Absalom was never Yahweh's choice to succeed David (cf. 12:24-25; 1 Chron. 22:9-10). Therefore his attempt to dethrone the Lord's anointed was contrary to God's will and doomed to fail from the beginning. Even though he was personally fertile as a result of God's blessing (14:27), his plan brought God's punishment on himself, even his premature death, rather than further blessing.
Two sub-sections each begin with a reference to time (vv. 1, 7) and form a literary "diptych"(i.e., two complementary panals).233The first six verses explain how Absalom undermined popular confidence in the Lord's anointed for four years. The last six relate his final preparations to lead a military revolution against David.
"Whatever the reason, he exhibited the same patient scheming and relentless determination which he had already shown when he set out to avenge the rape of his sister (chapter 13); the leopard had not changed his spots. His hatred for Amnon at least had had some excuse, but now it became clear that he had no affection for his father either. Apart from his love for his sister Tamar, he appears to have been a cold, ruthless and above all ambitious man."234
Absalom spent four years (v. 7, probably 980-976 B.C.) quietly planning a coup.235He did this by securing military weapons and supporters (v. 1; cf. 1 Kings 1:5), criticizing his father's administration (vv. 2-3), promising to rule better than David (v. 4), and exercising personal charm and flattery (vv. 5-6). David was at this time (980-976 B.C.) building his palace in Jerusalem, then constructing a new dwelling place for the ark, and finally making preparations for the temple (5:9-12). This may be the reason David was not meeting the needs of his people as well as he might have done. It accounts for David's surprise when Absalom's coupbegan as well.
Perhaps Absalom chose Hebron as the place to announce his rebellion because that was his birthplace, and his support may have been strongest there. Some in Hebron may have resented David's moving his capital from there to Jerusalem.236Ahithophel (v. 12) was Bathsheba's grandfather (11:3; 23:34). Ahithophel's support of Absalom may suggest that the general public did not know about God's choice of David's successor. Ahithophel came from a town in Judah (Josh. 15:51).
Absalom's rebellion against God's anointed king is similar to the reaction of the Jews to Jesus, the Lord's Messiah. They did not want Him to reign over them. Consequently Jesus departed from them and returned to heaven from which he will return to reign over them eventually.
The people of Israel had formerly given the kingdom to David as a gift (5:1-3), but now they took that gift from him (v. 13).237David knew that Absalom was popular with the people. Evidently he fled Jerusalem to save his own life and to spare the capital from destruction. Perhaps Absalom planned to destroy David's capital as well as to kill the king and reassert Judean supremacy. Clearly David planned to return to Jerusalem (v. 16). He was fleeing from an attack, not going into exile. The Cherethites and Pelethites were David's bodyguard. The 600 men from Gath (v. 18) were probably mercenary soldiers. These foreigners were loyal to David even when his own son deserted him.
"Ancient kings quite often preferred to employ foreign bodyguards, since they were unlikely to be affected by local political considerations or won over by local political factions."238
David later repaid Ittai, another former resident of Gath, for his loyalty by making him commander of one-third of his army (18:2). David urged Ittai to return to Jerusalem and to remain loyal to him there (v. 19), but Ittai insisted on accompanying the king. Ittai's commitment to David (vv. 19-22) recalls Ruth's commitment to Naomi (Ruth 1:16-17). David crossed the Kidron Valley immediately east of Zion and moved up the Mount of Olives that lay on the other side of the valley. In this he anticipated the movement of his descendant, Jesus Christ, who also crossed the Kidron Valley to pray on Mt. Olivet during His passion (John 18:1).
At this time there were two leading priests in Israel, Zadok (who was also a prophet, v. 27) and Abiathar. Probably Zadok was responsible for worship in Jerusalem where David had built a new structure to house the ark. Abiathar seems to have functioned for many years as David's personal chaplain. Earlier Zadok had been in charge of the Gibeon sanctuary (1 Chron. 16:39-42). God's "habitation"(v. 25) most likely refers to the new tent David had recently completed in Jerusalem (cf. 1 Chron. 15:1).
