2 Samuel 3-4 - Abner Joins Forces with David

 

Previously in 2 Samuel, we saw the men of Joab and Abner participate in a duel of sorts that quickly degenerated into a blood bath. The battle could have been much worse, but Abner and Joab both agreed to call it off. It was a needless battle that did not need to take any more lives than it already had. There was war a long time between the house of Saul and the house of David, but the house of David became stronger, while the house of Saul grew weaker.

While in Hebron, six sons were born to David from six different wives. Again, David was following the common practice of polygamy, but this was against God’s prescribed will for kings as seen in Deuteronomy. At least three of these six sons will not turn out well.

Meanwhile, Abner was strengthening his hold on the house of Saul. There was a concubine of Saul’s named Rizpah, and Ishbosheth, the king, accused Abner of having sexual relations with her. This, also, was a common pagan practice in those days, and was viewed as a transfer of power from one king to the next. If true, Abner would have been guilty of sexual immorality, as well as treason, but we have no evidence that Abner did such a thing. In fact, Abner became very angry, and said that he had been loyal to Saul’s family and friends, had protected him from David, and how was it that he was charging him with such a fault? Abner then said, “May God do so to Abner, and more also, if I do not do for David as the Lord has sworn to him—to transfer the kingdom from the house of Saul, and set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan to Beersheba.” Abner was indicting himself here: he was admitting he knew the Lord had sworn to give the kingdom to David, while he had been trying to secure a kingdom for the house of Saul. Ishbosheth did not answer Abner because he was afraid of him. Ishbosheth seems to be following in his father’s footsteps somewhat by being suspicious of others. Abner had seen all too much of this from his father, and he probably had had enough.

Next, Abner sent messengers to David asking him to make a covenant with him in order to bring all of Israel to David, and David agreed. He had one condition though, that Abner bring Michal, Saul’s daughter, with him when he came. David sent messengers to Ishbosheth stating to give him his wife whom he had betrothed to himself for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines. So, Ishbosheth sent Abner to go get her, and her husband followed her a ways weeping. At a certain point, Abner told him to go home, and he did. This may seem like an odd situation, but Michal rightfully belonged to David. Saul had taken her away from him and given her to be married to someone else when David was on the run from her father. David had literally put his life on the line twice to gain her father’s blessing, once for killing Goliath, and, second, for killing 200 Philistines and bringing their foreskins to Saul.

Abner spoke to the elders of Israel that they, in time past, had sought for David to be king over them. They should do it now, for the Lord had spoken of David, “By the hand of My servant David, I will save My people Israel from the hand of the Philistines and the hand of all their enemies.” We have no record of this exact statement from the Lord, but, again, it was known to Abner and probably to many others. He also spoke to all of the tribe of Benjamin. Then, he and 20 men went to Hebron where David was, and David made a feast for them. David could have been suspicious of Abner and his men, but he responded graciously. Abner had made concessions for peace, and David took him at his word. I’m sure David was not foolish; he probably had enough men there to protect himself if necessary, but his response to Abner was in kindness. Saul had proven he could not be trusted, but Abner needed to be given a chance to prove himself. Abner told David that he would go to gather all Israel to him to make a covenant to make him king over the nation, and David sent him away in peace.

After Abner had left, Joab and the men came back from a raid with a large spoil, and they told Joab what had happened. After this, Joab went to the king, and asked him what he had done and why he had sent Abner away? He told David that Abner had come to deceive him and to spy out what he was doing. Next, Joab sent messengers after Abner to bring him back to Hebron, but David didn’t know it. When Abner arrived, Joab took him aside in the city gate to speak with him privately. As I stated earlier, Hebron was one of the cities of refuge the Lord told Moses to appoint in Numbers 35. It was a place where a manslayer (someone who accidentally killed someone) could flee to be safe from the avenger of blood. They were safe as long as they stayed within the city until the high priest died, in which case they were free to go back to their home. If the avenger of blood killed him while inside the city, the avenger would be guilty of murder. Joab subtly brought Abner outside the city, and stabbed him in the stomach that he died. This was a carefully engineered murder by Joab so that he could take vengeance for the blood of his brother Asahel. The problem with this was that Abner had killed Asahel out of self-defense, something clearly justified in the Scriptures; however, Joab killed Abner in cold blood. In this, we see that Joab was vengeful and had little regard for human life. He also may have been fearful of losing his position as the general of David’s army since Abner had more military experience. Whatever the case, this was murder, and David was not happy about it.

