CHAPTER XXX. THE EARLY PART OF THE REIGN OF DAVID. (2 Sam. ii.-xii. 1 Chron. xii. 23.-xx. 3.) THE death of Saul (B.c. 1055) having cleared the way to the throne, David sought Divine direction concerning his own line of conduct; and, in answer to this inquiry, he was ordered to repair to Hebron, where the men of Judah immediately anointed him as their king.* Abner, however, the general of Saul's army, induced all the other tribes to give their allegiance to Ishbosheth,† the son and heir of the late king, whose residence was fixed at Mahanaim, on the east of the Jordan. The authority of this new sovereign was, however, unconstitutional; inasmuch as, although he was acknowledged by the majority of the tribes, his appointment had not received the Divine sanction; and Ishbosheth himself was a feeble princein fact a mere roi fainéant in the hands of Abner, by whom his throne was upheld as long as it appeared to suit his own interest to give it his support. § War between the two portions of the divided kingdom was commenced by Abner, at the outset of which he sustained a signal defeat by the forces of David under the command of Joab, after an ineffectual attempt to * Some think that David, while reigning at Hebron, was tributary to the Philistines. Originally [as we may infer from 1 Chron. viii. 33; ix. 39] called, by his father, Esh-baal (man of Baal), perhaps out of compliment to the Phoenicians; but afterwards, by the Israelites, to express their contempt for the Phoenician idol, Ish-bosheth (man of shame). [Compare the interchange of Jerubbaal (Judg. viii. 35) and Jerubbesheth (2 Sam. xi. 21); Meribbaal (1 Chron. viii. 34; ix. 40) and Mephibosheth (2 Sam. iv. 4, &c.).] Considered apart from the direct interposition of Divine authority, David's accession to the throne has been not unaptly compared to that of our own William III. His rival on the other side of the Jordan (over the water) maintained, indeed, his residence in a portion of his dominions; but he had no more footing in central and northern Palestine (then in the hands of the Philistines) than James had in Ireland and Scotland. § [We read (2 Sam. ii. 10, 11) that Ishbosheth reigned over Israel 'two years,' and that David reigned over Judah 'seven years and six months.' There are three principal ways of explaining this apparent contradiction : (1). That for five years after Saul's death all the country except Judah was in the hands of the Philistines, but that at the end of that time the Israelites had recovered their territory, and Ishbosheth was set up by Abner. (2). That immediately upon Saul's death Ishbosheth was set up as king beyond Jordan, but did not for five years recover from the Philistines the country to the west of that river-from which event therefore the two years' of his reign are to be reckoned, (3). That the expression reigned two years' merely means that he had reigned that length of time when the events about to be related occurred-the rest of ver. 10 and the whole of ver. 11 being parenthetical.] decide the issue by a combat of twelve picked men on each side, the whole of whom were destroyed by each other.* Joab, who was a nephew of David, being a son of his sister Zeruiah, was accompanied in this battle by his brothers Abishai and Asahel; the latter of whom (celebrated as being as light of foot as a wild roe') was slain by Abner, with a back thrust of his spear, after having been in vain requested by the defeated general to desist from his close pursuit. Joab lost only nineteen men, besides Asahel; while the number of the slain on the side of Abner amounted to three hundred and sixty. There was no desire on the part of Judah to follow up the victory with a greater effusion of blood; and, after a parley, Joab withdrew his forces, and returned to Hebron. The war, however, was prolonged for some time, during which 'David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul weaker and weaker.' At length, on occasion of a quarrel with the weak and incapable Ishbosheth-a quarrel probably designed from the first to serve only as a pretext for his defection-Abner sent a message to David, tendering his support in reducing all the tribes of Israel to their proper allegiance. David required, as a preliminary, that his wife Michal should be restored to him, and (probably at Abner's suggestion) sent to Ishbosheth, making this demand. The request was complied with, and Abner then treated with the elders of Israel in favour of David as their lawful sovereign, according to the declared will of the Most High. Afterwards he had a conference with David at Hebron, and left that place with the intention of procuring his recognition by all the Israelites. But he was not permitted to execute his design. Joab, jealous probably of the influence which Abner was likely to possess at the court of David, remonstrated with the king for sending away in peace one whom he represented as a spy; and then, without David's knowledge, he caused Abner to be recalled to Hebron. On his return, he took him aside at the