6 11. Quarrel between Abner and Ish-bosheth<\/p>\n
6<\/strong>. made himself strong<\/em> ] Or, shewed himself strong.<\/strong> Ish-bosheth was evidently weak and incapable, a mere puppet in the hands of Abner, who had made himself the mainstay of Saul’s house, partly from his family connexion, partly with a view to secure the greatest amount of influence, possibly with the hope of eventually becoming king himself. At length foreseeing the impossibility of continuing a successful opposition to David’s growing power, he took the opportunity of a quarrel with Ish-bosheth to make such overtures to David as might secure him favourable terms and an influential position.<\/p>\n Render, And it came to pass, while the war between the house of Saul and the house of David lasted, that Abner assisted the house of Saul.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 6<\/span>. Abner made himself strong<\/B><\/I>] This strengthening of himself, and going in to the late king’s concubine, were most evident proofs that he wished to seize upon the government. See 1Kg 2:21-2:22<\/span>; 1Kg 12:8<\/span>; 1Kg 16:21<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n He used all his endeavours to support Sauls house; which is mentioned, to show the reason of his deep resentment of the following aspersion. Or, he strengthened himself in the house of Saul, i.e. he so managed all affairs, as to get all the riches and power into his own hands; which made Ish-bosheth suspect that he aimed at the kingdom, and sought to marry the kings concubine in order to it, as the manner was. See 2Sa 12:8<\/span>; 16:21<\/span>; 1Ki 1:17<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n 6-11. Abner made himself strong forthe house of Saul<\/B>In the East, the wives and concubines of aking are the property of his successor to this extent, that for aprivate person to aspire to marry one of them would be considered avirtual advance of pretensions to the crown (see 1Ki2:17<\/span>). It is not clear whether the accusation against Abner waswell or ill founded. But he resented the charge as an indignity, and,impelled by revenge, determined to transfer all the weight of hisinfluence to the opposite party. He evidently set a full value on hisservices, and seems to have lorded it over his weak nephew in ahaughty, overbearing manner.<\/P><\/p>\n And it came to pass, while there was war between the house of Saul and the house of David<\/strong>,…. As long as that continued, as it did until the following quarrel happened between Ishbosheth and Abner:<\/p>\n that Abner made himself strong for the house of Saul<\/strong>; or was strongly in the interest of that house, and used his utmost endeavours to support and confirm it.<\/p>\n Decline of the House of Saul. – 2Sa 3:6-11<\/span>. Abner’s quarrel with Ishbosheth.<\/em> – During the war between the house of Saul and the house of David, Abner adhered firmly to the house of Saul, but he appropriated one of Saul’s concubines to himself. When Ishbosheth charged him with this, he fell into so violent a rage, that he at once announced to Ishbosheth his intention to hand over the kingdom to David. Abner had certainly perceived the utter incapacity of Ishbosheth for a very long time, if not from the very outset, and had probably made him king after the death of Saul, merely that he might save himself from the necessity of submitting to David, and might be able to rule in Ishbosheth’s name, and possibly succeed in paving his own way to the throne. His appropriation of the concubine of the deceased monarch was at any rate a proof, according to Israelitish notions, and in fact those generally prevalent in the East, that he was aiming at the throne (vid., 2Sa 16:21<\/span>; 1Ki 2:21<\/span>). But it may gradually have become obvious to him, that the house of Saul could not possibly retain the government in opposition to David; and this may have led to his determination to persuade all the Israelites to acknowledge David, and thereby to secure for himself an influential post under his government. This will explain in a very simple manner Abner’s falling away from Ishbosheth and going over to David.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:6-7<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> 2Sa 3:6<\/span> and 2Sa 3:7<\/span> constitute one period, expanded by the introduction of circumstantial clauses, the (it came to pass) of the protasis being continued in the (he said) of 2Sa 3:7<\/span><\/em>. “It came to pass, when there was war between the house of Saul and the house of David, and Abner showed himself strong for the house of Saul, and Saul had a concubine named Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, that he<\/em> (Ishbosheth) said to Abner, Why hast thou gone to my father’s concubine?”<\/em> The subject to “said”<\/em> is omitted in the apodosis; but it is evident from 2Sa 3:8<\/span>, and the expression “my father,”<\/em> that Ishbosheth is to be supplied. Even in the second circumstantial clause, “and Saul had a concubine,”<\/em> the reason why this is mentioned is only to be gathered from Ishbosheth’s words. : to prove one’s self strong for, or with, a person, i.e., to render him powerful help. means “to cohabit with.”