Chapter 3

1 During the war David still waxeth stronger. 2 Six sons were born to him in Hebron. 6 Abner, displeased with Ish-bosheth, 12 revolteth to David. 13 David requireth a condition to bring him his wife Michal. 17 Abner, having communed with the Israelites, is feasted by David, and dismissed. 22 Joab, returning from battle, is displeased with the king, and killeth Abner. 28 David curseth Joab, 31and mourneth for Abner.

1. There was long war. There was not open warfare but a state of hostility between the houses of Saul and David. This situation must have continued about five years, for Ish-bosheth reigned two years at Mahanaim before war began (ch. 2:10) and David reigned seven years and six months at Hebron before he became king over “all Israel” (ch. 5:5). During this time David was content largely to allow matters to take their own course. Instead of taking the offensive against Israel, David awaited the outcome of events, confident of the early fulfillment of God’s promises to him concerning the kingdom.

David waxed stronger. Time was on David’s side. Ish-bosheth was a weakling, and a few years of incompetent rule, followed by a few more without a king, made Israel long for the type of aggressive leadership that David provided for Judah. David was a man of character and prowess, and his daring and courage had endeared him to the hearts of the people. As the years went by it became increasingly evident that he was the man whom the Lord had ordained for the kingdom. Even on the occasion of Saul’s last battle there had been a significant defection to David from the tribe of Manasseh, with men continuing to come to his side “day by day” (1 Chron. 12:19–22).

2. Sons born. Though God suffered the practice of polygamy for a time (see on Deut. 14:26), He did not prevent the evil results of such a mode of life. Strife, contention, variance, jealousy, and bitterness came to David’s household and left their evil effects upon the people of the realm. Three of the sons born to David at Hebron brought much vexation and woe to him, to his family, and to the nation.

Amnon. Literally, “faithful.” See ch. 13 for the record of the unhappy experience of David with this son.

3. Chileab. Called “Daniel” in 1 Chron. 3:1. Nothing further is known of him. It is possible that he died at an early age.

Absalom. The sad history of this son, his rebellion, and death are recorded in chs. 13 to 18.

Geshur. An area below Mt. Hermon east and and north of the Sea of Galilee (Deut. 3:14; Joshua 12:5; 13:11, 13; 1 Chron. 2:23). However, there were Geshurites mentioned as living in a district in the Negeb on the south of Judah invaded by David during his residence in Ziklag (1 Sam. 27:8). The statement in 2 Sam. 15:8 seems to identify the Geshur from which Maacah came as a Syrian region.

4. Adonijah. Literally, “Yahweh is my Lord.” This is the son who, when David was old, aspired to the crown (1 Kings 1:5), and was later put to death by Solomon (1 Kings 2:24, 25). After the death of his three elder brothers, Chileab being presumably dead, Adonijah regarded himself the rightful heir to the throne.

Shephatiah. Literally, “Yahweh has judged.” Nothing is known concerning this son.

5. Ithream, by Eglah. Nothing is known of this son or his mother.

David’s wife. According to the Jewish interpretation this title is taken to mean that Eglah was first in rank among David’s wives. Others see in the expression a description applying to all the precedingly listed women.

6. Made himself strong. Abner kept on assuming an increasingly important role in the affairs of the house of Saul. He was the mainstay of Saul’s tottering dynasty, and well realized his own importance. Except for the strength of Abner, Ish-bosheth would never have been able to maintain his hold upon Israel’s throne.

7. Rizpah. See ch. 21:8–11.

Wherefore? In Oriental lands the harem of a king was regarded as the property of his successor, and the taking of a woman who had belonged to the previous king was therefore regarded as an assertion of a claim to the throne (see 2 Sam. 12:8; 16:21; 1 Kings 2:22). There is nothing in the record to indicate that Abner, if guilty of the act of which he was charged, had any design on Ish-bosheth’s throne, but the king nevertheless preferred to regard the alleged conduct as an act of treachery, and it was this that aroused the anger of Abner. Ish-bosheth’s words of reproach are understandable, for Abner’s alleged deed violated the rights of the king.

