Chapter Nineteen
Joab Rebukes David
19:1 It was told Joab, “Behold, the king is weeping and mourning for Absalom.” 2 So the victory that day was turned into mourning for all the people, for the people heard that day, “The king is grieving for his son.”
David continues to mourn for Absalom and was apparently inconsolable, the news of the king’s misery quickly spread to the people, to Joab, and to the men that fought in the battle. What should have been a joyful time turned into a dark time of mourning. Instead of celebration there was silence.
19:3 And the people stole into the city that day as people steal in who are ashamed when they flee in battle.
The people stole (Hebrew yiṯ·gǎn·nēḇ’, to steal, sweep away, wrongly taking, go by stealth) into the city that day as people steal (same Hebrew word) in who are ashamed when they flee in battle. This verse may sound awkward to some readers, but the image the author is conveying is a deep emotional pain. The soldiers had to quietly and stealthily return from battle as if they were the ones defeated. In a sense the joy and celebration of victory were stolen from them and from all of the people, due to the king’s time of mourning.
19:4 The king covered his face, and the king cried with a loud voice, “O my son Absalom, O Absalom, my son, my son!” 5 Then Joab came into the house to the king and said, “You have today covered with shame the faces of all your servants, who have this day saved your life and the lives of your sons and your daughters and the lives of your wives and your concubines, 6 because you love those who hate you and hate those who love you. For you have made it clear today that commanders and servants are nothing to you, for today I know that if Absalom were alive and all of us were dead today, then you would be pleased.
David was still mourning loudly for Absalom when Joab came into the house. Joab, trying to jolt David back into reality, tells him that everyone’s faces are covered with shame, especially those who fought in battle, those that saved his life and the lives of his family. Joab explains that they are feeling shame because he (David) is perceived as one who loves those that hate him and hates those who love him. Making it clear to the people that his commanders and his fighting men mean nothing to him. Joab then proclaims, “For today I know that if Absalom were alive and all of us were dead today, then you would be pleased.”
19:7 Now therefore arise, go out and speak kindly to your servants, for I swear by the LORD, if you do not go, not a man will stay with you this night, and this will be worse for you than all the evil that has come upon you from your youth until now.”
The situation was grim, the men were confused and demoralized, they clearly won the rebellion as YHWH provided them a swift victory. Joab warns that if David doesn’t address this situation and acknowledge their victory, he will not have an army the next day. Joab further warns David that if that abandonment were to occur, that he would be worse off than any evil time he had experienced in the past.
19:8 Then the king arose and took his seat in the gate. And the people were all told, “Behold, the king is sitting in the gate.” And all the people came before the king. Now Israel had fled every man to his own home.
The gate was where elders and dignitaries would listen to disputes and render judgments. David got up and took the customary seat that was for the highest ranked person present in the community at the time. Soon everyone was told that he was there and they all went there to hear him. Meanwhile the people of Israel, those that supported Absalom, went back to their homes.
There is no record of David’s response to Joab, nor is there anything in Scripture that reveals what David said to the people. Since David replaces Joab as the commander of his army (see verse thirteen) it is believed that David did not appreciate Joab’s forwardness.
David Returns to Jerusalem
19:9 And all the people were arguing throughout all the tribes of Israel, saying, “The king delivered us from the hand of our enemies and saved us from the hand of the Philistines, and now he has fled out of the land from Absalom. 10 But Absalom, whom we anointed over us, is dead in battle. Now therefore why do you say nothing about bringing the king back?”
Absalom’s rebellion left the kingdom in a state of disarray. The tribes of Israel rationalize that King David had delivered them from their enemies, including the Philistines, but left his throne when he fled from Absalom. They then accepted Absalom as their king, and apparently anointed him as their king (which would likely have included a formal denouncement and termination of David’s rule). But now he’s dead, so they collectively ask themselves, “Why not ask David to come back and be our king again?” (2 Samuel 19:10b, NLT)
David likely remained on the other side of Jordan River with the expectation of being invited back. That invitation was given by the tribes of Israel, but the tribe of Judah, was slower to deal with the changes. There seemed to be a general consensus that they wanted David to return, but no one recalled him. Perhaps they were lost in protocol, trying to figure out what the proper procedure would be, as not many kings in those days were replaced while they were still alive. When a new replacement king is anointed but then subsequently killed in battle, how do you go back to the previous king?