These facts suggest another reason for Absalom's rebellion and the support he enjoyed. Many of the Israelites probably considered David's projects of building a new tabernacle and bringing the ark into Jerusalem inappropriate since Jerusalem was a formerly Canaanite stronghold. Many other people may have shared Michal's reaction (6:16-20).239
David's complete submission to God's authority over his life is admirable (v. 26). The phrase "the fords of the wilderness"(v. 28) probably refers to the place people forded the Jordan River near the wilderness of Judah (cf. 17:22). David did not believe superstitiously that the presence of the ark would insure his victory (cf. 1 Sam. 4:3).
David trudged up the Mount of Olives attired for mourning (v. 30), praying as he wept (v. 31). On Mt. Olivet David was still only a few hundred yards from the City of David. It rises about 200 feet above the city to its east. Walking barefoot (v. 30) symbolized "the shameful exile on which he is now embarking (cf. Isa 20:2-3; cf. similarly Mic 1:8)."240David's friend (i.e., counselor) Hushai came from a family that evidently lived on Ephraim's southern border between Bethel and Ataroth (Josh. 16:2).241He was probably quite old.
Chapter 15 teaches us a lot about friendship. Absalom is the negative example, and David's supporters as he left Jerusalem are the positive ones. David lost Absalom as a friend because he failed to reach out to him in forgiveness. David won the friendship of many others in Israel because he had a heart for God that expressed itself in loving kindness for people (cf. Matt. 22:37-39). This made people love David, and we see the marks of their friendship in their dealings with David in this chapter. The king's servants modeled true servanthood by offering to do whatever David needed them to do (vv. 15-18). Ittai expressed his friendship by being a companion to David (vv. 19-23). Zadok and Abiathar became informants and made sure their friend had the information he needed to guarantee his welfare (vv. 24-29). Hushai was willing to hazard his own safety to defend David in the presence of his enemies (vv. 30-37). These people proved to be "sheltering trees"242for their friend in his hour of need.
"Meanwhile David showed a commendable attitude very much in contrast to Absalom's arrogance. He was completely willing to submit to God's will (verses 25f.), whatever that might prove to be. Such willingness to surrender leadership at the right time is another hallmark of good leadership."243
"David now encounters Ziba (vv. 1-4), the first of two men with links to the house of Saul (the other is Shimei [vv. 5-14]). Although Ziba attempts to ingratiate himself to him and Shimei curses him, David treats each with courtesy. The brief account of the king's kindness to Ziba (vv. 1-4) has obvious connections with the narrative of his kindness to Mephibosheth (ch. 9) . . ."244
Ziba's report of Mephibosheth's reaction to the news that Absalom had rebelled seems to have been untrue (cf. 19:24-28). Perhaps he believed Absalom would kill his master and then David would reward him. David accepted Ziba's report too quickly without getting all the facts perhaps because Ziba showed himself to be a friend of David by sustaining him in his flight. We sometimes accept a friend's analysis of the motives of another person too quickly if we do not bother to get all the facts. Here David slipped because he too willingly accepted the complimentary words of a friend.
This second descendant of Saul demonstrated a reaction to David that was the opposite of Ziba's. Ziba had been ingratiating and submissive, but Shimei, a "reptile of the royal house of Saul,"245was insulting and defiant (cf. Gen. 12:3).246The focus of the chiasm in this section is Abishai's desire for Shimei's execution (v. 9; cf. 1 Sam. 17:46; 2 Sam. 4:7).
Bahurim evidently stood on the east side of Mt. Olivet but not far away (cf. 3:16; 17:18). Shimei's charge that David was a man of bloodshed (v. 8) was true. David had murdered Uriah. However, Shimei meant David was responsible for the murders of Abner and Ish-bosheth, which was not true. David appears to have felt his present distress might be God's punishment for that sin (vv. 10-11). He hoped that by showing Shimei mercy God might be merciful to him (v. 12; cf. 22:26). David's attitude was entirely different from Abishai's (v. 9; cf. 1 Sam. 26:8) and Abishai's brother Joab's who often seized the initiative from God. "Sons of Zeruiah"was probably a disparaging form of address (cf. 1 Sam. 10:11; 20:27).