gate of the city, and assassinated him with his own hand. Abishai abetted him in this act, which the two brothers no doubt represented as only a due and customary avenging of the death of their brother Asahel. David was indignant at the treachery and murder which had been committed; but he could do no more than testify his regret for the death of Abner by a public funeral and mourning, in which he himself took a prominent part. In the public mind the king was entirely exempt from *This combat bears an obvious resemblance to that of the Horatii and Curiatii. Dr. Kitto compares it to the Scotch clan fight related in 'The Fair Maid of Perth.' the charge of any share in the murder of Abner; and he said to his servants, Know ye not that there is a prince and a great man fallen this day in Israel? And I am this day weak, though anointed king; and these men the sons of Zeruiah be too hard for me; the Lord shall reward the doer of evil according to his wickedness.' It is probable that, had Abner lived, he would not only have been too powerful as a rival to Joab, but might have become troublesome even to the king himself; and it is pleasing to find that David was entirely free from suspicion or jealousy with regard to him. Ishbosheth had now only the name of king; and soon afterwards, when lying on his bed in the heat of the day, he was murdered by two of his own officers, Rechab and Baanah, who cut off his head and carried it to David at Hebron, expecting no doubt to receive a high reward for this proof of their devotion to his cause; instead of which they met with a wellmerited rebuke, and the death of traitors." Soon after this, the elders of the tribes of Israel waited on David at Hebron, tendering their submission; and here, at the end of seven years and a half, during which he had reigned over Judah alone, David was anointed king over the whole people +-having been first anointed by Samuel as future sovereign by Divine appointment, and again afterwards as reigning prince of Judah at Hebron.‡ *The conduct of David towards one who was, at least officially, his chief public enemy, may well be compared to that of Alexander to the slayer of Darius, and contrasted with that of Antony to the assassins of Cicero.'-KITTO, Daily Bible Illustrations, iii. 336. This assembly of the tribes at Hebron may be compared in point of numbers (see 1 Chron. xii. 23-38) to the ancient gatherings of the Germans, under their leaders and nobles, for the election of an emperor. Compare especially the election of the Emperor Lothaire II., in the year 1125-at which 60,000 persons of all ranks were present. The great antitype of David, Messiah, has been in like manner made king, while yet a large number of His subjects refuse to acknowledge His authority. And here it may be well to take notice of the following observations concerning the typical character of Old Testament history. What is written in the history of the Old Testament church, concerning God's dealings toward her, and the institutions and providences which she received at His hands, was all written for the learning of the New Testament church; and the things which happened to the one were appointed for types to the other; nay, were contrived with such minute and wonderful adaptation to the mysteries of redemption, that to be able to read with a clear and discerning eye the truths and lessons they were designed to teach, concerning the work and dispensation of Christ, is to reach the stature of a full-grown, ripened understanding in the things of God. . . . Let the notices of Old Testament history be viewed in their real connection with the scheme of grace revealed in the Gospel; let the field which it traverses, however limited in extent, and the scenes which it delineates, however unimportant to the natural eye, be regarded as that field and those scenes through which, as on a lower and common ground, God sought to make His people familiar with the truths and principles hereafter to be developed in the events of His everlasting kingdom; let this view be taken of the notices of Old Testament history, which is the one His first act was to advance against mount Zion, the fortress of Jerusalem (inheritance or habitation of Salem, or, habitation of peace, peaceful city), which had hitherto continued in possession of the Jebusites, and was regarded as impregnable. This place he reduced and converted into his own residence, as the city of David, at the same time enlarging Jerusalem and establishing it as the metropolis of the whole kingdom; a stroke of good policy, both on account of the strength of this place as a fortress, and also because, by its central position, it was well adapted to contribute towards the maintenance of the newly restored harmony among the tribes. Herein we may at the same time recognise a further step in the establishment of the kingdom of God upon earth, and also a lively prefiguration (and therefore, considered altogether, a true historical type) of the conquests of Messiah, who seizes the strongholds of Satan, and converts one portion of the world after another into the spiritual Zion.' And David went on and grew great, and the Lord God of Hosts was with him.' Hiram, king of Tyre, despatched an embassy to him, and at the same time sent workmen and valuable building materials for the construction of a palace. The faithfulness and piety of the new monarch were displayed on occasion of two powerful invasions of the Philistines, who came up and pitched in the valley of Rephaim, south-west of Jerusalem on the borders of Judah and Benjamin.