Deeper Commentary
2Sa 5:1 Then came all the tribes of Israel to David to Hebron-
This was to enter the covenant which Abner had persuaded them to make
(see on 2 Sam. 3:21). We noted earlier that God had told David to go
up to Hebron and it seems that is where God intended David to be king from.
But it was David who preferred Jerusalem and possibly transferred that
desire onto God.
And
spoke saying, Behold, we are your bone and your flesh-
Eph. 5:30 makes the amazing
statement that even now, "We are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones". In a very
detailed study of this language, Henricus Renckens concluded: "In Israel,
in order to say that someone was a blood relation, one said: "He is my
flesh and my bones" (Gen. 29:14; Jud. 9:2; cp. Gen. 37:27; 2 Sam. 5:1;
19:13 ff.; Is. 58:7)". This is how close we are to the Lord Jesus- blood
relatives. This language could in no way be justified if Jesus were God
Himself in person.
2Sa 5:2 In times past, when Saul was king over us, it was you who led out
and brought in Israel. Yahweh said to you, ‘You shall be shepherd of My
people Israel, and you shall be prince over Israel’-
The mutuality between God and David is often brought out. Yahweh was
his shepherd (Ps. 23:1), and he was to shepherd Israel). All Israel
recognized that David had always been Israel's saviour, and Saul generally
had failed to experience the Divine potential for him to be this.
The people may possibly be alluding to Gen. 49:10 "The scepter will not
depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he
comes to whom it belongs. To him will the obedience of the peoples be".
And so the people gathered to David, the king chosen from Judah, the
shepherd who had a staff. Although for them it now seemed so logical that
a shepherd man from Judah should be their king, God's choice of Saul of
Benjamin shows that He sees His purpose as capable of multiple different
paths of outworking. This is why the interpretation of prophecy can never
be conducted dogmatically, because there are various possible outcomes-
depending upon human freewill response.
2Sa 5:3 So all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and king
David made a covenant with them in Hebron before Yahweh; and they anointed
David king over Israel-
This is the covenant which Abner had engineered in 2 Sam. 3:21, aimed
at providing total amnesty and assurance to all those who had once
supported Saul. David had already been anointed by Samuel, but this was
stating that all Israel approved of that and wanted to work with God's
plan rather than against it. It was a covenant of amnesty and
forgiveness, the past was to be the past. And this looks forward to the
situation when the Lord is finally enthroned king at His return.
2Sa 5:4 David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned
forty years-
If Saul reigned 40 years (Acts 13:21), this creates various
chronological problems. Solomon, David and Saul are all stated to have
reigned 40 years, and it may be a non literal number. Paul's argument in
Acts 13:21 seems to be seeking to draw a parallel between Israel's 40
years in the desert and Saul's reign. Numbers are simply not used in
Semitic literature in the literalistic way that they are in the writings
of other cultures. To this day an Arab may describe a hot day as being 100
degrees C, when it is not that literally. But the Arab is not lying nor
deceiving; it's a case of using numbers within a different context of
language usage. Beginning his reign at 30 may be intended to recall how
the Levites began serving at 30 (Num. 4:3), because David was set up to be
the priest-king who would replace the high priesthood according to
Hannah's song. And at times he clearly did act like this, although his
failures meant that the potential was reapplied and reframed to fulfilment
in the Lord Jesus.
2Sa 5:5 In Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months; and in
Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years over all Israel and Judah-
Hebron was a priestly city and Jerusalem the kingly city, so maybe
this is intended to present David as a king-priest, beginning his kingship
at the same age as the priests began their service (:4). But I
have suggested that Yahweh's command in 2 Sam. 2 was for David to be king
in Hebron, but he chose Jerusalem [partly in Judah, partly in Benjamin]
for political purposes and God went along with that.
2Sa 5:6 The king and his men went to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the
inhabitants of the land, who spoke to David saying, Unless you take away the
blind and the lame, you shall not come in here; thinking, David can’t come
in here-
A person who feels they are somehow a nice guy
and worthy of invitation will be the one who tends to consider others as
unworthy of invitation to the Kingdom. He or she who perceives their own
desperation will eagerly invite even those they consider to be in the very
pits of human society. The lame, blind etc. were not allowed to serve God
under the law (Lev. 21:18), nor be offered as sacrifices (Dt. 15:21), nor
come within the holy city (2 Sam. 5:6-8). The Lord purposefully healed
multitudes of lame and blind (Mt. 15:30), and allowed them to come to Him in
the temple (Mt. 21:14). His acted out message was clearly that those who
were despised as unfit for God’s service were now being welcomed by Him into
that service. The lame and blind were despised because they couldn’t work.
