God continues to unroll the consequences of David’s sin, while at the same time fulfilling His gracious promises to David. Solomon is not mentioned in this section, but he is clearly waiting in the wings.

The Text

“Now Joab the son of Zeruiah perceived that the king’s heart was toward Absalom. And Joab sent to Tekoah, and fetched thence a wise woman, and said unto her, I pray thee, feign thyself to be a mourner . . .” (2 Sam. 14:1-33).

Summary of the Text

So Joab saw the conflicted nature of David’s attitude toward Absalom (v. 1). He brought a wise woman from Tekoa and told her to present herself as a woman in mourning (v. 2), and to present herself to the king that way with a story that Joab gave her (v. 3). And so she came before the king, prostrated herself, and cried out for help (v. 4). David asks what is wrong, and she says she is a widow (v. 5). She had two sons who got in a fight in the field, and one killed the other (v. 6). The whole clan wants to kill the remaining son (which would be just), but this would destroy her one remaining heir (v. 7). David told her he would take care of it (v. 8). She wants more, and says that if he is worried about bloodguilt, she and her house will bear it (v. 9). David promises a little more (v. 10). She asks for more assurance, and he swears that not a hair of her son’s head would fall to earth (v. 11). But remember how Absalom died.

She then springs the trap. Can I say one more thing (v. 12). Given permission, she then asks why Absalom remains in exile (v. 13). She says we all must die, but God has mercy on the exile (v. 14). She then asks pardon, and notes that the people have made her fearful (v. 15). She then returns to the refuge of her fictional story (v. 16). She goes on to praise how discerning the king is, as an angel of God (v. 17). David then asks her if he might ask something, and she obviously agrees (v. 18). He asks if Joab was behind it, and her answer is affirmative, while at the same binding the king to his word (v. 19). You, oh king, know everything (v. 20). David then tells Joab to bring Absalom back (v. 21). Joab prostrates himself, and thanked the king profusely (v. 22). So Joab brought Absalom back (v. 23). At the same time, the king refused to give an audience to Absalom (v. 24). We are then introduced to Absalom as an attractive political figure (v. 25). He would cut his hair once a year, apparently as an annual Nazarite, and his hair weighed five and a half pounds (v. 26). And Absalom had three (unnamed) sons, and a daughter named Tamar, beautiful like her aunt (v. 27). So Absalom lived in Jerusalem for two years without seeing the king (v. 28). Absalom then sends for Joab twice, but he refuses to come (v. 29). So Absalom has his servants set Joab’s field on fire (v. 30). When Joab comes to ask why (v. 31), Absalom replies by saying that he might as well have stayed in Geshur—he wasn’t seeing the king there either (v. 32). And so Joab went to the king, and the king agreed to a formal reconciliation. Absalom prostrated himself, and the king kissed him (v. 33).

Two Tamars

We will see in this chapter that Absalom was full of himself, but he was not totally that way. He had been considerate of his sister, and apparently named his (very beautiful) daughter after her. It is striking that Absalom is said to have three (unnamed) sons, and his daughter is named. She was like her namesake—beautiful. And like her aunt, she quietly disappears from this story of treachery and intrigue. Absalom’s sons had apparently died by just a few chapters later (2 Sam. 18:18). So the two Tamars quietly disappear from the story, which we may take as a very great mercy. As Thomas Watson once put it, it is better to be wronged than to do wrong, and Tamar retires from the scriptural account—despite the dishonor done to her—in honor.

The naming of daughters in Scripture often has to do with inheritance. Think of the daughters of Zelophehad (Num. 26:33; Num. 27:7). Also the daughters of Job were also beautiful, like the Tamars, and they were given an inheritance (Job 42:15). Absalom did not pass his inheritance on to his sons, and so Tamar was likely blessed in this way. And husbands, remember to dwell with your wives with understanding because they are joint heirs, together with you (1 Pet. 3:7).

Echoes of Scripture

There are three important sets of allusions in this section, just as we saw allusions to Genesis in the previous chapter.

First, the wise woman (which in scriptural usage was likely a kind of prophetess or sibyl) came to David the same way Nathan had (with a fictional story), but in the service of a political agenda. Her story parallels the account of Cain and Abel, and in that story God Himself gave protection to Cain. But this story invokes more than the wise woman wanted—if the story fits, then Absalom was not the seed. Absalom was Cain. The promised seed was Seth, the coming Solomon.