"This is an interesting theological view, that coming from the hate-filled rantings of an apparent madman might be the voice of God to David. The willingness to listen to one's critics and even to one's enemies may be the only way to discover the truth of God. The natural tendency is to surround ourselves with friends who are often reluctant to tell us the things we need to know. This opens the possibility that we may do well at times to listen to people who wish us harm but tell us the truth. Here again we see David's willingness to expose himself to God's word for his life and to God's judgment upon his life."247
Here, in contrast to the previous pericope, David succeeded. He did not let the criticism of a critic elicit an improper response from him. Rather he listened for the voice of God in Shimei's words (vv. 10-11). Sometimes the complementary words of a friend (vv. 1-4) are more difficult to handle than the curses of an enemy. David showed some growth here; previously he had reacted violently to the disdain of an enemy, namely, Nabal (cf. 1 Sam. 25:26, 32-34). For David to control his temper was a greater victory than his slaying Goliath (Prov. 16:32). Times of stress bring out the best and the worst in people. This was true of David's flight from Absalom as it had been true during his flight from Saul.
This is the central unit of chapters 5-20, and its central focus is the judgment that Hushai's advice was better than Ahithophel's (17:14). This advice is the pivot on which the fortunes of David swung in his dealings with Absalom.
Hushai was loyal to David primarily because David was the Lord's anointed (v. 18). His words to Absalom implied that he was supporting the revolution, but everything that Hushai said could have been taken as supporting David, which he did. They are masterful double entendre. He was really serving David in the presence of his son Absalom (v. 19).
"Hushai has kept his integrity, Absalom has been blinded by his own egoism, and the reader is permitted to see one example of the outworking of God's providence."248
In the ancient East people regarded the public appropriation of a king's concubines as an act that signaled the transfer of power to his successor.249Here Absalom broke the Mosaic Law (Lev. 18:7-8) to gain power. By following Ahithophel's advice Absalom brought about one of the judgments God had predicted would come on David for his sin (12:11-12). This act was also a great insult to David, and it jeopardized Absalom's inheritance rights (cf. Reuben's similar sin, Gen. 35:22; 49:3-4). The king was reaping what he had sown (Gal. 6:7). Absalom's immorality may have taken place on the very roof where David had committed adultery (cf. 11:2).
"David had illicitly slept with a woman who was not his wife (cf. 11:4), and now his son is counseled to follow in his father's footsteps."250
In 17:9 Hushai warned that if only a small group of Absalom's men pursued David and David defeated them, the news would spread that Absalom had lost the battle. The people would then side with David. He proposed the ultimate flattery, namely, that Absalom himself should lead his troops into battle (v. 11). Yahweh sought to bring calamity on Absalom (v. 14) because Absalom sought to overthrow the Lord's anointed.
Enrogel (v. 17) was just south of Zion near where the Hinnom and Kidron Valleys join.251Ahithophel may have believed that Hushai's advice would result in Absalom's defeat and David's ultimate return to Jerusalem,252or he may have committed suicide out of humiliation (v. 23).
"All the utterly real issues between people and people and between God and people that swirl throughout II Samuel 9-20, I Kings 1-2 also swirl about Jesus as he moves toward the cross. One must think that the Gospel writers were acutely aware of this when they depicted Jesus' Maundy Thursday walk to the Mount of Olives in ways so graphically reminiscent of the passion' of the first Meshiachin II Samuel 15:13-37. Even the detail of Judas' betrayal of Jesus, and his subsequent suicide, have no remote parallel anywhere in Scripture, with the remarkable exception of Ahithophel, who betrayed the Lord's anointed and thus opened the door to suicidal despair (II Samuel 17:23)."253
Mahanaim on the Jabbok in Transjordan had been Ish-bosheth's capital (2:8). Probably David went there because the inhabitants favored him for his goodness to Mephibosheth, Saul's grandson. Amasa was the son of Jithra (or Jether) an Ishmaelite (not Israelite; cf. 1 Chron. 2:17) and the son of Joab's cousin Abigail. Absalom's army also camped in Transjordan in the Gilead hills probably south of Mahanaim.
