shunned for a misdeed.

25. His beauty. Absalom was a man of striking appearance. His personal bearing won the admiration of the people, and the treatment he suffered at the hand of David won their sympathies.

26. Two hundred shekels. According to the normal weight of the shekel this would be 2.28 kg., or about 5 lb. This seems to be an excessive weight of hair. Perhaps the weight of a royal shekel was different from the ordinary shekel.

27. Three sons. These probably died early in life (see ch. 18:18).

Tamar. Tamar was named after Absalom’s sister and shared her beauty (ch. 13:1). She was probably the one who married Uriel of Gibeah and had a daughter Maacah (or Michaiah). The wife of Rehoboam and the mother of Abijah was called both Maacah the “daughter” of Absalom (evidently granddaughter, see on 1 Sam. 14:50), and Michaiah, the daughter of Uriel (see 2 Chron. 13:2; 11:20–22; 1 Kings 15:2).

28. Saw not the king’s face. This naturally made Absalom bitter and morose, causing him to think that he was being unjustly treated. In his own eyes he probably felt that he had done no wrong in putting Amnon to death, since he had only meted out justice. Absalom was selfish and unscrupulous, ambitious and impulsive. He was admired by the people and was gradually winning their sympathies. It was hardly the part of wisdom for David to allow such a situation to continue.

29. Would not come. Since Joab had been successful in his former efforts, Absalom thought that he again might be of service. But Joab doubtless felt that he had already done as much as was wise, and that he would incur the king’s displeasure if he took any further steps in the matter.

30. Set it on fire. Such a stratagem certainly would secure action on the part of Joab, but it would be resorted to only on the part of an unscrupulous, irresponsible character.

32. That I may send. Absalom treated Joab as his servant, giving to him his orders and expecting them to be carried out. His conduct reveals how far he had already gone in his course of rebellion and his determination to secure a redress of his supposed grievances and a restoration to privileges he believed to be rightfully his. No attempt was made to explain his arson. He acted as if he were fully within his rights in taking the measures he did to bring Joab to him, and as if Joab were under obligation to carry out his wishes.

See the king’s face. Absalom had been allowed to come home, but the king still refused to see him. Such treatment was to Absalom more galling than his exile. In the popular estimation David was unduly harsh in his treatment of his son, and the people were gradually drawn toward Absalom.

If there be any iniquity. Absalom knew that David was in no position to carry out justice. The king himself had been guilty of murder in the death of Uriah, and in the endeavor to mete out justice to Absalom he would only involve himself. The attitude of the people would probably not have supported David in such a course. Their hearts were with Absalom, and David knew it.

33. Kissed Absalom. Absalom was not only admitted into the royal presence but was given such treatment as indicated an outward reconciliation at least. Compare Esau kissing Jacob, and Joseph, his brethren (Gen. 33:4; 45:15). David’s memory of his own guilt made him listless and irresolute. He apparently knew not which way to turn or what course to pursue. He recognized his duty, but the memory of his own transgression prevented him from doing what he knew should be done.

Ellen G. White comments

1–33PP 728, 729

1–14PP 728

21, 24, 25, 28, 32, 33 PP 729