They had to rely on the grace of others. Here again is a crucial teaching:
those called are those who can’t do the works, but depend upon grace.
Defining the Jebusites as "the inhabitants of the land" may be another mark left by the inspired editing of these records for the exiles. Such explanatory notes would have been unnecessary for the primary readership. The encouragement to them was that restoration of Israel's fortunes was indeed possible, under a new David.
"Thinking, David can’t come in here" continues a theme in the Samuel records- that human thoughts are so significant to God. This is what they thought, and therefore from the abundance of their hearts, their mouths spoke.
2Sa 5:7 Nevertheless David took the stronghold of Zion; the same is the
city of David-
As often in the Hebrew Bible, we have a summary statement and then an
explanation of how it came about. The contrast is with how Saul's tribe of
Benjamin had failed to drive out the Jebusites (Jud. 1:21). Jerusalem was
originally in Benjamin, but David's capture of the city made it "the city
of David" and therefore in Judah. We see here how different potential
futures could have worked out. If Benjamin had taken and inherited their
possession and Saul had 'worked out' as he could have done, then Jerusalem
would have been in Benjamin. We see here how God's plans are flexible,
reflective of His great respect of human freewill and initiative. The
"city of David" was not a city, it is defined here as a stronghold, and
elsewhere the term is used specifically of the burial places of the
Davidic kings. It was a hill southeast of Jerusalem. In the
wilderness Psalms, David so often talks of Yahweh as his stronghold, his
fortified tower. And we think of 2 Sam. 22:1-3: "David spoke to Yahweh the
words of this song in the day that Yahweh delivered him out of the hand of
all his enemies, and out of the hand of Saul: and he said, Yahweh is my
rock, my fortress, and my deliverer, even mine; God, my rock, in Him I
will take refuge; my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower,
and my refuge. My saviour, You save me". But once he settles in Jerusalem,
we repeatedly read of the city / stronghold of David, the area he built a
fortification around, the "milo". Again we see his spiritual decline once
he settled down and we must beware of this. He himself and his fortified
home fortress was his own stronghold rather than Yahweh.
It can be inferred that the Jebusites surrendered when the blind and lame were so cruelly slain. There is no mention of any battle; and Araunah the Jebusite is living and owning part of the future temple mount nearby at the time of 2 Sam. 24.
2Sa 5:8 David said on that day, Whoever strikes the Jebusites, let him get
up to the watercourse, and strike the lame and the blind, who are hated by
David’s soul. Therefore they say, The blind and the lame can’t come into
the house-
See on :6. The Hebrew is difficult but seems to allude to how the
Jebusites mocked the Hebrews, thinking that their high elevation was such
that the bind and lame could repel any attackers. If David was indeed
Jonathan's armourbearer in 1 Sam. 14, he would have seen how God had
punished the pride of the Philistines when they thought likewise. For
Jonathan had shinned up an almost vertical cliff, with the Philistines
mocking him- and slew them. This inspired David with the possibility that
someone of similar faith and bravery could climb up the sewer line into
Zion and do the same. Jonathan's example, from some decades earlier,
inspired faith in this later situation. And so will all Godly examples.
The fact it was Joab who rose up to this example (see 1 Chron.) means that
he must surely have had some faith as well as bravery, despite his rather
unspiritual ways.
But the Hebrew of David's words here read like a kind of song, which could be translated:
Whosoever smites the Jebusite,
let him hurl down the precipice
both the lame and the blind,
hated of David’s soul.
We sense here a bitterness and lack of respect of the human person, which maybe resulted in his not being allowed to build the temple later. To murder the handicapped was unethical, but David's bitterness and desire for power led him to command it. Hence LXX "Whosoever smiteth the Jebusite, let him slay with the sword both the lame and the blind who hate David’s soul".
There are echoes of Saul's offer at the time of the fight with Goliath. Chronicles records: "Whosoever smites the Jebusites first shall be chief and captain". And thus Joab was restored to being chief of the army.