19:11 And King David sent this message to Zadok and Abiathar the priests: “Say to the elders of Judah, ‘Why should you be the last to bring the king back to his house, when the word of all Israel has come to the king? 12 You are my brothers; you are my bone and my flesh. Why then should you be the last to bring back the king?’
David sent a message to Zadok and Abiathar, two highly respected priests that remained in Jerusalem during his absence, asking them to speak to the elders of Judah on his behalf. He has them ask why are they the last tribe to restore and bring David back as their king, after all he is their brother. For he has heard that all of Israel is ready for his return.
19:13 And say to Amasa, ‘Are you not my bone and my flesh? God do so to me and more also, if you are not commander of my army from now on in place of Joab.’ ”
David also had them tell Amasa, his cousin (click here to read more about Amasa), who led the opposition against him under Absalom, that he will appointed as the new commander of his army in place of Joab. While this could have been a politically savvy move to extinguish any remaining rebellion and make his reign more appealing, many believe that this decision was due to David desiring to punish Joab (for a number of reasons, insubordination, killing Absalom, etc.) As Amasa just suffered a great defeat it seems obvious that Joab was clearly the better commander.
19:14 And he swayed the heart of all the men of Judah as one man, so that they sent word to the king, “Return, both you and all your servants.”
David’s message persuaded the men of Judah to accept him back as their king, so they asked him to return.
19:15 So the king came back to the Jordan, and Judah came to Gilgal to meet the king and to bring the king over the Jordan. 16 And Shimei the son of Gera, the Benjaminite, from Bahurim, hurried to come down with the men of Judah to meet King David. 17 And with him were a thousand men from Benjamin. And Ziba the servant of the house of Saul, with his fifteen sons and his twenty servants, rushed down to the Jordan before the king, 18 and they crossed the ford to bring over the king’s household and to do his pleasure.
Heading west, David approaches the Jordan River and was met by people from Judah, Shimei the one that cursed him (see 2 Samuel 16:5-13), a thousand men from Benjamin, and Ziba with his fifteen sons and twenty servants, to help David and his family cross the fords of the Jordan River near Gilgal.
Considerations
Cross-Country Rivalries
Both the book of Joshua and the book of Judges reveal several political rivalries that arose between the tribes of Israel. This infighting continued even after Saul became king, especially between the northern tribes (often referred to as Israel) versus Judah (see Joshua 11:21; 1 Samuel 11:8; 17:52; 18:16; 2 Samuel 2:10; 3:10; 5:5; 11:11; 12:8). This schism may have been ‘sealed’ for a period of time under David’s rule, but now the old rivalry is alive and well again.
David Has Mercy on Shimei
19:18b And Shimei the son of Gera fell down before the king, as he was about to cross the Jordan, 19 and said to the king, “Let not my lord hold me guilty or remember how your servant did wrong on the day my lord the king left Jerusalem. Do not let the king take it to heart. 20 For your servant knows that I have sinned. Therefore, behold, I have come this day, the first of all the house of Joseph to come down to meet my lord the king.”
Shimei undoubtedly was in fear that David would have him killed, so he came to greet David at the Jordan River and repented of his cursing. He asked that David not hold his crime against him, as he now knows he was wrong and sinned against him on the day David left Jerusalem.
19:21 Abishai the son of Zeruiah answered, “Shall not Shimei be put to death for this, because he cursed the LORD’s anointed?”
Abishai, who wanted to kill Shimei the day he cursed David (see 2 Samuel 16:9), once again expresses his opinion that Shimei should be put to death for that cursing.
19:22 But David said, “What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah, that you should this day be as an adversary to me? Shall anyone be put to death in Israel this day? For do I not know that I am this day king over Israel?” 23 And the king said to Shimei, “You shall not die.” And the king gave him his oath.
David responds similarly as he did then (see 2 Samuel 16:10), “What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah,” but this time he asks, shall anyone be put to death on that day, as he notes that he is not even sure that he is the king over Israel at that time. He then promises Shimei that he will not be killed. Later when he was handing over the kingdom to Solomon he told Solomon to not hold Shimei guiltless and to deal with him as he thought was appropriate, Solomon eventually had him killed (see 1 Kings 2:8-9, 36-46).
David Restores Mephibosheth
19:24 And Mephibosheth the son of Saul came down to meet the king. He had neither taken care of his feet nor trimmed his beard nor washed his clothes, from the day the king departed until the day he came back in safety. 25 And when he came to Jerusalem to meet the king, the king said to him, “Why did you not go with me, Mephibosheth?”
