Today, I am reading and commenting on  2 Samuel 12-13.

When confronted by Nathan concerning his sin with Bathsheba and to Uriah, David immediately confessed his sin.  Unlike Saul, he made no attempt to justify his sin, rather he acknowledged his guilt and accepted God’s judgement.  On the two occasions where Samuel confronted Saul over his failure to follow God’s will, Saul made excuses.  I want to take note that we often view the sins which David committed as much more serious than what Saul did, but the Bible is quite clear that God makes no distinction between failure to obey His commands.  On behalf of God, Nathan told David that God had forgiven him, had taken away his sin.  However, Nathan also told David that he would still suffer the consequences of his sin.  The rest of today’s passage describes some of the consequences of David’s sin.  If we look at Amnon’s rape of Tamar, how different is it really from David’s relationship with Bathsheba?  Except that David married Bathsheba, while Amnon wanted nothing to do with Tamar after he forced himself upon her.  We might say that David did not force himself upon Bathsheba, but the passage suggests that Tamar was willing to go to bed with Amnon, if he married her.  And while Absalom’s motives, and methods, were different, what he did to Amnon was not very different from what David did to Uriah.

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 4-7.

When David decided to move the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem, we are told that they brought it from the house of Abinadab.  Interestingly, back in 1 Samuel 6-7, after the Philistines returned the Ark to the Israelites, it was taken from Beth Shemesh to Kiriath Jearim and left in the house of Abinadab.  It also says that it remained there for twenty years.  However, I cannot accept any reading of the two books of Samuel which has today’s passage happening only twenty years after those of 1 Samuel 6-7.  As I read this, the events of 1 Samuel 6-7 occurred before Samuel began leading Israel. Then Samuel was followed by Saul being king for forty-two years. Then I noticed as I was reading through this year that in 2 Samuel 14:18 it says that while Saul was king the Ark was with the Israelites when they mustered for battle.  As I was getting my facts straight on this, I came across an article which suggested that the twenty years which 1 Samuel 7 says that the ark remained at Kiriath Jearim was the time between the return of the Ark and Samuel beginning to lead Israel described next there in chapter 7.  The explanation then of why David was bringing the Ark from Kiriath Jearim to Jerusalem in today’s passage would be that while the Israelite army was not mustered for war, the Ark was returned to Kiriath Jearim.

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 1-3.

Some people think the account given of Saul’s death here contradicts the one given at the end of 1  Samuel.  While this is true, they miss the fact that the account of his death given here is not told as what happened.  Rather, it is told as what the messenger who brought the news to David said happened.  The writer makes no comment in this passage as to whether or not the messenger is telling the truth.  Even David’s response does not necessarily tell us that David believed the messenger.  It is worth noting that the messenger was an Amalekite and that David had recently returned from chasing down a group of Amalekites who had destroyed his home and taken the women and children of his men, and himself, captive.  So, David was predisposed to think poorly of Amalekites.  The messenger did confess to killing the king, something David had refrained from doing at least twice.

I have often wondered at the hostility which David expresses towards Joab and his brother Abishai.  I think today reading this passage I finally understand it.  It is not made completely clear, but when Abner offered to come over to David, David asked for Saul’s daughter Michal to be returned to him as his wife.  Ish-Bosheth, Saul’s surviving son whom Abner had previously supported as king over Israel, ordered her taken from the man to whom King Saul had given her after David fled from Saul’s attempts to kill him.  This suggests that not only was Abner going to swear fealty to David as king, but that Ish-Bosheth would do so as well.  So, Joab killing Abner ended to opportunity to end the conflict between David and Saul’s house without further bloodshed.  After the death of Abner, Ish-Bosheth was afraid that someone among David’s men would kill him as well.  We see from David’s psalm of mourning in today’s passage that he had no enmity towards Saul’s family.  In any case, while David had stopped Abishai from killing Saul on the occasion when the two of them had snuck into Saul’s camp, he only starts complaining about how bloodthirsty Abishai and Joab were after the incident with Abner.

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

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 28-31.

When I read today’s passage two questions cross my mind.  The first one: would David have fought for the Philistines and against the Israelites if the other Philistine rulers had not demanded that Achish send him away from the battle?  Second, why is the account of Saul consulting the medium in Endor included here?  I do not think that we can answer the first question with any more than a guess.  While David lived under Achish’s rule, he was careful to never attack any Israelite settlements but told Achish that he had.  As to the second question, I think we can reach a few conclusions about why it was included.  First, it gives us an idea about how desperate Saul had become as he heads into his final battle.  Additionally, it tells us that at least some of those who claim to speak with the dead are indeed able to do so.  Finally, we learn that if we turn aside from God we will be left with nowhere to turn when things inevitably go wrong.

On the other hand, David consulted God whenever he had a decision to make.  So, when he was about to feel compelled to fight against his own people, God arranged for the Philistines to send him away from the battle, just in time for him to return to his home base to discover that his wives and possessions, and those of his men, had been taken by bandits.  Again, David consulted God before setting off in pursuit of those bandits.  With God’s help David was able to overtake the bandits and recover not only all of the goods and people which the bandits had taken from him and his men, he also recovered that which they had taken from other towns and villages nearby.  He shared some of this plunder with the elders of Judah who had provided him supplies and support while he was hiding from King Saul.