We note that the exclusion of blind and lame in Lev. 21:18-20 only applied to "the seed of Aaron" not being able to officiate with sacrifices. And lame and blind sacrifices weren't to be offered (Dt. 15:21). But this is being twisted by David's extremism and anger issues into a general prohibition of lame and blind people coming into sacred space. The Jebusites were making typical pre-battle taunts- and David falls deeply for it. The words lodged in him and he got furiously angry. But Lev. 21:21,22 was clear that disabled priests were allowed to eat the holy things although not to offer them: "he shall not come near to offer the food of his God. He shall eat the food of his God, both of the most holy, and of the holy". That holy food was to be eaten in the holy place, beside the altar (Lev. 6:16,26; 7:6; 10:12,13; 24:9- all very different from the attitudes of other religions at the time which stigmatized disability and wouldn't have allowed any disabled priests). So David was quite wrong to demand that no disabled person come into the temple. The Lord healed the blind and lame and allowed them to enter the temple, as if undoing this whole law and principle (Mt. 21:14 "the blind and the lame came to him in the temple and he healed them"). Jacob was lame but Yahweh is so often stated to be his God. There is no grace in David's position, nor in those who upheld it. The reason is given that the lame and blind were hated of David's soul. Hardly a great basis morally. And yet, as ever, David's feelings are nuanced- because he shows huge grace to the lame Mephibosheth and has him live within his house and eat at his table (2 Sam. 9:13). We all have these contradictory feelings and positions, where anger struggles against grace. We think of his expressed hatred for Saul in the Psalms, and yet his love and grace to him in practice. This is not the same as hypocrisy, it is what it is to be a spiritually flawed human. And the promise of the new covenant is that specifically the blind and lame are those who will come to Zion: “I will bring them in from the northland, gather them from the ends of the earth—the blind and the lame among them, those with child together with those in labour—in a vast throng they shall return here” (Jer. 31:7). Indeed the law of Moses taught respect for the disabled- the deaf were not to be reviled, and no stumbling hazard placed where blind people were (Lev. 19:14), because "I am Yahweh". David's attitude is completely opposite to this; he is presented as plain wrong right from the get go of his establishment in Zion. But soon after he receives the amazing grace of the promises of 2 Sam. 7. Rather like directly after Abraham and Isaac are weak in faith regarding their wives- they receive the promises and material blessings.
2Sa 5:9 David lived in the stronghold, and called it the city of David.
David built around from Millo and inward-
Jerusalem was particularly loved by David. He thereby moved the city
into Judah's possession from Benjamin's; see on :7. Chronicles adds: “And
Joab repaired the rest of the city".
2Sa 5:10 David grew greater and greater; for Yahweh, the God of Armies,
was with him-
This is the same phrase as used in David's protestation of humility in
Ps. 131:1: "
2Sa 5:11 Hiram king of Tyre sent messengers to David, and cedar trees,
carpenters and masons; and they built David a house-
The way Solomon also used him, or probably another Hiram, for the
same trees reflects again how Solomon sought to live out his father. But
he had no real spirituality, and over time he revealed that he had no
personal faith, turning away to idols in his old age and coming to the
nihilism of Ecclesiastes.
Psalm 30 was written at the dedication of a house by David, and we assume it was this house. But that Psalm reveals David had been very ill. He seems not to have had robust health although he was physically strong and lived a long life. There is ample evidence for a breakdown of his health after the sin with Bathsheba.
2Sa 5:12 David perceived that Yahweh had established him king over Israel,
and that He had exalted his kingdom for His people Israel’s sake-
He realized that the promises of Samuel so long ago had finally come
true, despite all the times when it had seemed they could not come true
(see on 1 Sam. 27:1). But this sense of fulfilment led him to take yet
more wives (:13), which is surely to be read negatively in spiritual
terms. Yet he realized that his establishment was located in a wider
context than just for himself; it was for the sake of His people Israel.
2Sa 5:13 David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after
he had come from Hebron; and there were more sons and daughters born to
David-
See on :12. This is hard to read in a positive light spiritually; for
Israel's king was not to multiply wives (Dt. 17:17). He seemed to feel the
need to prove himself established by having more wives and children, but
this was itself a failure to appreciate that Yahweh had established him
(:12). He did perceive this, but only on one level. David
in Ps. 119 says that he studied God's law day and night. But he like us
can miss the totally obvious and filter out the direct personal relevance.
David was acting as monarchs did- having children by women from his chosen
capital city, to establish his dynasty and establish himself as king
there. Yet by doing this, David is breaking Divine principle by marrying
multiple wives, for the sake of his political agenda rather than love
marriage. And if the women were from Jerusalem, they were likely Gentiles
/ Jebusites as Jerusalem had not been in Israel's hands in recent times.