Mephibosheth made the effort to meet David on his way back to Jerusalem. During David’s absence he was under the impression, based on what Ziba told him upon leaving Jerusalem, that Mephibosheth had hoped that the house of Israel would give him back the kingdom that belonged to his father (see 2 Samuel 16:3). But when David saw him and that he had not taken care of himself and that he was clearly in mourning, he asked him, “Why did you not go with me, Mephibosheth?”
The text introduces Mephibosheth as the son of Saul, the Hebrew běn does not imply a direct descendant, it can refer to any generation in the bloodline. The Hebrew language does employ prefixes like ‘grand’ or ‘great grand’ to signify a specific generation. Here it can be confusing since Saul also had a son named Mephibosheth (see 2 Samuel 21:8, who was killed by the Gibeonites, see 2 Samuel 21:1-14). But we know this Mephibosheth was Jonathan’s son due to the description being lame. Plus, the Septuagint in this verse calls him the son of Saul’s son (which would be Jonathan).
19:26 He answered, “My lord, O king, my servant deceived me, for your servant said to him, ‘I will saddle a donkey for myself, that I may ride on it and go with the king.’ For your servant is lame. 27 He has slandered your servant to my lord the king. But my lord the king is like the angel of God; do therefore what seems good to you. 28 For all my father’s house were but men doomed to death before my lord the king, but you set your servant among those who eat at your table. What further right have I, then, to cry to the king?”
Mephibosheth told David that he wanted to go with him and asked Ziba to saddle a donkey for him to join him, but instead he went out and greeted David and slandered him. Mephibosheth then told David that he is like the angel of God, as his father’s house were are doomed to die, but instead, he set him among the king’s own family and allowed him to eat at his table. What right does he have to complain to the king, what more could he ask for now?
19:29 And the king said to him, “Why speak any more of your affairs? I have decided: you and Ziba shall divide the land.” 30 And Mephibosheth said to the king, “Oh, let him take it all, since my lord the king has come safely home.”
David stops him, perhaps mid-sentence, as he had already decided that he and Ziba can divide the land. Mephibosheth then proclaims that Ziba can have it all, he was just happy that David had come home. Some have difficulty with David’s decision. Mephibosheth was clearly deceived and so was David by Ziba, so why was he given any of Saul’s land? Apparently David found himself in a quandary, after all it was Ziba who brought much needed provisions to him and his men as he was leaving Jerusalem. Some believe that David gave him all of Saul’s land for two reasons, one to reward him for the provisions, and two, to punish Mephibosheth. And now since Mephibosheth had exonerated himself, the punishment was revoked, allowing him to retain a portion. But if deception was used, the decision seems to have been made in haste, perhaps David was unsure who was telling the truth.
It is impossible to commend the cavalier treatment, any more than to approve the partial award, of David in this case. If he were too hurried and distracted by the pressure of circumstances to enquire fully into the matter, he should have postponed his decision; for if by ‘dividing the land’ (v. 29) he meant that the former arrangement should be continued, by which Mephibosheth was acknowledged the proprietor, and Ziba the farmer, it was a hardship inflicted on the owner to fix him with a tenant who had so grossly slandered him.[1]
David Shows Kindness to Barzillai
19:31 Now Barzillai the Gileadite had come down from Rogelim, and he went on with the king to the Jordan, to escort him over the Jordan.
We were introduced to Barzillai in 2 Samuel 17:27, who was one of three men that met David when he arrived in Mahanaim to offer food for David and his men (there are three individuals named Barzillai in Scripture, two in the book of 2 Samuel, which is why he is referred to as being from Gilead).
19:32 Barzillai was a very aged man, eighty years old. He had provided the king with food while he stayed at Mahanaim, for he was a very wealthy man. 33 And the king said to Barzillai, “Come over with me, and I will provide for you with me in Jerusalem.”
Barzillai is called a “very aged man” being eighty years old, and is further described as being wealthy. David apparently impressed with Barzillai invites him to go with him to Jerusalem, so that he could provide for him.