The second reference is also to Genesis—the wise woman says that the king has the discerning ability to rule, knowing the distinction between good and evil (v. 17). This was the knowledge that our first parents seized out of time, and as a result their heightened abilities at discernment were cockeyed. We may learn from the ironic statement of this woman—praising David’s discernment when he is manifestly being played.

And third, we have an allusion to the book of Judges. Absalom is another Samson—who was a charismatic leader, had long hair, and set Philistines’ fields on fire. But because of Absalom’s developing treachery, we should see him as an anti-Samson, an anti-Nazarite.

God Looks on the Heart

Saul had been described as choice and handsome (1 Sam. 9:2), but that turned out badly. He was a full head taller than everyone else. Attention is drawn to Absalom’s head as well, and to his beautiful family, and the fact that he had no external blemish (vv. 25-26). And David had been described as being very attractive in appearance (1 Sam. 16:12-13). But even with him, Samuel was taught that God looks on the heart. Unlike David, a root of bitterness had clearly taken up deep residence in Absalom’s heart. We can understand how someone might have been driven into bitterness—but bitterness still destroys the bitter one. As it has been well said, being bitter is like eating a box of rat poison and then waiting for the rat to die.

Joab is not a close intimate with Absalom. Remember that he is the man who eventually kills Absalom, and much against David’s wishes. He is not an Absalom loyalist. He is playing a realpolitik game, and it appears that his principle motivation is political stability without Solomon, apart from Solomon. Anybody but Solomon. After Absalom’s death, Joab joins forces with the Adonijah faction—for Adonijah has the supreme qualification of not being Solomon.

A Field on Fire

Absalom has already set Joab’s field on fire. Brought back to Jerusalem, he proceeds to do the same with his father’s “field.” He has set his course. David was around 66 when Absalom came back, 68 when they supposedly reconciled, and 70 when war broke out. Where was Solomon? As God’s choice for the throne, he was somewhere, waiting.

We are tempted to despair when everything goes wrong. The brothers are fighting—there is no solution. Cain kills Abel, and everything is lost. But God has Seth. Absalom kills Amnon, and then tries to kill his father. Everything is lost. But God has Solomon. Christ is in the wings.

This tragic story follows immediately after the David and Bathsheba tragedy. Details and names change, but we have a beautiful woman, fulfilled lust, and then murder.

The Text

“And it came to pass after this, that Absalom the son of David had a fair sister, whose name was Tamar; and Amnon the son of David loved her . . .” (2 Sam. 13:1-39)

Summary of the Text

Absalom had a beautiful sister named Tamar, and Amnon loved her (v. 1). Amnon made himself sick over it (v. 2). Amnon had a friend in Jonadab, his cousin, and he was a man full of twists and turns (v. 3). He saw Amnon’s condition and found out the problem (v. 4). Jonadab came up with a plot to get them alone together (v. 5). So Amnon did it (v. 6). So David sent Tamar to her half-brother in his sick bed (v. 7). She prepared the food, but he refused it, and sent everybody out (vv. 8-9). He invited her to his inner chamber (v. 10).

When she did, he grabbed her and said “come, lie with me” (v. 11). She refuses—it would disgrace both her and him (vv. 12-13). But he was stronger, and raped her (v. 14). Then Amnon hated her with greater hatred than the love he had for her before (v. 15).

She refused again, saying that this would be even a greater evil (v. 16). So he called a servant and had him throw her out, and lock the door behind her (v. 17). She had a beautiful robe, the kind that the virgin daughters of the king would wear (v. 18). So Tamar put ashes on her head, tore her robe, laid her hand on her head, and left weeping (v. 19). Absalom tried to comfort her (v. 20), and she remained, desolate, in her brother’s house. David was very angry . . . but did nothing (v. 21). Absalom also did nothing . . . or so it appeared (v. 22).