This is all the backdrop to God's statement to David in 2 Sam. 7 that He is going to establish David's dynasty eternally. Kings typically built a temple to their patron god and David also wanted to do this. But Yahweh wants none of that. He doesn't turn away from David over his human efforts to establish himself, but rather by grace He gives David amazing promises to show that He will establish David and his dynasty and kingdom ("Yahweh Himself will establish your house / family", 2 Sam. 7:11; "I will establish your descendants forever, and build your throne for all generations", Ps. 89:4.). And it will be God's Kingdom, not simply David's. We too face many temptations to legitimate and establish ourselves, to prove ourselves in society, especially with regard to family life and inheritances. People give their whole lives to establishing a 'successful' family, to own property, to prove yourself and show you have done something 'permanent' as you passed briefly through this world. Men name their lands and homes after themselves. But it is God who legitimates man, and He does so eternally and not through visible achievement in this life. Be it owning a property, or as in David's case, having wives and children from Jerusalem. Yahweh stresses He will make David's name great- not David nor any man making their own name great (2 Sam. 7:9). Man in his youth wants to legitimate himself by leaving the parental home, having his own property and family, carving out his own career and life path. And in later life, he seeks to create a family brand, and leave an inheritance to his well set up children. David was the same and he tried to do so on a large scale, involving being less than moral in his actions. The promises to him about God's legitimization of him and establishment of his "house" addressed all of this- he was to understand that God would legitimate him and establish him, not his own strength and wit. And like the promises to Abraham, which include the same things, they were given to David unconditionally without conditions nor any comment as to his worthiness to receive them. They came to him from out of left field. If his seed failed, the seed would be punished but the covenant would not be broken- love, chesed, the love and bond of the covenant, would not be withdrawn: "When / if he commits iniquity, I will punish him with the rod of humans, with floggings inflicted by people. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you" (2 Sam. 7:14-16). Likewise Ps. 89:31–34: "If they violate my statutes and do not keep my commandments, then I will punish their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with scourges; but I will not remove from him my steadfast love, or be false to my faithfulness. I will not violate my covenant, or alter the word that went forth from my lips". The love would "never" [2 Sam. 7], not ever, be removed- and therefore the covenant was for ever eternal: "Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever” (2 Sam. 7:16). This is indeed amazing grace; an eternal unconditional commitment to David and his seed. David's seed were going to be a non negotiable part of God's purpose for ever. All this was way more than establishing David's family in the short term, as David had spent so much effort to do. We who all struggle to legitimate ourselves in this world are likewise hugely challenged by the same covenant grace. The language of the Davidic covenant mirrors by contrast the situation with Saul- who was given the covenant but it and the Spirit were withdrawn from him. Saul's sins led to the end of covenant relationship, but David's sins didn't. David realizes on one level that Yahweh alone by grace has established his kingdom (:12)- just as do those who pay lip service to God's grace and establishment of them. And yet at the very same time, he goes helter skelter to establish his kingdom in his own strength.
2Sa 5:14 These are the names of those who were born to him in Jerusalem:
Shammua, Shobab, Nathan, Solomon-
These were the sons of Bathsheba. We note that they had a son called
Nathan, perhaps in respect of the prophet of that name who had rebuked
David for his sin with Bathsheba. And it was through him that the Lord
Jesus was descended back to David (Lk. 3:31). Birth "in Jerusalem"
was seen as legitimizing a great man in his home city; we think of the
similar comment in 2 Sam. 21:22 "These four were born to the giant in
Gath; and they fell by the hand of David".
The account of bringing the ark to Zion is prefaced by this record of David's sons who were born in Jerusalem. But we read nothing further about them. This could all be read as part of David's attempt to establish his own dynasty in Zion, which God responded to in 2 Sam. 7 by saying that He would establish David's Kingdom in His own way, through David's seed, the Lord Jesus. Ps. 87:5 expresses David's misunderstanding that physical birth in Zion meant Yahweh's establishment: "Yes, of Zion it will be said, This one and that one was born in her; the Most High Himself will establish her". Likewise in Ps. 132:17 David puts words in God's mouth: "There [in Zion / Jerusalem] will I make the horn of David to bud". But the budding of David's horn was fulfilled by God in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, the great "son of David", rather than in David having many sons in Jerusalem. The promises of Divine establishment of David's dynasty through the Lord Jesus were therefore a corrective to David's thinking about establishing his dynasty in his own strength.