Those who helped David included Shobi (v. 27), the son of Nahash, who had been king of Ammon, and who was probably the brother of Hanun, the present Ammonite king who had humiliated David's well-wishers (ch. 10). Ammon was presently subservient to Israel. David and Joab had subdued Ammon about 14 years earlier (12:26-31). Machir had been the host of Mephibosheth before David assumed his support and moved him to Jerusalem from Lo-debar (9:1-5). Barzillai was a wealthy supporter of David from Rogelim, a town farther to the north in Gilead. Shobi, Machir, and Barzillai demonstrate other characteristics of true friends: they initiated help for David and supplied him abundantly with his needs and wants.
If all Christians are God's anointed (and we are, 1 John 2:27), even though former friends disappoint, forsake, and betray us, the Lord will preserve and protect us (cf. Heb. 13:5-6). He will even raise us from the dead to keep His promises to us (cf. Heb. 11:19). Our responsibility is simply to follow the Lord faithfully in spite of opposition, as we see David doing in this story.
"In the overall structure of 15:1-20:22, the story of Absalom's death (18:1-18) provides a counterpoise to that of Shimei's curse (16:5-14 . . .). Just as in the earlier narrative an adversary of David (Shimei) curses him (vv. 16:5, 7-8, 13), so also here an adversary of David (Absalom) opposes him in battle (vv. 6-8); just as in the earlier account David demands that Shimei be spared (16:11), so also here David demands that Absalom be spared (vv. 5, 12); and just as in the earlier episode a son of Zeruiah (Abishai) is ready to kill Shimei (16:9), so also here a son of Zeruiah (Joab, v. 2) is ready to kill Absalom--and indeed wounds him, perhaps mortally (vv. 14-15)."254
Ahimaaz wanted to be the first to tell David the news of his victory since messengers often received a reward for bringing good news. Joab discouraged him thinking he would also report that Absalom was dead. David would not have rewarded that news and might have slain its bearer (cf. ch. 1). Joab sent "the Cushite"(v. 21), possibly one of Joab's servants (cf. v. 15), to tell David the bad news. Cushites came from the upper Nile region of Egypt (Nubia, modern Ethiopia).267Joab may have selected this man because he was a foreigner and therefore more expendable than an Israelite.
David seems to have concluded that a single runner bore good news because if the army had suffered a defeat many people would have been retreating to Mahanaim. Ahimaaz may have lied about not knowing Absalom's fate (v. 29), or he may have been telling the truth. The Cushite then arrived with the news of Absalom's death (vv. 31-32).
"There is a clear rule of law which connects a leader's conduct with his fate and the fate of his house. A degenerate leader, whether it is himself who has sinned or his sons, will ultimately be deposed (see the story of Samuel and his sons) or come to a tragic end, just as Eli and his sons die on the same day, and so do Saul and his. This law holds true of David also; . . . just as in the stories of the death of Eli, Saul and their sons, in the story of Absalom there appears a runner who announces the evil tidings of his death in battle (II Sam. 18:19-32); and before that, in the story of Amnon's murder, a rumor comes to the king of the killing of all his sons, although it is found that only Amnon had been killed (II Sam. 13:30-36). With this, the criticism of all four leaders described in the book of Samuel, together with their sons, reaches its conclusion."268
"The description of Absalom's demise resonates with allusions to Abraham's binding of Isaac in Genesis 22. . . . Both Absalom and the ram are caught in a thicket (sobek/sebak). Whereas Abraham is commanded not to send forth his hand (al tislah yadeka) unto the lad (22:12), Joab's soldier refuses to send forth his hand (lo' eslah yadi) unto the son of the king (18:12). And finally, Abraham offers up the ram in place of his son (tahat beno[22:12]). It takes a while for David to help us perceive this analogy, but finally he makes it clear: would that I had died in place of you (tahteka), O Absalom, my son, my son.'"269
David responded here similarly to the way he did when he heard of Saul's death (ch. 1). Certainly David was correct to weep over Absalom's death. However, Joab was also correct to warn David of the consequences of failing to thank his soldiers for saving his life and kingdom. David should have tempered his personal sorrow since Absalom had rebelled against the Lord's anointed. Since David had slain Uriah with the sword, God punished David by slaying his son, the fruit of his fertility, with death by the sword, too (12:9-10; cf. Gal. 6:7).
