Today, I am reading and commenting on 2 Samuel 8-11.

I have a Youtube video of me reading the Scripture passage and my comments. Please check it out and let me know your thoughts.

Also, here is the link for my Patreon page

Every time I read this passage I wonder what led David to kill two thirds of the Moabites (I am assuming there were the same number of people in each of the lines David had them form).  This seems strange since David’s great grandmother, Ruth, was a Moabite and he had put his parents into the care of the king of Moab while he was on the run from King Saul.  The only thing I have seen which explains this is a Jewish tradition which says that the king of Moab either killed his parents, or turned them over to King Saul, who killed them.

This year when I read the passage I wondered about something else.  When David asked after anyone left of the house of Saul that he could show kindness too, why did they only mention Mephibosheth?  After all, in a few chapters we will learn that, in addition to Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth, there were two sons and five grandsons of King Saul still alive.  I will be perfectly honest, no sooner had I begun to wonder about this than I realized the answer.  David said that he wanted to show kindness to this descendant of Saul for Jonathan’s sake.  The logical answer was therefore Jonathan’s son.  Is it possible that David was made aware of the rest of King Saul’s descendants who were alive at this point?  Absolutely, but since they were all healthy and did not need assistance, he chose only to show special kindness to the crippled son of his dear friend, Jonathan.

Finally, I want to touch on something else I noticed for the first time with this reading.  I have read/heard some people suggest that Bathsheba was on the roof bathing in an attempt to catch King David’s attention.  I always felt that was taking a position which was not supported by the text, but I could not say that they were wrong.  Except that today I noticed that the text says that Bathsheba had been “purifying herself from her uncleanness”.  I am sure that was included to indicate that she was particularly fertile at the time David took her, but it also explains why she was bathing at that time.  Bathsheba was not bathing in order to get David’s attention and “trade up”.  She was bathing because Mosaic law called for her to bath after the end of her menstrual bleeding.  So, Bathsheba was not bathing in order to attract David’s attention.  Rather she was doing so to return to a state of ritual cleanness.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on 2 Samuel 8-11.

Today’s passage contains two accounts about David’s war against the Ammonites.  The first is a summary about what caused the war and summarizes the course of the war.  The second mostly presents the war as a backdrop to David’s affair with Bathsheba.  The conclusion to the war in the second account occurs in tomorrow’s passage.  One of the things which always strikes me is that David was led into temptation because he did not do what he should have been doing.  Rather than lead his army to war, David sent them off to war under Joab.  As a result, David found himself in Jerusalem with time on his hands.  If instead David had led his army into battle, he would not have been tempted by the sight of Bathsheba.  He would not have committed adultery, betraying one of his most loyal men (Uriah is listed elsewhere as being one of David’s Thirty Mighty Men).  David followed up his initial betrayal by having Uriah put into a situation where he would die in battle.  Today’s passage ends with “But the thing David had done displeased the Lord.”  King David is held up as a man who sought to serve the Lord with his whole heart, but even he fell into temptation because he chose not to do what he knew he should be doing.  Many tragedies occurred in his life as a result.  Yes, to some degree they were the result of God’s judgement, but some of them resulted from his sons following the bad example he gave them here.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  2 Samuel 8-11.

My first thought on reading today’s passage was, to ask why David went to war with the Moabites?  After all, he had placed his parents into the care of the king of Moab while he was on the run from King Saul.  Of course, We are not told what happened to David’s parents after he put them into the care of the king of Moab.  I came across a reference which says that there is a Jewish tradition that David’s parents were killed while they were in Moab.  If that were true it would explain David’s harsh treatment of the Moabites.  We also do not know why David went to war against Hadadezer, unless that war came after his war against he Ammonites, which is mentioned later in today’s passage.  Something I would not rule out as the writer(s) do not have the same concern with chronological order that we do today.  Which brings me to another interesting point about the accounts of David’s wars.  Nahash was the name of the king of the Ammonites whose attack on Jabesh-Gilead led to Saul establishing his kingship.  Some commentators think that Hanun, whom David went to war against, was the son of the Nahash whom Saul had warred against.  I think that this is unlikely.  I believe that the Nahash with whom David was friendly was the son or grandson of the man with whom Saul made war.

Usually I try to make a point about what the passage teaches us about how we should live our lives.  However, today I am going to write about what the passage tells us about what happened.  As I read about Mephibosheth in today’s passage I thought it supported my thoughts that David’s interaction with Abner would have peacefully brought the House of Saul under David’s kingship if Joab had not killed Abner.  It seems to me that while David was overjoyed that he was able to show grace to his friend Jonathan’s son, he was seeking any descendant of Saul through whom he could show that he held no animosity towards those who had remained loyal to King Saul.  Further, as I read the account here I cannot help but try to understand what happened between Mephibosheth, Ziba, and David when David fled from Absalom (and when he then returned to Jerusalem).  I am not sure that I understand what is going on relative to that, but reading this, knowing about that later incident makes it seem like there is some tension between what Ziba “owned” before Mephibosheth was brought before David and was then given into the ownership of Mephibosheth.

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.

Today, I am reading and commenting on  2 Samuel 8-11.

When I read about King David’s conquests of the surrounding kingdoms I debate in my head between two theories I have about what he was doing.  The one that came to me is that King David was protecting the merchant caravans, similar to the way he had protected Nabal’s shepherds when he was on the run from King Saul.  In that theory, the neighboring kingdoms profited from raiding merchant caravans.  My second theory is that, instead, David conquered the surrounding lands in order to seize control of the caravan routes as far as he could.  I think the first theory better explains why he did not attack the Ammonites until they provoked him.

Today was the first time that it occurred to me that the reason that King David did not lead his army against the Ammonites was that the war against the Ammonites was not part of the strategy that led him to conquer his other neighbors.  In any case, staying home while he sent the army out to fight was a mistake, perhaps even a sin.  I believe that the writer of this passage felt the same way.  He expresses his judgement on King David for not leading his army by writing, “In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, David sent Joab out…”  The writer follows that up with recording Uriah’s reason for not going home to his wife.  All of this leads me to my main point on this: if King David had been doing what he ought to have been doing, leading his army in war, he would not have been tempted to do, and thus would not have done it, what he should not have done, sleeping with another man’s wife.  In the same way, if we fill our time with doing the things which we ought to be doing, the things which God desires us to do, we will not fall into temptation

I use the daily Bible reading schedule from “The Bible.net” for my daily Bible reading.