2Sa 5:15 Ibhar, Elishua, Nepheg, Japhia-
We know nothing of these sons, nor indeed or most of David's
children. This would indicate perhaps that David was not a very good
spiritual father to his children. And that, as noted above, his
attempts at self-legitimization in Jerusalem were not at all spiritually
blessed.
2Sa 5:16 Elishama, Eliada and Eliphelet-
The lists in 1 Chron. 3:5-8; 14:4-7 also mention two more sons,
Eliphalet or Elpalet and Nogah. Perhaps they are omitted here
because they died in infancy, and that the second Eliphalet was named
after his dead brother.
2Sa 5:17 When the Philistines heard that they had anointed David king over
Israel, all the Philistines went up to seek David; and David heard of it,
and went down to the stronghold-
They must have felt bitterly betrayed by David. He had lived with
them in Ziklag and Gath for some time and claimed he was on their side
against Judah. His lack of integrity would have deeply riled them, and was
a poor advertisement for the God of Israel.
The stronghold in view may have been the cave of Adullam (2 Sam.
23:13,14), where God had previously delivered David from Saul. Perhaps he
went there to pray. It was at this time that he wished to drink of the
water from the well in Bethlehem, and his men broke risked their lives to
get it for him. We see the extent of their dominance, in that they had
overrun Bethlehem, David's home village, and placed a garrison in it (2
Sam. 23:14).
2Sa 5:18 Now the Philistines had come and spread themselves in the valley
of Rephaim-
The record of David's battle with the Philistines in 2 Sam.5:17-24 has
certain similarities with the exploits of 1 Sam. 14:8-11; as if, years
later, David replicated Jonathan's early adventure of faith. This would be
understandable if he had been Jonathan's armourbearer in that incident.
Situations repeat in our lives; what we learn in youth becomes tested
later on in life.
They perhaps chose the valley of the giants as the battleground because they still recalled his victory over Goliath, and wanted to reverse it.
2Sa 5:19 David inquired of Yahweh saying, Shall I go up against the
Philistines? Will You deliver them into my hand? Yahweh said to David, Go
up; for I will certainly deliver the Philistines into your hand-
This recalls how he asked Yahweh when Saul died whether he should go
into Judah, and to which city there. A man of lesser humility and
closeness to God would have just gone ahead with assumptions he was right.
His questions also recall the questions he asked [and answers received]
about the situation in Keilah (1 Sam. 23:11,12). He retained this desire
for guidance, and showed he had learned from his previous experiences.
"Teach me Your way" was definitely David's credo and reflects
humility. For so often we read of David asking for guidance (1 Sam. 23:2;
2 Sam. 2:1).
2Sa 5:20 David came to Baal Perazim, and David struck them there; and he
said, Yahweh has broken my enemies before me, like the breach of waters.
Therefore he called the name of that place Baal Perazim-
Perhaps there was a literal flash flood sent by God. This means the place of breaches. What happened has been explained as
follows: "It was the rocky height on the north of the valley of Rephaim.
David must, therefore, have stolen round the army of the Philistines,
creeping, probably by night, up to this ridge of Ben-Hinnom, and thence at
the dawn of day have rushed down upon the camp. And his onset was sudden
and irresistible, like the rush of the waters of some mountain lake when,
swollen with rains, it bursts through the opposing dam, and carries hasty
destruction to everything that lies in its way". This means that just like
the second attack, David circled around and came at the Philistines from
behind (:23). But this is exactly how a dog attacks. David in his low
moments had felt himself as a desert dog (1 Sam. 17:44 LXX; 24:14). When
we are weak, then we are strong. Perhaps God played along with David's low
feelings by saying that if he indeed felt as a dog, then He would use him
to achieve victory as a dog does. This is not to justify David's view of
himself, but to show rather how God interacts with man in a mutual way.
2Sa 5:21 They left their images there; and David and his men took them
away-
They should have destroyed them, according to the law of Moses which
David professed such love for in Ps. 119. Perhaps they justified it by
saying they were doing to the Philistines as they had done to the ark; for
the Philistines took the ark as a sign they had triumphed over Israel's
God. But Yahweh clearly punished them for that, and David's men might have
boasted that the Philistine gods didn't do that to them. Such is the quasi
spiritual reasoning of our flesh. 1 Chron. 14:12 however explains that
finally, they were burnt.