Joab's execution of Absalom cost him his position, at least temporarily (v. 13). Nevertheless his rebuke of the king (vv. 5-7) was good as well as needed.
A true friend--and Joab was a true friend to David here--will be willing to take personal risks to confront a friend in love. A wise person, such as David, will accept strong advice from a friend who really cares.
David's emotions were sometimes inappropriate, loving those whom he should have hated and hating those whom he should have loved (v. 6). Similarly Amnon had hated Tamar whom he should have loved (13:15). These emotions were common to father and son, both of whom committed serious injustices.270
"In the overall structure of chapters 15-20 (more precisely 15:1-20:22), the literary unit describing the return of King David' (v. 11) to Jerusalem (vv. 9-43) parallels that depicting his flight (15:13-37) caused by Absalom's rebellion . . ."271
The only thing the people could do after Absalom had fallen was to return to their former king (vv. 11-12). Absalom had found his strongest support among the people of Judah. David did not want the Judahites to conclude that by supporting Absalom they had become his enemies. David extended pardon to them and informed them that he still regarded them as his closest kin. This wise political move helped unite the nation again.
". . . David's reference here [v. 12] is not to blood ties, though they may be present, but rather that mutual covenant commitments must be honored because the vows assume fidelity through thick and thin."272
David also forgave the Benjamites who had hoped for his downfall and had seen it as punishment for taking Saul's place on the throne (vv. 16-30). Shimei had actively opposed David, Ziba had misled him (apparently), and Mephibosheth had not supported him. Mephibosheth's failure to trim his toenails and his beard and to wash his clothes expressed his desire to remain ceremonially unclean while David was in exile (cf. Exod. 19:10, 14).273By forgiving all of these Benjamites David again secured the support of this difficult tribe.274A generation later, when the kingdom split in two, the tribe of Benjamin remained attached to Judah. Abishai had become an "adversary"(Heb. satan) to David in the sense that he opposed David's purpose to pardon Shimei.275
David may have divided the fields between Mephibosheth and Ziba to determine which of them was telling the truth or because he could not tell (v. 29). Solomon followed a similar procedure and threatened to divide a living baby to determine which of two mothers was telling the truth (1 Kings 3:24-25). Mephibosheth offered the entire estate to Ziba (v. 30). His action argued his innocence.276
Barzillai's support (vv. 31-39) undoubtedly represents that of others in Transjordan. By honoring him and his representative, Chimham, David cemented good relations with the tribes across the Jordan.277
The other Israelites (vv. 40-43) also rallied behind David again. The little "who loves the king most"contest they held with the Judahites illustrates their support. Thus almost the whole nation again united behind the Lord's anointed. This was a blessing from God.278
This section is a remarkable testimony to the power of forgiveness (cf. Matt. 6:12, 14-15; 18:21-22; Luke 7:47; 17:3). David had not forgiven Absalom, and perhaps the consequences of his lack of forgiveness encouraged him to take a different approach with his subjects after Absalom's death. We see in David's dealings with Amasa (vv. 11-15) that forgiveness wins over former enemies. We see in his dealings with Shimei (vv. 16-23) that forgiveness gives time for people to change. We see in his treatment of Mephibosheth and Ziba (vv. 24-30) that forgiveness placates irreconcilable adversaries. We see in his relations with Barzillai and Chimham (vv. 31-39) that forgiveness causes blessing to overflow on others. We see in the section revealing the final reactions of the Israelites and the Judahites (vv. 40-43) that forgiveness lays a strong foundation for the future.
