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

Today, I am reading and commenting on 2 Samuel 18-19.

    There is really a lot in this passage which I want to comment on. It is worth noting that David did not kill the messenger who brought him the news of Absalom’s death, unlike those who brought him the news of Saul’s death and the news of Ishbosheth’s death. The difference is that this messenger did not claim responsibility for the death.
    David’s reaction to Absalom’s death is understandable. He clearly deeply loved this son. Although it is likely that part of David’s morning was a result of the betrayal he felt over Absalom’s attempt to usurp his throne. It took Joab confronting him for David to realize what his actions said to his loyal followers who had just saved his life. So, this is the second account where Joab gets David to change his behavior in a way which Joab perceives as being in David’s interest. The first time was when Joab convinced David to bring Absalom back from exile because he believed that to be David’s desire (an idea supported by how deeply David mourned Absalom’s death). Then this occasion where Joab got David to put aside his mourning before he alienated his supporters.
    When David entered into Jerusalem he had a disagreement with Joab’s brother. David was angry because Abishai, Joab’s brother, wanted to kill Shimei for cursing David when he fled from Absalom. In reaction to Abishai’s reccomendation that Shimei be killed, David angrily lashed out at both Abishai and Joab. I have never quite understood the conflict between David and his nephews, Joab and Abishai. It is never clear to me why David was unable to remove Joab from his position as head of his army. Even more confusing is why Joab remained loyal despite David’s clear desire to remove him. I think, at least in part, this situation can be explained by family dynamics. Joab was David’s nephew, but not a lot younger than David. So, Joab looked up to David, but was close enough in age to see him more as a companion than as an elder. David, on the other hand, felt a sense of duty to look after Joab and his brothers, perhaps even felt that their impetuousness was his fault for not being a better example.

    Finally, I said that we would come back to what Ziba had told David when he joined him as he fled Jerusalem. When David returned to Jerusalem, Mephibosheth came to greet him. Now the passage tells us that Mephibosheth had not taken care of his basic hygiene since David had left the city. Further, when questioned by David, Mephibosheth claimed that Ziba had tricked him into staying and outright lied when he said that Mephibosheth had refused to join David as he fled. This is where it gets interesting. David apparently believed Mephibosheth. At least, by enough to return to Mephibosheth half of the property he had bestowed upon Ziba when David fled Jerusalem. Now, if David believed that Ziba had lied to him about Mephibosheth, why did he allow him to keep half of the property? On the other hand, if David believed that Mephibosheth was lying here, why did he return to him half his property? At which pint Mephibosheth declines, saying that Ziba should be allowed to keep all of it. We do not know how this actually played out. Did Mephibosheth get half of his property back? Or did it all go to Ziba and his heirs?