Two years later, Absalom invited all the princes to party out of town, celebrating the shearing of the sheep (v. 23). He invited the king first, knowing he wouldn’t go (vv. 24-25). This made it possible for him to invite Amnon, as the king’s representative (v. 26). David thought it odd, but let them all go (v. 27). Absalom told his servants to wait until Amnon was merry with wine, and to strike on the signal (v. 28). They did this, and all the other princes fled (v. 29). Rumors got to David before the princes did (v. 30), and so he tore his robe, and lay on the ground (v. 31).

Jonadab has apparently switched sides, or at least has distanced himself from the former episode, and he tells the king that only Amnon is dead, and it has been in the works for two years (vv. 32-33). Absalom fled (v. 34), and the watchman saw many people coming. Jonadab said that it was just as he said (v. 35). When he was done, the king’s sons all came in, weeping, and the king and his servants wept also, greatly (v. 36). Absalom fled to Geshur, home of his maternal grandfather (v. 37). David mourned for Amnon daily, and Absalom remained in Geshur three years (v. 38). And David’s soul turned to Absalom after he was comforted concerning Amnon (v. 39).

A Very Structured Story

There are seven interlocking “pages” in this story, each one with two characters, and one of these characters will appear in the next scene. They are: 1. Jonadab/Amnon 2. Amnon/David 3. David/Tamar 4. Tamar/Amnon 5. Amnon/servant 6. Servant/Tamar, and 7. Tamar/Absalom

Odd Details

The dumplings that are prepared are “heart-shaped.” Amnon used “heart-nourishing” food to violate his sister. And Absalom used feasting to make Amnon’s heart merry with wine before the murder.

So God is true in Christ. Christ’s robe was not like the robes in this story—it was not torn. And Christ’s body, which was the veil in the Temple, was in fact torn. That is how God determined to bring all these stories, some of them pretty grim, into a glorious conclusion. Christ is risen.

David sinned grievously, but his repentance went as deep as his sin had gone. We see complete forgiveness in this portion of the story, offered to David, and received by him. We also see that the reality of ongoing consequences is not the same thing as lack of forgiveness. We must learn to stop reading the latter in terms of the former.

The Text

“And the Lord sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor . . .” (2 Sam. 12:1-31)

Summary of the Text

As many messengers had been sent in the previous chapter, so now the Lord sends Nathan the prophet to David (v. 1). The prophet tells him a stylized story about a rich man and a poor one (v. 1). The rich man had many flocks (v. 2), while the poor man had only one small ewe lamb, like one of the family (v. 3). A traveler came, and the rich man killed the poor man’s sheep in order to feed his guest (v. 4). David got angry, and said that such a man deserved to die (v. 5). Because he had no pity, he will have to restore four-fold (v. 6). And so Nathan then said, “You are the man” (v. 7). God made you king over everything (vv. 7-8), and God would have done even more than that (v. 8). But you killed Uriah and took his wife (v. 9). The sword will therefore not depart from your house (v. 10). Revolt will come from within your own house (v. 11), and another man will publicly sleep with your wives (v. 12).

David confesses fully (v. 13). Nathan tells him that he won’t die, but because he opened the way for blasphemies, the child will die (v. 14). So Nathan departed, and the (unnamed) child got very sick (v. 15). David fasted, and prostrated himself on the ground before the Lord (v. 16). The elders tried to get him to get up, but he refused (v. 17). After seven days of this, the child died (v. 18), and the servants were afraid to tell him. When David sees them whispering, he understands the child was dead and asks about it (v. 19). So David gets up, and cleanses himself, goes to the house of the Lord, worships, and comes home to eat (v. 20). Obviously, the servants ask him about it (v. 21). He replies that while the child was alive, there was a chance (v. 22). Now that he is dead, the matter is settled (v. 23). David then comforts Bathsheba, and she bore a son—Solomon (v. 24). The Lord loved him, and Nathan came with another name, Jedidiah, which means “beloved of the Lord” (v. 25). In the meantime, the siege of Rabbah was almost done (v. 26). Joab sent word—he had already captured the city’s water supply (v. 27). David had better come quickly if he didn’t want Joab to get the credit (v. 28). So David comes against Rabbah, and captures it (v. 29). The ceremonial crown that they place on David’s head weighed between 65-75 pounds (v. 30). David then puts the Ammonites to forced labor, and returns to Jerusalem (v. 31).