<\/em> It was the exclusive right of the successor to the throne to cohabit with the concubines of the deceased king, who came down to him as part of the property which he inherited.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:8<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Abner was so enraged at Ishbosheth’s complaint, that he replied, “Am I a dog’s head, holding with Judah? To-day<\/em> (i.e., at present) I show affection to the house of Saul thy father, towards his brethren and his friends, and did not let thee fall into the hand of David, and thou reproachest me to-day with the fault with the woman?”<\/em> “Dog’s head”<\/em> is something thoroughly contemptible. , lit<\/em>. which (belongs) to Judah, i.e., holds with Judah.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:9-10<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> “God do so to Abner, … as Jehovah hath sworn to David, so will I do to him.”<\/em> The repetition of serves to introduce the oath, as in 2Sa 2:27<\/span>. “To take away the kingdom from the house of Saul, and set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan to Beersheba.”<\/em> We do not know of any oath with which God had promised the kingdom to David; but the promise of God in itself is equivalent to an oath, as God is the true God, who can neither lie nor deceive (1Sa 15:29<\/span>; Num 23:19<\/span>). This promise was generally known in Israel. “From Dan to Beersheba”<\/em> (as in Jdg 20:1<\/span>).<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:11<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Ishbosheth could make no reply to these words of Abner, “because he was afraid of him.”<\/em> <\/p>\n 2Sa 3:12-21<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> Abner goes over to David.<\/em> – 2Sa 3:12<\/span>. Abner soon carried out his threat to Ishbosheth. He sent messengers to David in his stead<\/em> (not “on the spot,” or immediately, a rendering adopted by the Chaldee and Symmachus, but for which no support can be found) with this message: “Whose is the land?”<\/em> i.e., to whom does it belong except to thee? and, “Make a covenant with me; behold, so is my hand with thee<\/em> (i.e., so will I stand by thee), to turn all Israel to thee.”<\/em> <\/p>\n 2Sa 3:13<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> David assented to the proposal on this condition: “Only one thing do I require of thee, namely, Thou shalt not see my face, unless thou first of all bringest me Michal, the daughter of Saul, when thou comest to see my face.”<\/em> , “except before thy bringing,” <\/em> i.e., unless when thou hast first of all brought or delivered “Michal to me.” This condition was imposed by David, not only because Michal had been unjustly taken away from him by Saul, after he had rightfully acquired her for his wife by paying the dowry demanded, and in spite of her love to him (1Sa 18:27<\/span>; 1Sa 19:11-12<\/span>), and given to another man (1Sa 25:44<\/span>), so that he could demand her back again with perfect justice, and Ishbosheth could not refuse to give her up to him, but probably on political grounds also, namely, because the renewal of his marriage to the king’s daughter would show to all Israel that he cherished no hatred in his heart towards the fallen king.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:14<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Thereupon, namely when Abner had assented to this condition, David sent messengers to Ishbosheth with this demand: “Give (me) my wife Michal, whom I espoused to me for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines”<\/em> (see 1Sa 18:25<\/span>, 1Sa 18:27<\/span>). David sent to Ishbosheth to demand the restoration of Michal, that her return might take place in a duly legal form, “that it might be apparent that he had dealt justly with Paltiel in the presence of his king, and that he had received his wife back again, and had not taken her by force from her husband” (Seb. Schmidt).<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:15<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Ishbosheth probably sent Abner to Gallim (1Sa 25:44<\/span>) to fetch Michal from her husband Paltiel (see at 1Sa 25:44<\/span>), and take her back to David. The husband was obliged to consent to this separation.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:16<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> When he went with his wife, weeping behind her, to Bahurim, Abner commanded him to turn back; “and he returned.”<\/em> Bahurim<\/em>, Shimei’s home (2Sa 19:17<\/span>; 1Ki 2:8<\/span>), was situated, according to 2Sa 16:1<\/span>, 2Sa 16:5<\/span>, and 2Sa 17:18<\/span>, upon the road from Jerusalem to Gilgal, in the valley of the Jordan, not far from the Mount of Olives, and is supposed by v. Schubert<\/em> (R. iii. p. 70) to have stood upon the site of the present Abu Dis<\/em>, though in all probability it is to be sought for farther north (see Rob. Pal.