2Sa 5:22 The Philistines came up yet again, and spread themselves in the
valley of Rephaim-
This was soon afterwards, implying David's men hadn't slain that many
of the Philistines.
2Sa 5:23 When David inquired of Yahweh, He said, You shall not go up.
Circle around behind them, and attack them opposite the mulberry trees-
The Father and Son are constantly seeking to lead us in
“newness
of life”. David didn’t get victory by the mulberry trees the same way each
time (2 Sam. 5:23,24). God changed the method. But as noted on :20, David
was still to circle around and attack from behind, like a dog. "Mulberry"
is Hebrew baca, and could refer to the valley of Baca, or
weeping, of Ps. 84:6. Hence RV "valley of weeping". Perhaps David was in
depression at this time, and was being comforted that his weeping was to
be his strength. For God loves to use the weak to achieve His victories.
2Sa 5:24 It shall be, when you hear the sound of marching in the tops of
the mulberry trees, that then you shall stir yourself up-
This sound was the marching of the Angels. They are called Yahweh's
hosts or armies, and the idea was that David's army was a reflection on
earth of the heavenly armies above him. This was necessary to teach that
Israel were not winning these victories in their own strength, but by
following the Angelic hosts above them.
"Stir up" is Heb. 'follow after'. The idea of ‘following after’ a man is a Hebrew figure for men following their leader / general into battle. There are many examples: Josh. 3:3; Jud. 3:28; 4:14; 6:34,35; 9:4,49; 1 Sam. 17:13,14; 30:21; 2 Sam. 5:24 etc. In those early days, a general wasn’t a smart guy with a degree who directed the battlefield from his laptop; he was the one who went over the top first with his men behind him, knowing full well he was the one whom his enemies would go for above all others. It was his bravery which inspired the followers to go after him, and which, over the battles and wars, solidified their trust in him and willingness to give their lives behind him. And this figure of speech was well understood by the Lord when He bid us follow Him. Around Him were false prophets and rabbinic teachers, asking young men to follow them, adopt their interpretations of Torah, study the traditions, and get hyped up enough to take weapons in their hands and go forth to fight the infidel. The Lord was fully aware of this, and He frames His calling of men in the same terms. Indeed, when He speaks of leaving all and following after Him (Lk. 14:33), He surely had in mind the well known story of Mattathias, who began the Maccabean revolt by saying: “Let every one who is zealous for the Law and supports the covenant follow after me… and they left their possessions behind in the town” (1 Macc. 2:27).
For then Yahweh
has gone out before you to strike the army of the Philistines-
The people wanted a king to "go out before us and fight our battles" (1
Sam. 8:20), but they were disappointed in Saul ultimately. For it was
effectively David who went out before the people to fight their battles
(s.w. 1 Sam. 18:13,16). And David was only successful because he recognized
that it was Yahweh who 'went out before' to fight his battles (s.w. 2 Sam.
5:24), rather than any human king or leader.
2Sa 5:25 David did so, as Yahweh commanded him, and struck the Philistines
from Geba until you come to Gezer-
"Geba" is Gibeon (1 Chron. 14:16), which is directly on the road from the
valley of Rephaim to Gaza. The continual consistency of the geographical
references in the record is yet another reflection of the utter
credibility of it as Divinely inspired. Any group of human writers would
have made mistakes in this area, given the lack of detailed maps and
geographical knowledge.
The significance of Gibeon [Geba] is that David had avoided having any part in the duel there between his men and the men of Saul. But he does fight there against Yahweh's enemies and wins. In the very place where divided brethren slew each other, David slays the Philistines. We note that Gibeon was in Benjamin, who had initially been on Saul's side during the civil war and against David. Whilst Gibeon was in their hands at the time of the duel, it seems it fell into Philistine hands soon afterwards- for David now drives the Philistines out of Gibeon. This is the fruit of divided brethren- the world comes in.
We wonder why there was this victory over the Philistines inserted into David's experience here. He has established himself as king, and will build his own house and desire to build God a house in the next chapter. One reason may be that God is preparing David to receive the promises and covenant of 2 Sam. 7 which includes victory over enemies (2 Sam. 7:11 "I will cause you to rest from all your enemies"). God works progressively with His people, teaching them by experience [in this case, a carefully Divinely controlled victory over enemies] what He then tells them in words. For we are in the end empirical learners, and God knows this.
Previous Chapter