A King Under Law

One of the great differences between pagan forms of government and biblical forms of government is that in biblical forms of government the “king” is not divine. This means that it becomes possible for a prophetic rebuke to come to the king. It is possible for a “thus saith the Lord” to come from outside the Oval Office. Nathan comes to David because he was sent. Remember that David had already had one man killed as part of this cover-up, and there was no reason to assume that he wouldn’t do it again. And yet, once sent, Nathan courageously came with the message.

Ego Camouflage

If we look at David’s descriptions of his internal state during this time (Psalm 32 & 51), we know that his conscience was tormenting him. We see in his reaction to Nathan’s story that his conscience was fully functional. He says that the rich man deserved to die, even though he was not guilty of murder. David’s moral outrage here is conflicted.

Nathan uses a prophetic form of godly deception. He frames the case in a way that David would not recognize, but where all the essential elements of the offense were still there. When David pronounces sentence on that offense, he was pronouncing sentence on himself, a fact that would be revealed to him immediately afterwards.

Some Numbers

David pronounced a four-fold judgment, which was a kind of restitution that law sometimes required (Luke 19:8). It is striking that this is exactly what happened to David’s house—he lost four sons because of this. First was this small child, then Amnon, then Absalom, and last Adonijah.

Uriah had slept on the ground for two nights, outside David’s palace. Here David sleeps on the “earth” for seven nights.

Rich man, poor man, a man came . . . and for the seventh occasion of it, we hear Nathan saying, “You are the man . . .”

Forgiveness in the Aftermath

David is laid low by his sin. He could have doubled down on it, had Nathan executed, and declared himself an absolute ruler.

He accepts the statement of his guilt, full stop. He also accepts the consequences, but feels free to intercede concerning those consequences before the Lord makes it final. One of the consequences is that the sword will not depart from his house (v. 10). This is what lies behind David not being permitted to build the Temple. The reason stated there was that he was a “man of blood” (1 Chron. 28:3), which did not refer to him fighting the Lord’s battles. Rather, I take it as referring to the blood of Uriah, and the cascading bloodshed and warfare in his house as a result of it.

David is a penitent, and exhibits that repentance in truth. He sorrows in the presence of the Lord. In a type, when “a son of David” dies, he then gets up. He then washes and dresses himself. He then goes to worship the Lord. A son of David dies, and David the sinner is restored. Then another son of David is born, a son who is beloved by God.

God has established David as a great king in a newly created Israel. This is the account of a new fall, marring that new creation. In this chapter, David commits adultery, followed up with murder. His subsequent attempts at a bungled cover-up resulted in one of the best known stories of human history. So much for cover-ups. But though the outlines of the story are well-known, there is a lot more to it than is commonly supposed.

The Text

“And it came to pass, after the year was expired, at the time when kings go forth to battle, that David sent Joab, and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the children of Ammon, and besieged Rabbah. But David tarried still at Jerusalem. . .” (2 Sam. 11:1-27).

Summary of the Text

The time of year came when kings go out to battle, but David does not go out to battle (v. 1). When David gets up from a long afternoon nap, and while walking on his roof in his palace pjs, he sees a beautiful woman bathing (v. 2). He inquires and finds out who she is (v. 3). David sends messengers for her, and she came to him in adultery (v. 4). After a time, she sends word to David that she is pregnant (v. 5). These are her only words in the entire narrative. So David summons Uriah from the front (v. 6). When he arrives, David asks him about this and that (v. 7). David then dismisses Uriah to go home, and David sends along a catered, romantic dinner after him (v. 8). But Uriah didn’t go home—he camped at the door of the king’s house (v. 9). David was told this the next day, and so he asked Uriah why he hadn’t gone home (v. 10). Uriah’s answer was a true rebuke full of faith —the Ark of the Covenant is in the field. The armies of Israel and Judah are in the field. How could he go home to sleep with his wife (v. 11)? So David tells him to stay another day before he returned (v. 12). That evening, David called him to the royal table—where Mephibosheth was, remember—and got him drunk. But he still wouldn’t go home (v. 13). So the next day, David sends Uriah back to Joab, carrying his own death warrant in a letter (v. 14). The instructions were to abandon Uriah on the field of battle so that he would be killed (v. 15). Joab followed instructions, in modified form, and Uriah was killed (vv. 16-17). Joab then sent a messenger to tell David that a number of men had to die in order to accomplish his wishes. If David gets angry, then console him with news of an additional casualty (vv. 18-21). So the whole sordid affair is an open secret by this point, and the messenger doesn’t wait to be asked (vv. 22-24). David tells the messenger to tell Joab not to be displeased (v. 25), because these things do happen in war. When Bathsheba heard that Uriah was dead, she mourned for him (v. 26). When that mourning was over (typically seven days), David summoned her, married her, and she bore him a son (v. 27). But the Lord was displeased.

