Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Samuel 21:2
And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites [were] not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.)
2. the Amorites ] Amorites (= highlanders) is here and elsewhere used as a general designation for the ancient inhabitants of Palestine, particularly those who occupied the mountainous country. See note on 1Sa 7:14. The Gibeonites belonged to the tribe of the Hivites.
had sworn unto them ] See Jos 9:3 ff. The oath though obtained by fraud was acknowledged to be binding (Jos 9:19-20), and its violation was a breach of the third commandment (Exo 20:7).
in his zeal ] Probably in a fit of zeal to carry out the Law by cleansing the land from the remnant of the heathen (Exo 34:11-16; Deu 7:2) as he cleansed it from the soothsayers (1Sa 28:3). There is no allusion to the deed elsewhere.
wherewith shall I make the atonement ] The cognate substantive also rendered satisfaction (Num 35:31) and ransom (Exo 30:12) means literally a covering. The “atonement” is a covering, which hides the offence from the eyes of the offended party, and withdraws the guilt from the gaze of an avenging God.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The way in which the writer here refers to the history of the league with the Gibeonites Josh. 9 shows that the Book of Joshua was not a part of the same work as the Books of Samuel.
Of the Amorites – The Gibeonites were Hivites Jos 9:7; Jos 11:19; and in many enumerations of the Canaanite nations the Hivites are distinguished from the Amorites. But Amorite is often used in a more comprehensive sense, equivalent to Canaanite (as Gen 15:16; Deu 1:27), and denoting especially that part of the Canaanite nation which dwelt in the hill country Num 13:29; Deu 1:7, Deu 1:20, Deu 1:24, and so includes the Hivites.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 2. The remnant of the Amorites] The Gibeonites were Hivites, not Amorites, as appears from Jos 11:19: but Amorites is a name often given to the Canaanites in general, Ge 15:16; Am 2:9, and elsewhere.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Saul sought to slay them, i. e. he sought occasions and pretences how he might cut them off with some colour of law or justice, diligently searching out and aggravating their faults, and punishing them worse than they deserved; oppressing them with excessive labours, and openly killing some of them, and intending by degrees to wear them out.
In his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah; conceiving, or rather pretending, that it was not for the honour, nor comfort, nor advantage of Gods people, to nourish any of that viperous broad in their bosoms; and that howsoever Joshua and the princes which then were, had by their fraud been drawn into an oath to preserve them, Jos 9:15, yet in truth that oath was contrary to Gods command, Exo 23:32; Deu 7:2, and therefore (as he thought) not to be observed. This was his pretence. But how little zeal he had for God, or for the public good of his people, is evident by the whole course of his life; and therefore it is more than probable he had some particular motive or design in the case; either because some of them had highly provoked him, for whose sake he would be revenged of the whole race; or because, they being cut off, their estates might be forfeited to the crown; or for some other reason now unknown.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
2. in his zeal to the children ofIsrael and JudahUnder pretense of a rigorous and faithfulexecution of the divine law regarding the extermination of theCanaanites, he set himself to expel or destroy those whom Joshua hadbeen deceived into sparing. His real object seems to have been, thatthe possessions of the Gibeonites, being forfeited to the crown,might be divided among his own people (compare 1Sa22:7). At all events, his proceeding against this people was inviolation of a solemn oath, and involving national guilt. Thefamine was, in the wise and just retribution of Providence, made anational punishment, since the Hebrews either assisted in themassacre, or did not interpose to prevent it; since they neitherendeavored to repair the wrong, nor expressed any horror of it; andsince a general protracted chastisement might have been indispensableto inspire a proper respect and protection to the Gibeonite remnantthat survived.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the king called the Gibeonites,…. Sent messengers unto them, and summoned them to come to him,
and said unto them; what is expressed in 2Sa 21:3; for what follows is in a parenthesis:
(now the Gibeonites [were] not of the children of Israel; originally, though they were proselyted to the Jewish religion, and were employed in the menial services of the sanctuary:
but of the remnant of the Amorites; they were the remains of the old Canaanites, who sometimes in general were called Amorites, otherwise the Gibeonites were called Hivites; see Jos 9:7;
and the children of Israel had sworn unto them; by their princes, as Joshua; yet,
and Saul, contrary to this oath, sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah); pretending a great concern for them, for their honour and profit; that these men ought not to live in their cities, and take the bread out of their mouths, and be employed in the service of the sanctuary; but that they ought to be expelled, and even cut off, being the old inhabitants of the land, the Lord ordered to be destroyed; and that though the Israelites had given an oath to the contrary, they were drawn into it by guile and deceit, and therefore not binding upon them; hence he sought by all means to harass and oppress them, and slew many of them, and destroyed them out of their cities, that they might be possessed by Judah and Benjamin; see 2Sa 4:2, compared with Jos 9:17.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(2) For his bloody house.Better, for the blood-guilty house. Sauls family and descendants are regarded, according to the universal ideas of the times, as sharers in his guilt. The story of the Gibeonites and of Joshuas league with them is told in Joshua 9, but Sauls attempt to destroy them is mentioned only here. It is plain, from what is said of them in 2Sa. 21:8, that they had never become incorporated with the Israelites by circumcision, but remained a distinct people. Sauls sin consisted in the violation of the solemn oath, in the Lords name, by which the nation of Israel was bound to the Gibeonites. His zeal in that case was of the same ungodly character with many other acts of his reign, in which pride, arrogance, and self-will were cloaked under a zeal for Gods honour and His peoples welfare.