19:34 But Barzillai said to the king, “How many years have I still to live, that I should go up with the king to Jerusalem? 35 I am this day eighty years old. Can I discern what is pleasant and what is not? Can your servant taste what he eats or what he drinks? Can I still listen to the voice of singing men and singing women? Why then should your servant be an added burden to my lord the king? 36 Your servant will go a little way over the Jordan with the king. Why should the king repay me with such a reward? 37a Please let your servant return, that I may die in my own city near the grave of my father and my mother. But here is your servant Chimham. Let him go over with my lord the king, and do for him whatever seems good to you.”
Barzillai was truly appreciative for David’s offer, but due to his age he desired to stay home. But does ask David to consider extending his offer to Barzillai’s servant named Chimham, who is likely his son (see 1 Kings 2:7).
19:38 And the king answered, “Chimham shall go over with me, and I will do for him whatever seems good to you, and all that you desire of me I will do for you.”
David must have been truly impressed by Barzillai’s hospitality in Mahanaim, that he not only agrees to take Chimham to Jerusalem, he also adds, “I will help him in any way you would like. And I will do for you anything you want.” (2 Samuel 19:38b, NLT)
Evidence in a later text (Jer 41:17) indicates that David fulfilled his word. The existence of a site near Bethlehem named Geruth Kimham (= “the hospitality of/accorded to Kimham”) suggests that an estate in Judah was given to Barzillai’s designated recipient. But Barzillai himself would not be forgotten by the king: “anything” he might “desire from” David would be done for him.[2]
19:39 Then all the people went over the Jordan, and the king went over. And the king kissed Barzillai and blessed him, and he returned to his own home. 40 The king went on to Gilgal, and Chimham went on with him. All the people of Judah, and also half the people of Israel, brought the king on his way.
Barzillai and Chimham were the last of the greeters and send-off participants, so now David and all the people cross over the Jordan River. David kisses Barzillai and blesses him as he returned to his home. They went on to Gilgal with all the people of Judah and half the people of Israel escorting them.
An Argument Between Israel and Judah Regarding the King
19:41 Then all the men of Israel came to the king and said to the king, “Why have our brothers the men of Judah stolen you away and brought the king and his household over the Jordan, and all David’s men with him?”
As mentioned above there was a cross-county rivalry between the men of Israel and the men of Judah. Many of their antics would today be called childish, this event certainly fits under that category with king David right in the middle. The men of Israel ask the king why have the men of Judah ’stolen’ him away and brought the king and his men over the Jordan River.
19:42 All the men of Judah answered the men of Israel, “Because the king is our close relative. Why then are you angry over this matter? Have we eaten at all at the king’s expense? Or has he given us any gift?”
Before David could respond the men of Judah answer, and they explain that the king is their close relative (being from the tribe of Judah). But then they ask the men of Israel an important question, “Why are you angry over this matter?” They point out that they haven’t eaten at the king’s expense, nor has he given them any gift, emphasizing again the trivial nature of the issue.
19:43 And the men of Israel answered the men of Judah, “We have ten shares in the king, and in David also we have more than you. Why then did you despise us? Were we not the first to speak of bringing back our king?” But the words of the men of Judah were fiercer than the words of the men of Israel.
The men of Israel, now ‘grasping for straws’, say that they have “ten shares” in the king, noting that they represent ten tribes while Judah only represented two (Judah and Simeon) and that they have more people. They now rephrase the question, “Why then did you despise us?” They next point out that they were the first to ask the king to come back, which is true (see verses nine and ten). The verse ends with a statement from the author, the words that the tribe of Judah used were fiercer (Hebrew yi’·qěš, hard, severe, harsh, cruel, stiff-necked) than the words of the men of Israel, potentially alienating the northern tribes, the dissension between the people of Israel and the people of Judah deepens.
But at this time the old tribal jealousy that had been so prominent in Israel’s past history, especially in the time of the Judges, came to the fore again. The men of Israel lodged a bitter complaint against the men of Judah: “Why did our brothers, the men of Judah, steal the king [David] away?” It did no good for the men of Judah to explain that David was their “near relative” (being of the tribe of Judah). They still felt that they had been treated with contempt. Now the men of Judah too fell into intemperate language that only worsened the situation.[3]
⇐Previous (Introduction) Next⇒
[1] Jamieson, R. (n.d.). A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments: Joshua–Esther: Vol. II (p. 265). William Collins, Sons, & Company, Limited.
[2] Bergen, R. D. (1996). 1, 2 Samuel (Vol. 7, p. 432). Broadman & Holman Publishers.
[3] Franzmann, W. H. (1980). Bible history commentary: Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 402). Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.