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

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 25-27.

There are three accounts of David’s time on the run from King Saul in today’s passage.  I am going to start with my thoughts today on the first one and we will see if I write about the other two or not.  So, first we have the account of David’s interaction with Nabal and Nabal’s wife Abigail.  The first aspect of this account is the way Nabal answered the men David sent to him.  To me reading it today, it seems like David’s response to Nabal’s words is a bit over the top. Yes, it is dismissive of David and somewhat insulting, but is it really a harsh enough insult to justify bloodshed.  However, Nabal’s own servants apparently thought it was.  They went to Nabal’s wife Abigail and begged her to do something.  So, we should be careful about judging a situation from outside it.  To me, David seems to have overreacted, but to all of those who were there, his reaction was expected and considered justified.  There is one other piece of this account I want to point out.  Both Abigail and David expressed that they were pleased that David did not avenge himself on Nabal.  Neither seem to think that he would have been in the wrong to do so, but both thought it was better that he had not done so.  In the end, God avenged David against Nabal, and David was grateful that he had not done so himself.

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

Today, I am reading and commenting on 1 Samuel 21-24.

I am not sure why this never occurred to me before, but it struck me that David, whose great grandmother was a Moabite, took his parents to the king of Moab to keep them safe while he was on the run from King Saul.  This made me wonder if Ruth had been related to the royal family of Moab?  I think that is probably not a conclusion we are intended to reach, not even that Ruth’s descendants kept some kind of connection with her homeland.  As I have thought about it more, it seems like David went to Moab as the logical conclusion.   First, he had gone to Gath, in Philistia, and before he could ask for the king of Gath to shelter his parents he realized that he was seen as an enemy there.  If we then look at Ancient Israel we see that Philistia was on one side of Judah and Moab on the other.  Basically, after Philistia, Moab was the next place where David could take his parents.  Further, his other options would have required travelling through territory controlled by Saul, where David had no allies (at least not at this point in his life).

The other thing I want to look at is the men who followed David.  In 1 Samuel 14:52 it says that “whenever Saul saw a mighty or brave man, he took him into his service.”  In today’s passage it says that when David was at the cave of Adullam “All those who were in distress or in debt or discontented gathered around him, and he became their commander.”   Yet out of those discontented, distressed, or debtors came David’s mighty men.  Saul took the mighty and brave to build his army.  David took the outcasts.   David took the distressed, the discontented, the debtors, the outcasts and forged a force of mighty warriors.  Just as Jesus forges His Church out of the outcasts of our society.

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

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 18-20.

After David defeated Goliath, as King Saul and his army, including David, returned to Gibeah, the women in the towns they passed through praised Saul, but praised David even higher.  King Saul became jealous of David.  Saul’s jealousy of David is evidence of his lack of faith in God.  If Saul had been a leader who put God first in his life, he would not have been bothered by someone else receiving greater honor from the people than he did.  A leader who is serving the Lord does not mind when others get the credit, or are seen as more important.  They are not even worried if it becomes obvious that someone else will replace them as leader.  A leader who is serving God only cares that the people they are leading also follow and worship God.   If they are the leader God desires for His people, God will keep them in that position.  If God removes them from that position of leadership, it is because God has someone better in mind for that position…and the leader who is serving God desires that the people they are leading have the best possible leader, even if it is not themselves.  On the other hand, David did not particularly seek honor, as evidenced by his unwillingness to marry King Saul’s older daughter.  It was only after Michal, Saul’s younger daughter, fell in love with David that he was willing to become King Saul’s son-in-law.  David sought to do God’s will and knew that he did not need to strive after the position God wanted him in because he knew that God would put him there when the time was right.

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

Today, I am reading and commenting on  1 Samuel 14-15.

Today I want to compare Jonathan’s faith from the first account in today’s passage with Saul’s faith from the final account in today’s story.  When Jonathan left the Israelite camp and headed over to scout out, and provoke, a Philistine camp, he laid out a test before God of what he should do.  He laid out before God that he and his armor bearer would attack if the Philistines arrogantly called them to come close, but would not do so otherwise.  Then when the Philistines gave him the response to attack, Jonathan gave credit to God for the victory he was about to have.  Then in the last account of today’s passage Samuel told King Saul that God commanded him to attack and completely destroy the Amalekites, killing all of them and destroying everything which belonged to them.  Saul attacked them and completely wiped them out, but he spared their king and kept the best of their sheep and cattle.  When Saul then met Samuel he claimed to have fully carried out God’s instructions.  Then when Samuel confronted him about the sheep and cattle, Saul blamed his soldiers…and claimed that they had only done so in order to offer them to God.  Finally when Samuel told him that he had not obeyed the Lord, Saul claimed the he had done so and only kept the sheep and cattle in order to sacrifice them to “the Lord your God.”  Notice, Saul did not say, “the Lord my God,” or, “the Lord our God.”  King Saul did not view God as his God (not even as his god).

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