"The account of Sheba's rebellion against David serves as a counterpoise to the story of Absalom's conspiracy (15:1-12) in chapters 15-20, which constitute the major part of the narrative that comprises chapters 13-20 (more precisely, 13:1-20:22), the longest definable literary section of the Court History of David (chs. 9-20 . . .)."279
Not all the people of Israel followed David. Some lined up behind Sheba, a discontented Benjamite who sought to split the kingdom as Jeroboam did 45 years later. He sounded his rebel call in Gilgal and then proceeded north gathering supporters.
"It is no coincidence that independence is declared in practically identical terms in the cry of 2 Sam 20:1b and 1 Kgs 12:16. Sheba ben Bichri was before his time--so a worthless fellow.' After Ahijah's intervention, the time had come."280
The notation of David's dealings with his ten concubines (v. 3; cf. 15:16; 16:21-22) shows that the king behaved in harmony with the spirit of the Mosaic Law. The Law prohibited a woman who had had relations with two consecutive husbands from going back to her first husband (Deut. 24). The Law did not address David's case specifically, but Deuteronomy 24 was what seems to have guided his decision.
"The presence of concubines suggests how much the monarchy has embraced the royal ideology of the Near East, which is inimical to the old covenant tradition. David takes a drastic step of confining the concubines and presumably having no more to do with them. His action is most likely a concession and conciliatory gesture to the north. . . . In making this move, David not only distances himself from his own former practice but also offers a contrast to the conduct of Absalom (16:21-22)."281
David had promoted Amasa by making him commander of the army in Joab's place (17:25) probably because Joab had killed Absalom (19:13). Unfortunately Amasa moved too slowly (v. 5). Consequently David put Abishai in charge (v. 6). The writer probably referred to the soldiers as "Joab's men"(v. 7) because they had formerly been under Joab's command.
Joab greeted Amasa in a customary way (v. 9).282He kissed the man he was about to slay, as Judas did later (Luke 22:47-48). Solomon avenged Joab's murder of Amasa when he came to power (1 Kings 2:32). Perhaps David did not execute him because he owed Joab so much for serving him as he had done, and Joab was an effective commander who advanced David's interests. Leaders still publicly decry the methods of people whom they privately encourage.
Abel Beth-maacah lay about 90 miles north of Gilgal and four miles west of Dan. Sheba had far fewer soldiers than Joab did (vv. 11, 14). The saying, "They will surely ask advice at Abel [Beth-maacah],"(v. 18) means people regarded the residents of that town as wise. The city was a mother in Israel (v. 19) in the sense that it exercised a beneficent maternal influence over its neighboring villages.283
"Abel is characterized in the proverb as a city with a long reputation for wisdom and faithfulness to the tradition of Israel. It is, therefore, a mother in the same way Deborah was: a creator and hence a symbol of the unity that bound Israel together under one God Yahweh. And it is the wise woman's implicit appeal to this unity that stops Joab in his tracks."284
"The inheritance of the Lord"(v. 19) refers to Israel (cf. 21:3). Evidently Sheba, though a Benjamite, lived in the hill country of Ephraim (v. 21). David's rule was again secure with the death of Sheba, another man who rebelled against the Lord's anointed and died for it.
"Wise words override ruthless policy. At the end, not only the woman and the city are saved; something of David's dignity and self-respect are also rescued from Joab's mad, obedient intent."285
"In an earlier incident, another wise woman' had co-operated with Joab and had undertaken the delicate task of bringing the king to a new viewpoint (2 Sa. 14:1-20)."286
This story teaches much about wisdom and folly.