Palace Intrigues

This is a story full of palace intrigue, with messengers coming and going. This adultery was an open secret. One of his courtiers told David who Bathsheba was—that woman, there, bathing—and then messengers fetched her. She was a willing participant, which can see seen in the subject/object switch in v. 4, where she “came in unto him.” Like the Eagles had it in Lyin’ Eyes, she rushes to his arms, they fall together.

And Joab had David figured out, as we can see from the Abimelech story—a woman took him out, just like some other people he could mention. Uriah was killed from the wall. David looked down on Bathsheba from the wall, but he was the one destroyed—by a woman—from another wall, one he couldn’t see. Uriah was not the only one sacrificed (v. 17), because to abandon Uriah all by himself would have been too obvious, too transparent.

Uriah the Great

Uriah is a true Hittite convert. He is identified as a Hittite, but his name is a pious Israelite name, meaning “the

Lord is my light.” He is one of David’s elite corps of 30 (2 Sam. 23:39). His loyalty was the real thing. He

would not go home sleep with his wife when the Ark of the Covenant was at war. He swore by David’s life, and David’s soul’s life, that he would not do such a thing (v. 11). But he was actually swearing by his own life. Another member of that elite corps was Eliam (2 Sam. 23:34; 1 Chron. 3:5), Bathsheba’s father. His father, Bathsheba’s grandfather, was Ahithophel, one of David’s great counselors, who later went over to Absalom. Wonder why. Absalom executed vigilante justice against Amnon over Tamar, but at least he did something. There are two possibilities here in this story. Either Uriah knew he had been cuckolded or he did not. If he did not, the story is suffused with irony. If he did, it is a story of high brinksmanship, suffused with irony.

Competitive Crackle

The issue here was not simple physical desire. As the prophet Nathan later points out, there were plenty of women available that would not have brought all this trouble upon David’s house (2 Sam. 12:8). Whenever there was a regimental banquet for the 30, you can be assured that it was a room full of testosterone. It would have been a room full of top gun pilots, a room full of swagger. This was the heroic age—Achilles and Hector were only a century or so earlier, and about 700 miles away. David could easily have had some Trojans in his army.

Now when such men give way to ungodly competition, it usually involves the three g’s—gold, glory, and girls. Never make the mistake of thinking that desire is a straight line affair. This kind of desire is always a web. And too many Christian women think that desire—lust—is an affliction that the men have to deal with, poor buddies, and the men are patted on the head patronizingly. But sorry, I don’t buy it. The world lies under the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. Men want to want, and women want to be wanted. Men want to attain and women want to be attained. Moreover, they want this in the presence of others, with others in view.

C.S. Lewis once wrote in a letter, “The idea of female beauty is the erotic stimulus for women as well as men . . . i.e. a lascivious man thinks about women’s bodies, a lascivious woman thinks about her own. What a world we live in!” Human sexuality is a key and a lock—it is a complete mechanism. When we fell, the whole thing fell, and not just the key. The lesson here is to not kid yourself.

Bathsheba Blessed

This is the story where we are introduced to Bathsheba, an ancestress of the Lord Jesus. There are four women mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, and all of them had reputation issues. One is Tamar, who slept with her father-in-law (Matt. 1:3). Another was Rahab the harlot from Jericho (Matt. 1:5), the great-great- grandmother of David. A third was Ruth the Moabitess, the daughter-in-law of Rahab (Matt. 1:5). And the last was Bathsheba, mother of Solomon (Matt. 1:6).