When he found out, he said, “My kingdom and I are guiltless before the Lord forever of the blood of Abner the son of Ner. Let it rest on the head of Joab and on all his father’s house; and let there never fail to be in the house of Joab one who has a discharge or is a leper, who leans on a staff or falls by the sword, or who lacks bread.” We also find out that Joab’s brother, Abishai, assisted in some way in this murder. David told Joab and all his men to tear their clothes, put on sackcloth, and mourn for Abner. They buried Abner in Hebron, and David and all the people wept at his grave. David sang a lament over him, and the people wept over him again. They tried to convince David to eat, but he took an oath, saying, “God do so to me, and more also, if I taste bread or anything else till the sun goes down!” If we recall from 1 Samuel, Saul had charged the people with an oath that they should not eat until he had vengeance on his enemies, and it led Israel into sin. David, on the other hand, only charged himself with such an oath.  This pleased the people, and they understood that it had not been David’s intent to kill Abner. David said that he was too weak that day to deal with Joab and Abishai, but the Lord would repay them according to their wickedness. Joab would go on to be his general until David’s death. This wouldn’t be the last trouble he caused David, nor would it be the last person Joab offs in his struggle to stay in power. Some may argue David should have dealt with Joab sooner, but killing your own nephews would not have exactly been good for family relations. Joab will eventually get his comeuppance when Solomon would take the throne.

After Ishbosheth heard what had happened, he lost heart, and the whole nation was troubled. Abner was the strongest person in Ishbosheth’s life, and now he was gone. Ishbosheth had two captains of troops, Baanah and Rechab, who were of the tribe of Benjamin. These two came to Ishbosheth’s house during the heat of the day when the king was napping. They came in as though they were coming to get wheat, and stabbed him in the stomach. They beheaded him and escaped through the plain during the night, and came to Hebron. They brought the head of Ishbosheth to David, thinking David would be glad that the son of his enemy, Saul, was dead. However, David responded, “As the Lord lives, who has redeemed my life from all adversity, when someone told me, saying, ‘Look, Saul is dead,’ thinking to have brought good news, I arrested him and had him executed in Ziklag—the one who thought I would give him a reward for his news. How much more, when wicked men have killed a righteous person in his own house on his bed? Therefore, shall I not now require his blood at your hand and remove you from the earth?” It was the Lord that had delivered David from all his adversity, not from him taking matters into his own hands. If he had not been pleased when his enemy was killed, how much more then when a righteous man was killed? In this we can see that David had no intentions of forcing himself to the throne; he was leaving it in the Lord’s hands. The ends never justify the means. Even for a king, it is never right to do the wrong thing to accomplish good. As it has been said, “if someone is willing to sin for you, they will soon be willing to sin against you.” David was also keeping his promise to Jonathan to take care of his family. He was demonstrating a lot of integrity here, and it was going against the cultural practices of the day.

So, David commanded his men to execute them. They cut off their hands and feet, and hung them up by the pool in Hebron. They also took the head of Ishbosheth, and buried it in Abner’s tomb. God could have brought David to the throne without these men killing an innocent man, but He still will use the circumstances and will work them together for His good.

Lastly, we are told of a young boy, the son of Jonathan, who was five years old when Jonathan and Saul died. When his nurse heard the news, she picked him up to flee. As she did so, he fell and became lame. His name was Mephibosheth, and he would have been about 12 years old at this point. We probably are told of him here because he was the next in line to the throne after Ishbosheth’s death, but he would not have been considered a suitable king due to the fact he was lame. We will hear more of him later in 2 Samuel.