The Amorites.More precisely, the Gibeonites were Hivites (Jos. 9:7); but they are called Amorites (=mountaineers) as a frequent general name for the old people of Palestine.
Two questions are often asked in connection with this narrative: (1) Why the punishment of Sauls sin should have been so long delayed? and (2) why it should at last have fallen upon David and his people, who had no share in the commission of the sin? The answer to both questions is in the fact that Israel both sinned and was punished as a nation. Saul slew the Gibeonites, not simply as the son of Kish, but as the king of Israel, and therefore involved all Israel with him in the violation of the national oath; and hence, until the evil should be put away by the execution of the immediate offender or his representatives, all Israel must suffer. The lesson of the continuity of the nations life, and of its continued responsibility from age to age, was greatly enhanced by the delay. Besides this, there were so many other grievous sins for which Saul was to be punished, that it was hardly possible to bring out during his lifetime the special Divine displeasure at this one.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2. Of the Amorites They are called Hivites at Jos 9:7; but the name Amorites is more general and often used of all the Canaanitish tribes.
Gen 15:16; Amo 2:9.
Had sworn See Jos 9:3-21.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
(2) And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.)
The Reader, in order to have a clear apprehension of this subject, must look back as far as to the days of Joshua, and read the league of friendship entered into between Israel and Gibeon, See Jos 9:15 . The HOLY GHOST hath not recorded what the conduct was which Saul manifested towards the Gibeonites. It is sufficient to know, that it must have been particularly odious, because the LORD visited it upon Israel, in those three years famine, so long after Saul’s death. Reader! do not fail to remark, how sure, though slow, sometimes the LORD’s judgments are. The apostle, speaking of the awful certainty of such things, describes the tremendous visitation with which the LORD will in the end of the day, account with sinners, in those awful terms; whose judgment, (says he) now of a long time, lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 2Pe 2:3 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
2Sa 21:2 And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites [were] not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.)
Ver. 2. And Saul sought to slay them. ] Taxing them with supposed faults, saith Diodate, aggravating their true faults, extending the particular ones into the general, depriving them of all commodity and favour, and raising great dissensions amongst them. Others think that when Saul expelled sorcerers and witches out of Israel, under that pretence he also sought to root out the Gibeonites, as being a remnant of the Canaanites, who were much addicted to those devilish studies.
In his zeal to the children of Israel.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gibeonites. Compare Jos 9:3, Jos 9:16, Jos 9:17.
now. Note the Figure of speech Parenthesis. App-6.
were = they [were].
children = sons.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
now the: Jos 9:3-21
the Amorites: The Gibeonites were Hivites, not Amorites, as appears from Jos 6:19, but Amorites is a name often given to the Canaanites in general. Gen 15:16
in his zeal: Deu 7:16, 1Sa 14:44, 1Sa 15:8, 1Sa 15:9, 2Ki 10:16, 2Ki 10:31, Luk 9:54, Luk 9:55, Joh 16:2, Rom 10:2, Gal 4:17
Reciprocal: Exo 20:7 – guiltless Exo 23:32 – shalt make Deu 7:2 – make no Jos 2:17 – General Jos 5:1 – all the kings Jos 6:22 – as ye sware unto her Jos 9:15 – made peace 1Ki 2:43 – Why 1Ki 15:19 – break thy league 1Ch 1:14 – Amorite 2Ch 16:3 – break 2Ch 36:13 – who had Neh 3:7 – the Gibeonite Est 9:27 – and upon their seed Psa 15:4 – sweareth Eze 17:16 – whose oath Act 22:3 – was Phi 3:6 – zeal Heb 6:16 – an oath
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Sa 21:2. In his zeal for the children of Israel and Judah When Joshua and the princes made a league with the Gibeonites, the people were greatly offended with them, as appears, Joshua chap. 9. Whatever the pretences of this resentment might be, the true reason seems sufficiently apparent; they were, by this league, deprived of the lands and spoils of the Gibeonites. Did these reasons cease in the days of Saul? Or rather, did they not still subsist, and with more force, in proportion as the people of Israel and their wants increased, in a narrow land? But however this may be, why did Saul slay them? The text plainly saith, that he did it in his zeal for the children of Israel and Judah. But the question still returns: How could the destroying these poor people manifest his zeal for Israel and Judah? There is seemingly but one imaginable way how this could be done. The Gibeonites had one city in the tribe of Judah, and three in Benjamin; and when they were destroyed out of these cities, who could pretend any right to them but Israel (that is, Benjamin) and Judah? So that Saul destroyed the Gibeonites, as the most obliging thing he could do for his people. See Delaney.