8. Very wroth. Abner was angry because the one who owed his throne solely to his support now dared to reproach and upbraid him.

Dog’s head. The first part of Abner’s reply reads literally, “Am I a dog’s head which belongs to Judah?” The LXX omits the expression “which belongs to Judah.” Abner’s words were not an attempt to justify himself, but rather an expression of his resentment of Ish-bosheth’s rebuke. Ish-bosheth had probably employed some term of reproach against Abner, and Abner now responded by asking whether after all he was such a vile and worthless creature—he who had taken so strong a position against Judah and had continued to show such great kindness to the house of Saul.

9. So do God to Abner. These words are in the form of a solemn oath (see Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam. 3:17; 25:22; 2 Sam. 19:13; 1 Kings 19:2; 2 Kings 6:31). Abner swears that he will transfer the kingdom to David, and invokes the wrath of God upon himself if he does not fulfill his word.

As the Lord hath sworn. This statement shows how generally it was known that the Lord had chosen David to succeed Saul. There is no record of an oath on the part of God to deliver the kingdom to David, but Abner evidently understood the promise as solemnly sworn. Perhaps there is an allusion to the words “will not lie nor repent” as regards the promise God made through Samuel to rend the kingdom from Saul and to give it to David (1 Sam. 15:28, 29).

10. Translate the kingdom. Abner’s resolve to transfer the kingdom of Saul to David was probably not the result of hasty judgment. The commander may long have pondered the advisability of giving up the attempt to maintain the tottering house of Saul. The rebuke of Ish-bosheth seemed to provide the opportunity to carry into execution a decision that he had previously arrived at.

From Dan even to Beer-sheba. This expression betokens the entire realm of Israel, from its northern to its southern limits. The phrase was used during the period of the judges and up to the time of Solomon (Judges 20:1; 1 Sam. 3:20; 2 Sam. 17:11; 24:2, 15; 1 Kings 4:25; 1 Chron. 21:2), but was employed only once after the division of the monarchy, when Hezekiah sent an invitation to all Israel “from Beer-sheba even to Dan” (2 Chron. 30:5), to unite in the celebration of the Passover.

11. Feared him. This verse points out clearly the real nature of Ish-bosheth’s government. The weak king was afraid to make a reply to the man he knew to be the real power behind the throne.

12. On his behalf. Literally, “where he was.” The Lucian edition of the LXX reads “to Hebron.”

Whose is the land? Abner recognized that he was in a position to bargain with David. He would bring about the transfer of the land on one condition, that David make a league with him, giving him definite assurance of proper consideration for himself. In this proposal the narrow, haughty, self-seeking spirit of Abner was clearly revealed. He would throw in his lot with David, but only at a price, and he wanted first to make certain that the price would be paid.

13. Bring Michal. Michal had been given to David by Saul (1 Sam. 18:20, 21, 27) and was rightfully his. But besides the question of the justice of David’s demand was the politic consideration of the effect on Saul’s partisans of having a daughter of Saul as queen of Judah. This would tend to show that David had no malice against the house of Saul, and David’s right to the kingdom would be further enhanced by his being the son-in-law of the previous king.

14. To Ish-bosheth. The messengers were sent to Ish-bosheth and not to Abner, probably because the negotiations between Abner and David were then still secret. On the other hand it was Ish-bosheth who as king would have to issue the orders for Michal’s return. Without the support of Abner, Ish-bosheth would be in no position to resist David’s demand. In complying with that demand, Ish-bosheth would reveal his own weakness, acknowledge the wrong that had been done to David, and the justice of David’s demand. For Ish-bosheth publicly to accede to this demand would give evidence to all in both Judah and Israel that his days were numbered and that David would soon take over the entire kingdom.

An hundred foreskins. Saul had demanded 100 foreskins but 200 had been delivered (1 Sam. 18:25, 27).