In closing, in what ways can we learn from the characters in this chapter? Are we like Ishbosheth who was passive and allowed others to lead when it is really our job? Are we suspicious of others when they are filling the power vacuum in our absence? The right thing for Ishbosheth would have been to lead the nation in giving the kingdom over to David, but he was letting Abner lead the nation in rebellion to the Lord’s will. Even when Abner was doing the right thing, Ishbosheth was still sitting on the side-lines. Whatever position the Lord has us in, it is up to us to do it to the best of our ability, and leave the rest up to God. Maybe we are like David and are facing a situation of whether or not to trust someone with an offer of peace or reconciliation. If at all possible, we should give them the benefit of the doubt. Proceed with caution, but respond to them graciously. Like David, maybe we are tempted to use methods that are acceptable culturally to get what we want, but they are sinful in the eyes of the Lord. The Lord will straighten it all out in the end; we just need to wait on Him. Maybe we are like Joab who was vengeful and willing to mistreat someone if we perceive them as a threat to us. If so, we need to repent and trust the Lord with the outcome. Paul wrote to the Romans, “Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” (Rom 12:19) In the next chapter, the whole nation will come to David in Hebron to anoint him king.

What the Bible Has to Say to Dad's Part III.

 

Previously, we looked at what it means to bring our children up in the admonition of the Lord, and in this post, I want to focus on the training part of Ephesians 6. As I previously stated, training has the idea of teaching through discipline. Although children learn what is expected of them, sometimes they lack the incentive to carry it out, and discipline helps to reinforce these teachings. The Bible has a lot to say about child discipline, and probably the best place to look is in the book of Proverbs.

The first passage I want to look at states, “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.” (Pro 19:18) Here we see that parents are to discipline their children while there is hope, because the time will come when it is too late to effectively discipline them. The fact that Solomon says to not let our souls spare for his crying implies the major part of this discipline is to take place in their early years. If our children have reached their teenage years, and we have neglected to train and discipline them, we’re in for some major problems. In a lot of cases, it will be too late to have a major influence in changing their behavior. The fact that we are told not to let our souls spare for their crying also tells us that this discipline should not be pleasant. Whatever the discipline, it should cost the child something. Many parents neglect to discipline their children because it causes them to cry or be upset, and no doubt many children have learned to manipulate their parents to avoid this discipline. However, this is exactly what they need.

The next question that arises is, what type of discipline does the Bible teach? Proverbs again states, “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.” (Pro 22:15) Any of us who have had children know that they do not have to be taught to sin; it comes naturally. This is because they are born with a sin nature just like you and me. We were all born foolish, and it takes the Lord and our parents’ loving discipline to drive it from us. The means by which the Lord has chosen to drive foolishness from children is a spanking, and the instrument He has prescribed is the rod.

Let’s start by defining spanking.  Spanking is the act of striking a child on the buttocks with the open hand or a rod of some sorts.  The rear-end is the best place since it is well-padded, and if administered properly, the spanking will not bruise or otherwise injure the child. My own state of Washington defines what is considered child abuse, and I have to say, I actually agree with them for a change. The pain inflicted cannot be greater than transient pain or temporary marks. Contrary to popular belief, there is no mention in the law of the forbidding of the use of a rod. Modern psychology tells us that spanking is harmful to a child, and can cause them to have mental and emotional instability.  Make no mistake, child abuse does happen, and it is both wrong and harmful to children.  However, the Lord is a loving heavenly Father, and if He says spanking is necessary, then it is not child abuse regardless of what modern psychology or anyone else says on the subject.