<\/em> ii. p. 103). Paltiel had therefore followed his wife to the border of the tribe of Judah, or of the kingdom of David.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:17-18<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> But before Abner set out to go to David, he had spoken to the elders of Israel (the tribes generally, with the exception of Benjamin see 2Sa 3:19<\/span> and Judah): “Both yesterday and the day before yesterday<\/em> (i.e., a long time ago), ye desired to have David as king over you. Now carry out your wish: for Jehovah hath spoken concerning David, Through my servant David will I save my people Israel out of the power of the Philistines and all their enemies.”<\/em> is an evident mistake in writing for , which is found in many MSS, and rendered in all the ancient versions.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:19-20<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> Abner had spoken in the same way in the ears of Benjamin. He spoke to the Benjaminites more especially, because the existing royal family belonged to that tribe, and they had reaped many advantages in consequence (vid., 1Sa 22:7<\/span>). The verb in the circumstantial clause (2Sa 3:17<\/span>), and the verb in 2Sa 3:19<\/span>, which serves as a continuation of the circumstantial clause, must be translated as pluperfects, since Abner’s interview with the elders of Israel and with Benjamin preceded his interview with David at Hebron. We may see from Abner’s address to the elders, that even among the northern tribes the popular voice had long since decided for David. In 1 Chron 12 we have historical proofs of this. The word of Jehovah concerning David, which is mentioned in 2Sa 3:18<\/span>, is not met with anywhere in this precise form in the history of David as it has come down to us. Abner therefore had either some expression used by one of the prophets (Samuel or Gad) in his mind, which he described as the word of Jehovah, or else he regarded the anointing of David by Samuel in accordance with the command of the Lord, and the marvellous success of all that David attempted against the enemies of Israel, as a practical declaration on the part of God, that David, as the appointed successor of Saul, would perform what the Lord had spoken to Samuel concerning Saul (1Sa 9:16<\/span>), but what Saul had not fulfilled on account of his rebellion against the commandments of the Lord.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:19-20<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> When Abner had gained over the elders of Israel and Benjamin to recognise David as king, he went to Hebron to speak in the ears of David “all that had pleased Israel and the whole house of Benjamin,”<\/em> i.e., to make known to him their determination to acknowledge him as king. There went with him twenty men as representatives of all Israel, to confirm Abner’s statements by their presence; and David prepared a meal for them all.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:21<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> After the meal, Abner said to David, “I will raise and go and gather together all Israel to my lord the king, that they may make a covenant with thee<\/em> (i.e., do homage to thee before God as king), and thou mayest become king over all that thy soul desireth,”<\/em> i.e., over all the nation of God; whereupon David took leave of him, and Abner went away in peace. The expression “in peace”<\/em> serves to prepare the way for what follows. It is not stated, however, that David sent him away in peace (without avenging himself upon him), but that “David sent him away, and he went in peace.” Apart altogether from the mildness of David’s own character, he had no reason whatever for treating Abner as an enemy, now that he had given up all opposition to his reigning, and had brought all the Israelites over to him. What Abner had done for Ishbosheth, including his fighting against David, was indeed a sinful act of resistance to the will of Jehovah, which was not unknown to him, and according to which Samuel had both called and anointed David king over the nation; but for all that, it was not an ordinary act of rebellion against the person of David and his rightful claim to the throne, because Jehovah had not yet caused David to be set before the nation as its king by Samuel or any other prophet, and David had not yet asserted the right to reign over all Israel, which had been secured to him by the Lord and guaranteed by his anointing, as one which the nation was bound to recognise; but, like a true servant of God, he waited patiently till the Lord should give him the dominion over all His people.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:22-30<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> Abner assassinated by Joab.<\/em> – 2Sa 3:22<\/span>. After Abner’s departure, the servants of David returned with much booty from a marauding expedition, and Joab at their head. The singular may be explained from the fact that Joab was the principal person in the estimation of the writer. , lit.