15. Phaltiel. Or “Phalti,” whose home was in Gallim (1 Sam. 25:44), which, according to Isa. 10:29, 30, seems to have been not far from Gibeah and Anathoth. But he had probably taken up his residence across the Jordan in the region of Mahanaim with the adherents of Saul.

16. Weeping behind her. The sentence may be rendered more smoothly, “And her husband went with her, weeping as he walked behind her.” Though sympathy may be evoked by this touching tale it should be borne in mind that Phaltiel had erred in taking another man’s wife to himself.

Bahurim. Thought to be RaЖs etРTmйЖm, east of Mt. Scopus, just northeast of Jerusalem.

Then said Abner. These words indicate that the negotiations for the return of Michal were in the hands of Abner. This being a matter of such vital importance, Abner evidently took personal charge.

17. Ye sought for David. These words suggest that there may have been a popular movement, after the death of Saul at Gilboa, to have David established as king over all Israel. At the time Abner was opposed to such a demand. Now, with his change in policy, he prudently reminded the elders that what he was recommending was really their suggestion. It was essential for Abner to secure the consent and cooperation of these prominent officials in the impending moves.

18. The Lord hath spoken. This statement is undoubtedly true, but no exact words to this effect have come down to us in the Biblical record. The pronouncement was probably made through one of the prophets, Samuel, Gad, or Nathan, but only a very small percentage of the words of the prophets have been preserved.

19. Of Benjamin. Saul was of the tribe of Benjamin. Particular care would be necessary in the negotiations with the adherents of that tribe. They felt bound to Saul by ties of kinship and had enjoyed great advantages by virtue of their connection with him. Abner went in person to carry on his negotiations with Benjamin as he did also with David at Hebron.

21. He went in peace. The terms having been agreed upon the league solemnly ratified, Abner returned ready to carry out his part of the compact.

22. Pursuing a troop. Heb. gedud, which generally means “a marauding band,” “a troop,” but here seems to be used in the sense of “a foray,” or “a raid.” The sentence should read, “Joab came from a foray.” The raid had probably been against the Amalekites, the Philistines, or some other enemy of Judah. It is possible that the expedition had been planned by David, so that Joab would not be present during Abner’s visit. Joab returned, elated with his victory and the great spoil.

Not with David. The introduction of this item immediately after the mention of Joab’s return, suggests that the departure of Abner before Joab’s return was more than a mere coincidence. For the two rival generals to meet face to face at that juncture might have ruined all prospects of peace.

24. What hast thou done? Joab bitterly remonstrated with David for having secretly negotiated with Abner. Joab may have had an honest suspicion of Abner’s integrity, but in addition there existed a feeling of personal enmity, due partly to the fact that in the famous old warrior Joab would find a formidable rival, and partly to the blood feud between him and Abner for the slaying of Asahel (2 Sam. 2:22, 23).

26. Sent messengers. Without the knowledge but probably in the name of David.

Well of Sirah. Or “cistern of Sirah.” The location of this well is not positively known. Some have identified it with ФAin Saµrah, about 1 1/2 mi. (2.4 km.) north of Hebron. The site seems somewhat unlikely, for in such a case Abner would have just left Hebron when Joab arrived. Others have identified it with SйЖret elРBellaФ, a mountaintop 2.7 mi. (4.3 km.) north of Hebron, where the ruins of a tower are to be seen.

27. In the gate. A city gate in Oriental lands is a common meeting place. To carry out his purpose it was necessary for Joab to meet Abner before Abner reached David.

For the blood of Asahel. Joab slew Abner for blood revenge. He may have justified his retaliation by the provision of Num. 35:26, 27. Interestingly enough, Hebron was a city of refuge (Joshua 20:7) and in view of that fact, Joab may have carried out his deed in the city gate. The death of Asahel, however, took place in battle, and the slaying was an unwilling and reluctant act of self-defense on the part of Abner. Joab may not have been familiar with these details. But he should have studied the far-reaching effect of his deed, delaying as it did the formation of a united kingdom for some time. So great was Abner’s confidence in David that he appears to have had no suspicions.