This brings us then to what the Scriptures mean by the rod.  The word for rod here refers to a wooden stick that was used for varying purposes such as chastening, for measuring, a shepherd’s crook, or even a king’s scepter. The size of the rod also varied depending on its use, so context is crucial in determining the correct meaning. The Hebrew definition refers to a scion, which is a shoot or twig.  This would be a one-year-old sucker from a tree that is roughly the size of a pencil. In other words, a good old-fashioned switch. Similar items such as a ruler or wooden spoon would also be an appropriate instrument to use. Again, the idea is to cause temporary pain for a child as a deterrent for that behavior in the future, but not to injure them or leave lasting marks. This would be in line with how a loving parent should discipline a child as taught throughout the rest of the Scriptures. The Scriptures do not forbid the use of our hands in spanking, but in every instance that corporal discipline is mentioned in the Bible it refers to the use of a rod. I think the main reason for this is that our hands are meant to show love and affection, as well as protection. This also helps ensure the discipline is more methodical rather than just a knee jerk reaction of spanking the child for something they have done. There are always those times when a child needs corporal discipline when a rod is not available, but from the Scriptures we can see that the use of the rod is to be the norm. It should not be excessive, but only enough to get the point across. The spanking is not appropriate for every type of bad behavior, but the Scriptures give us guidance on this as well.

Next, we see that a spanking is not for every type of inappropriate behavior, but for foolishness: “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child.” It is for stubborn and defiant behavior. The child must know it is wrong, and has chosen against his or her parent’s wishes to do it anyway. If he or she has never been taught, then a spanking is not appropriate because proper instruction has not taken place. It is also not for childhood immaturity or impulsive behavior (as frustrating as that can be at times). For example, a boy throwing a ball in the house and breaking something valuable would be considered inappropriate behavior, but it is not a spank-able offense. In this case it would be better to use some other sort of discipline to correct the behavior. The exception to this would be behavior that is too dangerous for the child to repeat, such as running out into the street. I remember when my oldest son was little: we went for a walk in which he decided, for no apparent reason, to jump off the sidewalk, and began running in the street. Thankfully there were no cars coming, but I gave him a swat on his behind and told him to stay on the sidewalk.

There are a few other sins that, in my opinion, fall into this category of foolish behavior. One is lying, especially when done out of self-preservation. Lying was the devil’s tactic to tempt Eve and Adam into sin, and, according to Jesus, it is his nature. I have seen it do a lot of damage in relationships: it breaks down trust, and demonstrates that individual that created the offense is not really repentant. It also leaves us out of fellowship with the Lord, as we are unwilling to admit our own sins. One of the things my dad instilled in my sister and I is that, if we told the truth, we would get in a lot less trouble. If we lied about it, it was almost always a spanking. This is a principle my wife and I have passed onto our children. We want to encourage them to tell us the truth no matter what, and if they know they will get in the same amount of trouble regardless, they will be more apt to hide it from us. On occasion, the act may be serious enough to require a spanking, kind of like the dad who pulled his five sons aside, and said, “alright, I want to know which one of you boys pushed the outhouse over the edge of the ravine into the creek.” There was a pause, and then Billy, his youngest son, spoke up and said, “Pa, just like George Washington, I cannot tell a lie, it was me.” His dad said, “Ok, son, go find yourself a switch.” Billy protested, “But, Pa, when George Washington cut down the cherry tree and told the truth, his dad didn’t punish him.” His dad responded, “Well, son, George Washington’s father wasn’t in the cherry tree when he cut it down.”

The other sin that I believe warrants a spanking is complaining and arguing. I lump them together because if you do one, you are really doing both. My reasoning for including this in foolish behavior is because it got the children of Israel in a lot of trouble in their wilderness wanderings. Traveling around in the desert in 120+ degree temperatures would have been rough, rougher than any of us have it, but the Lord still didn’t tolerate their murmurings. Complaining and arguing have both spiritual and natural consequences that are experienced by children and adults alike. I believe we need to hear our children out when they come to us with concerns or questions, but in the moment they are asked to do something, they should be trained to do it without complaining or arguing.