<\/em> from the marauding host, i.e., from the work of a marauding host, or from a raid, which they had been making upon one of the tribes bordering upon Judah.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:23-25<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> When Joab learned. Lit. they told him<\/em>) that Abner had been with David, and he had sent him away again, he went to David to reproach him for having done so. “What hast thou done? Behold, Abner came to thee; why then hast thou sent him away, and he is gone quite away?”<\/em> i.e., so that he could go away again without being detained (for this meaning of the inf. abs.<\/em>, see Ewald<\/em>, 280, b<\/em>.). “Thou knowest<\/em> (or more correctly as a question, Dost thou know?) Abner, the son of Ner, that he came to persuade thee<\/em> (i.e., to make thee certain of his intentions), and to learn thy going out and in<\/em> (i.e., all thine undertakings), and to learn all that thou wilt do”<\/em> (i.e., all thy plans). Joab hoped in this way to prejudice David against Abner, to make him suspected as a traitor, that he might then be able to gratify his own private revenge with perfect impunity.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:26<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> For Abner had only just gone away from David, when Joab sent messengers after him, no doubt in David’s name, though without his knowledge, and had him fetched back “from Bor-hasirah<\/em>, i.e., the cistern of Sirah<\/em>.” Sir a<\/em> h is a place which is quite unknown to us. According to Josephus (Ant. vii. 1, 5), it was twenty stadia from Hebron, and called .<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:27<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> When he came back, Joab “took him aside into the middle of the gate, to talk with him in the stillness,”<\/em> i.e., in private, and there thrust him through the body, so that he died “for the blood of Asahel his brother,”<\/em> i.e., for having put Asahel to death (2Sa 2:23<\/span>).<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:28-30<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> When David heard this, he said, “I and my kingdom are innocent before Jehovah for ever of the blood of Abner. Let it turn<\/em> ( , to twist one’s self, to turn or fall, irruit <\/em>) upon the head of Joab and all his father’s house <\/em> (or so-called family)! Never shall there be wanting <\/em> ( , let there not be cut off, so that there shall not be, as in Jos 9:23<\/span>) in the house of Joab one that hath an issue <\/em> (vid., Lev 15:2<\/span>), and a leper, and one who leans upon a stick <\/em> (i.e., a lame person or cripple; , according to the lxx , a thick round staff), and who falls by the sword, and who is in want of bread,”<\/em> The meaning is: May God avenge the murder of Abner upon Joab and his family, by punishing them continually with terrible diseases, violent death, and poverty. To make the reason for this fearful curse perfectly clear, the historian observes in 2Sa 3:30<\/span>, that Joab and his brother Abishai had murdered Abner, “because he had slain their brother Asahel at Gibeon in the battle”<\/em> (2Sa 2:23<\/span>). This act of Joab, in which Abishai must have been in some way concerned, was a treacherous act of assassination, which could not even be defended as blood-revenge, since Abner had slain Asahel in battle after repeated warnings, and only for the purpose of saving his own life. The principal motive for Joab’s act was the most contemptible jealousy, or the fear lest Abner’s reconciliation to David should diminish his own influence with the king, as was the case again at a later period with the murder of Amasa (2Sa 20:10<\/span>).<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:31-39<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> David’s mourning for Abner’s death.<\/em> – 2Sa 3:31<\/span>, 2Sa 3:32<\/span>. To give a public proof of his grief at this murder, and his displeasure at the crime in the sight of all the nation, David commanded Joab, and all the people with him (David), i.e., all his courtiers, and the warriors who returned with Joab, to institute a public mourning for the deceased, by tearing their clothes, putting on sackcloth, i.e., coarse hairy mourning and penitential clothes, and by a funeral dirge for Abner; i.e., he commanded them to walk in front of Abner’s bier mourning and in funeral costume, and to accompany the deceased to his resting-place, whilst David as king followed the bier.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:32<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> Thus they buried Abner at Hebron; and David wept aloud at his grave, and all the people with him.