God promised David a line of kings to sit on the throne, and God fulfilled that promise through the woman who disqualified him from receiving the fulfillment of that promise. Bathsheba was a sinner, along with David, but she, along with David, was a true penitent. Later in the narrative, when Nathan the prophet is organizing the godly faction within the court, Bathsheba is allied with him. We should not hesitate to call her sister—the Lord Jesus could call her mother. The Lord Jesus is the Son of David, and that is quite a glory. But how was it possible for Him to be the Son of David? Through adultery and murder, that’s how.

In the previous chapter, David showed covenant kindness (hesed) to a prince who had lost his father, which is what happens in this chapter also. In the previous chapter, it was received with loyalty and deep gratitude. In this chapter, it starts a war.

The Text

“And it came to pass after this, that the king of the children of Ammon died, and Hanun his son reigned in his stead. Then said David, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto me. And David sent to comfort him by the hand of his servants for his father . . .” (2 Sam. 10:1-19).

Summary of the Text

The king of Ammon died, and his son Hanun came to the throne (v. 1). David determined to show kindness (hesed) to Hanun, the son of Nahash, as a reciprocal kindness (v. 2). Incidentally, Hanun means gracious and Nahash means serpent, meaning that this is a role reversal story. David sent diplomats as envoys/comforters, and Hanun’s counselors tell him that they must be spies (vv. 2-3). So Hanun has half their beards cut off, and their special diplomatic garments cut off at the hip (v. 4). They were humiliated, so David told them to stay in Jericho until their beards grew out again (v. 5). So the Ammonites saw that they had successfully picked a fight, and so they hired some Syrian mercenaries (v. 6). David heard this, and sent Joab to fight (v. 7). The Ammonites came out and set up in front of their city, and the Syrians were deployed in the field (v. 8), which hemmed the Israelites in. Joab saw this, and picked an elite group to fight the Syrians (v. 9), and the main body under Abishai to fight the Ammonites (v. 10). The agreement was that if either Israelite body faltered, the other would help (v. 11). Joab, for all his faults, was a superb field commander, and gave them all a stirring word of faith (v. 12). So Joab routed the Syrians (v. 13), and the Ammonites fled from Abishai (v. 14). When the Syrian mercenaries were seen to have been defeated, all the Syrians gathered en masse (vv. 15-16). David hears, and he goes out to battle (v. 17). The battle was joined, and David won a decisive victory (v. 18). And when the Syrian vassals saw the situation, they transferred their allegiance to David (v. 19), and the Syrians were done helping Ammon.

Victory with Foreboding

In this section of the story, even though David is triumphant in these two battles, something is missing. This chapter is the set-up and crucial background for the Bathsheba story, which is coming in the next chapter. In David’s previous victories, the historian went out of his way to say how the Lord was “with” David. Nothing but mojo in every direction. But here that blessing is not pronounced, and there is a sense that David is on autopilot. For the first battle, he sends Joab out to the fight, and a little voice inside us should say uh oh. For the big, second battle, David rallies, but then the next chapter sees David hanging around in Jerusalem again, giving way this time to sleep and to lust.

Resting on Past Accomplishments

Cotton Mather said it well. Faithfulness begat prosperity, and the daughter devoured the mother. It is so easy to tell yourself that you have “earned” the respite. It is so easy to be seduced away from God’s kindness to us by being stupidly dazzled . . . by God’s kindness to us.

But our task is to swim upstream. And the moment we stop swimming upstream (by faith) is the instant that we are floating downstream. In this life, in this setting, in this circumstance, there is no “neutral.” We are not walking up a path, but rather swimming up a river. There is no way to stop in order to “consolidate your gains.”

A Pattern of Division

This chapter is remarkable for how things are cut in two. We begin with the beards, and then with the diplomats’ garments. After that, the Ammonite forces are divided in two, and Joab divides his forces in two. Joab prevails by means of this tactic, but it seems that what we might have here is a thematic introduction of fundamental division. The rest of 2 Samuel is all about division—particularly the division of the kingdom—and it begins here.

The cutting of the beards was an insult to their masculinity, and it was true humiliation. The cutting of the garments was treacherous, an assault on diplomatic immunity, and it was also a sexual indignity. Moreover, to hack their beards was an insult to their religious identity (Lev. 19:27), and the cutting of the robes was the same thing again (Num. 15:37-41). This was an insult to the Torah.