So, what about behavior that is not foolish? For those behaviors that are simply done out of immaturity or not knowing better, the Scriptures do not have a lot to say. In those instances, I believe it is up to us as parents to come up with creative ways to instill in our kids the behavior is not appropriate.

Spanking, like all other forms of discipline, is not to be done in anger. Proverbs again states, “He who sows iniquity will reap sorrow, and the rod of his anger will fail.” (Pro 22:8) So when you or I discipline our children in anger (spanking in particular), the Bible says that we are sinning, and the discipline will fail. At this point we have lost sight of the point of the discipline, and it has really become more self-serving rather than for the good of the child. Our children are able to perceive this, and it hardens their hearts toward us and can provoke them to anger. As men we are generally more prone to be impatient and short-tempered, but we need to remember we are representing the Lord to our children. When we are impatient and short-tempered, our children naturally begin to view their heavenly Father in the same way, and this can be a difficult obstacle for them to overcome. When I was a child, my parents used to send us to our rooms for a while before they administered whatever discipline they thought necessary, and now that I am a parent I understand why. It allows the child time to think about what he or she has done, and it gives us time as parents to cool down if necessary and rationally consider the proper discipline. I’m sure my parents wanted to throttle me at times, but by the time they administered any discipline, I rarely recall them being angry. Also, pray for wisdom. There have been a few occasions when I was not sure what type of discipline to administer, and after praying about it, it became clear to me what to do.

There are just a few additional Scriptures I want to share from Proverbs that deal with this topic. The first is in Proverbs 23. It states, “Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.  Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.” (V 13-14) We are told to not withhold correction from our children, for it is not going to kill them. Oh, they may act like it’s going to, but the truth is it is quite the opposite. It even goes as far as to say when we beat (more accurately to strike) them with the rod it will deliver their soul from Hell. This passage should settle the debate on whether or not the rod is literal. “How does it deliver their soul from Hell,” you might ask? By disciplining our children, we are instilling in them the concepts of right and wrong and that there are consequences for our actions. Instilling in them this sense of right and wrong keeps their heart soft and allows the Holy Spirit room to bring conviction over their sin and their need for Jesus Christ. When we reject this part of God’s Word, we are potentially delaying our child’s receiving the Gospel, if not altogether. Back in chapter 13 Solomon wrote, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” (V 24) We may think we are loving our children by sparing them this type of discipline, but the Lord is actually saying we hate them. We hate them because we refuse to provide the correct deterrent for the foolish behavior that could bring them both physical and spiritual harm or destruction. The word “betimes” means immediately and consistently. It is important, particularly when the child is young, to administer the appropriate discipline immediately following the behavior. This ensures the child remembers what they have done and associates the discipline with the behavior. Consistency is also important so that the child knows what to expect each time they repeat the same offense.  In contrast, the Lord says through Solomon, “Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul.”  When we correct our children the way the Bible instructs us, it gives us rest and we can delight in them.  We can eliminate so many problems that will cause us and them worry, pain and heartache, and just enjoy them for who God has called them to be.  They will not be perfect; for none of us are, but hopefully we can train them so most of that foolish behavior is trained out of them while they are young and the consequences are much less severe.

If you are a parent who has really blown it in raising your children, it is never truly hopeless when you have the Lord. A couple of months ago, I spoke with a man at Church who gave his testimony of how he came to the Lord. He was a raging alcoholic who had been in and out of marriages, and had had children from various relationships. After he and his wife came to the Lord, they gave up alcohol, and one by one their children (including those from other partners began getting saved. I do not recall exactly, but most, if not all of them, have come to know Jesus Christ. God is faithful, folks! When we get right with Him through faith and repentance, there is no limit to what He can and may do for your children.

 

Additional Resources

 

How and How Not to Spank a Child (One of the best messages my wife and I have heard on the subject)

Children and the Rod of Correction

The Dr. James Dobson Parenting Collection