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:33-34<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> Although the appointment of such a funeral by David, and his tears at Abner’s grave, could not fail to divest the minds of his opponents of all suspicion that Joab had committed the murder with his cognizance (see at 2Sa 3:37<\/span>), he gave a still stronger proof of his innocence, and of the sincerity of his grief, by the ode which he composed for Abner’s death:<\/p>\n 33 Like an ungodly man must Abner die!<\/p>\n 34 Thy hands were not bound, and thy feet were not placed in fetters.<\/p>\n As one falls before sinners, so hast thou fallen! <\/p>\n 2Sa 3:34<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> The first strophe (2Sa 3:33<\/span>) is an expression of painful lamentation at the fact that Abner had died a death which he did not deserve. “The fool”<\/em> ( nabal <\/em>) is “the ungodly,” according to Israelitish ideas (vid., Psa 14:1<\/span>). The meaning of 2Sa 3:34<\/span> is: Thou hadst not made thyself guilty of any crime, so as to have to die like a malefactor, in chains and bonds; but thou hast been treacherously murdered. This dirge made such an impression upon all the people (present), that they wept still more for the dead. <\/p>\n 2Sa 3:35<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> But David mourned so bitterly, that when all the people called upon him to take some food during the day, he declared with an oath that he would not taste bread or anything else before the setting of the sun. does not mean, as in 2Sa 13:5<\/span>, to give to eat, on account of the expression “all the people,”<\/em> as it can hardly be imagined that all the people, i.e., all who were present, could have come to bring David food, but it signifies to make him eat, i.e., call upon him to eat; whilst it is left uncertain whether David was to eat with the people (cf. 2Sa 12:17<\/span>), i.e., to take part in the funeral meal that was held after the burial, or whether the people simply urged him to take some food, for the purpose of soothing his own sorrow. are to be taken separately: , , introducing the oath, and being the particle used in an oath: “if,” i.e., assuredly not.<\/p>\n 2Sa 3:36<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> “And all the people perceived it<\/em> (i.e., his trouble), and it pleased them, as everything that the king did pleased all the people.”<\/em> <\/p>\n 2Sa 3:37<\/span><\/p>\n <\/strong> All the people (sc., who were with the king) and all Israel discerned on that day (from David’s deep and heartfelt trouble), that the death of Abner had not happened (proceeded) from the king, as many may probably at first have supposed, since Joab had no doubt fetched Abner back in David’s name. <\/p>\n 2Sa 3:38-39<\/span> <\/p>\n <\/strong> Finally, David said to his (confidential) servants: “Know ye not<\/em> (i.e., surely perceive) that a prince and great man has this day fallen in Israel?”<\/em> This sentence shows how thoroughly David could recognise the virtues possessed by his opponents, and how very far he was from looking upon Abner as a traitor, because of his falling away from Ishbosheth and coming over to him, that on the contrary he hoped to find in him an able general and a faithful servant. He would at once have punished the murderer of such a man, if he had only possessed the power. “But,”<\/em> he adds, “I am this day <\/em> (still) weak, and only anointed king; and these men, the sons of Zeruiah, are too strong for me. The Lord reward the doer of evil according to his wickedness.”<\/em> The expression “to-day” not only applies to the word “weak,”<\/em> or tender, but also to “anointed”<\/em> ( to-day<\/em>, i.e., only just anointed<\/em>). As David was still but a young sovereign, and felt himself unable to punish a man like Joab according to his deserts, he was obliged to restrict himself at first to the utterance of a curse upon the deed (2Sa 3:29<\/span>), and to leave the retribution to God. He could not and durst not forgive; and consequently, before he died, he charged Solomon, his son and successor, to punish Joab for the murder of Abner and Amasa (1Ki 2:5<\/span>).<\/p>\n Abner Deserts Ish-bosheth, vs. 6-12<\/strong><\/p>\n Verse 6 emphasizes <\/em>the great amount of exertion Abner put himself to in order to save the kingdom for the house of Saul. However, the long struggle and his deteriorating position seem to have made Abner fractious. The matter came up over a concubine of Saul’s named Rizpah. This is the first mention of Rizpah, though. she bore two sons to Saul (see 2Sa 21:8<\/span>). Ish-bosheth charged Abner with having committed incest with Rizpah, his father’s concubine..<\/em><\/p>\n Judging from the vigorous reaction of Abner <\/em>toward Ishbosheth over this charge it would appear that he was innocent. In fact he refers to himself as a “dog’s head” if this were true. On the other hand it could be that Abner felt that it was no great matter if he took the concubine of the late king to himself, and that Ish-bosheth should not make such a commotion about it. Still another interpretation of his reference to the “dog’s head” might be that he feels himself treated like a dog’s head by the ungrateful Ish-bosheth.<\/em><\/p>\nFuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n