* On both occasions the enemy was repulsed with great loss, first at a place called, from this victory, Baal-perazim (i. e. the place_of_breaches, scattering, or discomfiture)—and afterwards, at the Baca, or Bak, trees. In each case the loyal Scripture itself requires us to take, and then how high a character do not one and all of them come to possess ! What a dignity and importance attaches even to the least of them! The smallest motions on the earth's surface acquire a sort of greatness, when regarded as examples of the law of gravitation; since, then, even the fall of an apple from the tree appears connected with the revolution of the planets in their courses. And, in like manner, the relation which the historical facts of ancient Scripture bear to the glorious work and kingdom of Christ, gives to the least of them such a character of sacred dignity and importance as brings them within the range of God's highest purposes, and renders them in reality the connecting links of that golden chain which unites heaven and earth. .. Thus may the typical transactions of Old Testament history, and symbolical institutions, be made to contribute most materially to the proper knowledge and perception of New Testament truths-even of such as are most plainly revealed there, and enter into the present experience of believers. For not only do they throw much light on the terms in which the doctrines of the Gospel are unfolded, but they also embody the ideas themselves, in such a distinct and tangible form, that the mind can frame to itself more vivid perceptions of them than it could otherwise do, and with increased confidence can make them the objects of its faith.'-FAIRBAIRN, Typology of Scripture, part i. ch. 3, 6. [Others, however, place this valley north or north-west of Jerusalem. See Smith's Dict. i. 990; iii. 1030.] In our version, herein following the Rabbins, mulberry-trees.' The tree is now supposed to be either a kind of balsam plant, or a kind of poplar. king of Israel sought and obtained the Divine direction as to the conduct of the battle. Under these favourable circumstances, David determined to bring up to Jerusalem the ark of God, which had so long remained in the house of Abinadab (p. 193), at Gibeah, or the hill in or near Kirjath-jearim. The design was good and noble, being no less than that of placing in the newly acquired capital of the kingdom the sacred symbol of Him whom David devoutly recognised as the Divine Sovereign of Israel; and the occasion was celebrated by a large public procession, with every variety of music. The proceedings, however, were marred by certain irregularities inadvertently committed. According to the law (Num. iv. 15; vii. 9), the ark ought to have been carried on the shoulders of the Levites, but it was now set upon a new cart, driven by Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab; and when they came to Nachon's threshing-floor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it, for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.' Distressed and alarmed at this event, David refrained from conducting the ark any further, and left it at the house of Obed-edom, the Gittite (i. e. of Gath *), where it remained three months. But afterwards, taking encouragement from the fact that the presence of the ark was attended by a manifest blessing from the Lord upon Obed-edom and his family, David proceeded with the prosecution of his design; and, at the head of a solemn procession, conducted the ark, in due form, with sacrifices, to Mount Zion, having previously made a new tent or tabernacle for its reception. On this occasion, he laid aside his royal robes, and, being clothed only with a linen ephod, danced before the ark; a transaction for which, supposing it to be beneath the royal dignity, he was visited with a severe rebuke from his wife Michal; who, however, was made to feel that she had in this matter exceeded the bounds of her duty. The 24th Psalm was composed by David expressly for this occasion; perhaps also the 15th and the 68th. David's next care was to provide a more suitable edifice for the lodgment of the ark, and as the centre of Divine worship. His own palace had been built in a style of magnificence, with the aid of Hiram; and well might the pious king say to the prophet Nathan, as he did, 'See now, I dwell in a house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains.' The [Probably of Gath-rimmon, a city of Dan assigned to the Kohathites, Josh. xxi. 24.] |