28. Guiltless. David had the reputation of being a man of his word, but the murder of Abner placed his good name in jeopardy. He did everything possible to absolve himself of any blame in the matter.

29. Let it rest. Literally, “let it whirl [or, whirl about].” David here invokes a curse on Joab for his mean act of seeking personal revenge. The imprecation reveals David’s keen sense of justice and his bitter indignation against an individual guilty of so dastardly a deed. David had evidently given his word that the person of Abner would be inviolate. The action of Joab cast suspicion on David’s integrity. David wanted all to know that he had had no part in this perfidious deed and that he abhorred with all his soul such a violation of honor.

Father’s house. Abishai, Joab’s brother, had also taken part in the plot to assassinate Abner (v. 30); hence, he too was included in the curse. The imprecation went beyond these two men, to include their posterity. Ancient civil penalties often seem to involve more than those directly connected with the crime. The penalty for Achan’s sin fell upon his whole family (Joshua 7:22–26). Likewise in the judgment upon Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, not only they perished, but their wives and the children of Dathan and Abiram (Num. 16:27–33; see also 2 Kings 5:27). At times the children may have been involved in the crime of their parents (see on Joshua 7:15). At other times innocent children suffered for the obstinacy of their elders (see on Num. 16:27). In the present instance we do not know whether the curse pronounced by David was spoken under inspiration and hence whether it had any validity or any purpose beyond expressing David’s extreme vexation at the deed.

An issue. See Lev. 15:2.

Leaneth on a staff. Some translate, “a distaff holder,” and thus indicate an effeminate person fit only to do a woman’s work.

On the sword. Literally, “by a sword.”

30. Joab and Abishai. Though nothing is said of Abishai’s part in the plot, this statement implies that Abishai was a willing accomplice with his brother Joab in the slaying of Abner, and thus he too must share his responsibility for the crime committed. The whole act was obviously premeditated.

31. Gird you with sackcloth. Joab was required publicly to condemn his own deed by his part in the public mourning. David himself followed the bier as the chief mourner, and evidently dressed in royal attire, for he is here specifically called “king David.”

32. In Hebron. This was another token of honor and respect, since Hebron was the capital of Judah. Abner’s home in Benjamin would have been the natural burial place, but to the buried in the royal city of Hebron would be more honorable. By ordering the burial of Abner at his capital David would help to convince the nation that he harbored no ill feelings against the slain general and that he chose to honor his memory.

33. The king lamented. In a brief but touching and eloquent elegy David expressed his grief and paid a worthy tribute to a fallen foe.

34. Before wicked men. David’s elegy to Abner was a cutting rebuke to the murderers of Israel’s commander in chief. He publicly expressed his contempt and scorn for men who would perform so foul a deed. His magnanimous recognition of the merits of one who only a short time before had been his bitter enemy won the hearts of all Israel (see PP 700). The people knew that with a man like David on the throne the kingdom would be in the hands of a man with a conscience as well as courage, and with a heart as well as a sword.

35. Till the sun be down. To fast till evening was a sign of deep mourning (ch. 1:12). Before the day was over David was urged by the people to break his fast and to partake of food, but he positively declined. His refusal made a deep and favorable impression upon the people.

38. A prince. In some respects Abner was a man of outstanding ability and would be regarded as a great man in Israel. Yet though sincere in his pact with David, he had been moved by selfish motives. In going over to David he thought to forsake a cause that was doomed and to win new honor and glory to himself. He would have wanted the highest position in the service of David, but his ambition, selfishness, and lack of consecration to God would not have served the best interests of David’s kingdom or the cause of the Lord. Abner’s death was to the kingdom of Judah a blessing in disguise (see PP 700).

39. I am this day weak. The strength and influence of Joab was the weakness of David. If he could have done so, David would immediately have punished Joab, but for the present that was not possible. He dared not attempt justice now lest Joab’s great power and popularity with the army cause a general uprising. David’s hands were tied, and to his closest friends he frankly confessed his weakness.

Ellen G. White comments

1–39PP 699, 700

1, 12, 13, 21. 27–30PP 699

31–39PP 700