"First of all the woman saw the problem realistically; the danger must have been clear enough to everyone in Abel, but there may have been some false hopes of rescue or intervention. Secondly, she did something about it--she did not wait for somebody else to act but took the initiative herself. Then she argued her case, challenging the rightness of Joab's actions; and he was forced to agree with what she said. So a compromise was reached; and finally she took steps to fulfil [sic] the terms agreed. In other words, wisdom was a combination of intelligent insight and bold action. The Old Testament rarely separates the intellectual from the pragmatic: wisdom is not simply knowing but also doing."287
The wise woman contrasts with foolish Joab who, nonetheless, showed wisdom himself when he listened to and cooperated with the woman. Sometimes very devoted people, such as Joab, can do much damage similarly in a church. Talk solved a problem that war would only have complicated. Wisdom saved the woman, her city, David's reputation, Joab's career, and many innocent lives. Her wisdom in action bears four marks: seeing the problem, acting to correct it, arguing her case persuasively, and fulfilling her responsibilities. God's glory evidently motivated and guided her actions (v. 19). Sheba's folly is clear in that he was easily offended, unable to muster support, and initiated a fight he could not win.
"With Joab's return to the king in Jerusalem, the grand symphony known as the Court History of David reaches its conclusion for all practical purposes (at least as far as the books of Samuel are concerned . . .). The last four verses of chapter 20 constitute a suitable formal coda, serving the same function for the Court History that the last four verses of chapter 8 do for the narrative of David's powerful reign . . ."288
This list of David's chiefs of state concludes a major section of Samuel (2 Sam. 9-20, "David's troubles") just as a former list closed another major section (2 Sam. 2-8, "David's triumphs"). Probably this list reflects David's administration toward the end of his reign. The former list evidently describes David's cabinet at an earlier time.
The "forced labor"force, the corvée, was an age-old institution (cf. Deut. 20:10-11; 2 Sam. 7:12-13). It consisted of prisoners of war who worked on such public construction projects as highways, temples, and palaces. Adoram (Adoniram) later became a prominent figure in the apostasy of the Northern Kingdom (1 Kings 12:18-19).
Ira may have been a royal adviser in the same sense as David's sons had been previously. The Hebrew word kohen("priest,"v. 26) seems to have this meaning elsewhere (e.g., 8:18).289
This long section of David's troubles contains selected events that show that even the Lord's anointed was not above a principle by which God deals with all people. Obedience to the revealed will of God brings blessing to the individual and makes him or her a channel of blessing to other people. However disobedience brings divine judgment in the form of curtailed blessing (fertility). Here we also see the serious effects of arrogance before God.
". . . the narrator has invited the reader to pay particular attention to the social and psychological aftermath of adultery, as well as to the obvious fulfilment [sic] of God's judgment as pronounced by the prophet Nathan (2 Sa. 12:10-12)."290
Another major lesson is that rebellion against the Lord's Anointed cannot succeed. The parallels between David and Jesus Christ in these chapters stands out. Jesus, as David, suffered rejection at the hands of "His own,"left His capital in apparent disgrace, but will return to rule and reign.
Seven sub-conflicts appear within this sixth major conflict section in Samuel. Mephibosheth and Jonathan's line conflicts with David's faithfulness (ch. 9). The Ammonite coalition conflicts with David (10:1-11:1). David's unfaithfulness to the covenant conflicts with Yahweh's faithfulness (11:2-12:25). Ammon conflicts with David (12:26-31). Amnon conflicts with Absalom (chs. 13-14). Absalom conflicts with David (ch. 15-18). Finally Sheba conflicts with David (chs. 19-20).
God's basic commitment to David resulted in his anointing, which guaranteed much blessing. David's basic commitment to God, his heart for God, resulted in his never losing a battle with a foreign nation, as far as the text records. David's occasional rebellion against the covenant resulted in some other losses (11:2-12:25; ch. 25).
Similarly God's election of the believer results in much blessing for him or her. The believer's commitment to God as lord of his or her life results in a life characterized mainly by victory. The believer's occasional rebellion against God's revealed will results in some defeat for him or her. Even an elect believer such as Eli's sons and Saul can experience a tragic life if he or she does not commit himself or herself to following God faithfully (Rom. 12:1-2).
