Read 2 Samuel 18:1-18

By the end of 1944, it is likely that both the Allies and Axis in their respective heart of hearts knew that the Allies would ultimately win the Second World War. The Allies were pressing from multiple directions in Europe, while they were island hopping closer to the Japanese Home Islands in the Pacific. The Axis’ demise was inevitable.

So too was Absalom’s demise, seen from the Biblical perspective. We have seen evidence in previous chapters of God working to ultimately frustrate Absalom’s plans, protect King David, and set about Absalom’s demise. In chapter 18, that is exactly what happens, demonstrating that anyone who tries to take the place of God’s Anointed One as king will face a similar end.

In the closing verses of chapter 17, we learnt that Absalom had appointed a new general and led his army out to battle King David and his forces (2 Samuel 17:25-6).

David divided his army into thirds, and set generals with significant military experience over each (vv.1-2). David then announced that he would march out to battle with them (v.2). But his men refused to hear this, declaring that “you are worth ten thousand of us” and telling him to stay in the city (vv.3-4). No doubt, David would have been a particular target in any battle, as killing him would end the conflict.

Despite Absalom’s many and varied outrages against King David and his family, he continued to demonstrate a desire to preserve Absalom’s life, despite the difficulty this would cause for his continued reign. David ordered his generals to “deal gently for my sake with the young man Absalom” in his army’s hearing (v.5). The phrasing suggests that Absalom was mistaken and misguided. Sentimentality (understandably) seems to be giving David a continued blind spot when it comes to Absalom.

The report of the battle is rather short and to the point, because the issue is theological not (strictly) historical. The two forces met in battle in a forest, and David’s forces won. The forest fought on the side of David, devouring more than David’s troops (vv.6-8).

While factually a forest environment could well have played tactically into David’s hands, I think the point implied here is that even the forces of Creation were directed by God towards Absalom’s defeat.

The text hones in on the definitive event which ultimately sealed victory for David and his forces. That of Absalom’s demise.

Absalom had been in some way attempting to direct the battle perhaps, and found himself directly in contact with the enemy (v.9). Despite a swift turnaround of his mule (the royal vehicle of choice), he found himself caught in the branches of an oak tree, stuck while his ride kept going from under him (v.9).

The scene is almost comical. But the situation was not. David’s troops were in a bind (so was Absalom). Here was the rebellious leader trapped, but David had told them not to harm him. So they punted the decision up to Joab (vv.9-13).

Joab was a man of action, and understood that David’s reign would not be secure while Absalom lived, so he grabbed three spears and killed Absalom while he was trapped in the tree (v.14). His armour bearers joined him in making sure that Absalom was truly done (v.15).

After this, Joab called off the battle, bringing his troops back to his side (v.16). After all, the battle was won. Absalom was defeated and dead. The rebellion had lost their figurehead, and so would melt away like snow in the heat of day.

And so it was. Absalom was thrown in a pit in the forest, with a cairn of stones thrown on top as his grave (v.17). Absalom’s burial was one reserved for criminals and enemies of God (cf. Josh 7:26, 8:29). Absalom’s army fled.

His only monument was a pillar he had erected himself in his own memory before his sons were born (v.18). His actual burial plot was the place of a criminal.

This is the ultimate end of all those who seek to overturn God’s Anointed One. The self-appointment which seizes the throne of our own hearts, erects monuments to ourselves in our lives, and seeks to kill God’s righteous king. After all, what is sin but rebellion against God and his reign?

No rebel can succeed, for God will fight to destroy them. The end is inevitable, a matter of history (to be played out) and theology. God will destroy us if we do not repent and bow the knee to Christ, God’s Anointed King.

We should give thanks that Jesus died on our behalf, himself also stuck to a tree. But for our sins, not his. And Christ’s death did not result in his defeat, but in his ultimate victory over our enemies sin and death. Absalom was buried in a stony pit, but Jesus returned to life, and now sits enthroned on high.

Christ’s death means that, through trusting in him, we do not join in Absalom’s demise.

Read 2 Samuel 17:23-29

The saying goes that you know who your true friends are when you go through a time of adversity. True friends will stick by you and support you in the difficult times, not just the easy ones. Deserters will head for the exit as soon as trouble rears its head.

In the closing verses of 2 Samuel 17, we read of Supporters who stuck by David in his hour of need. We also see a supporter of Absalom desert his cause, in a very final and definitive way, perhaps recognising that the gig was up. It reminds us of our need to stick close to our Saviour through thick and thin.

The events of chapter 17 to date appear to occur within the space of a day or so. Absalom, entering Jerusalem, was counselled by Ahithophel to immediately send a party to attack David while he was still on the run. Hushai, David’s “inside man” in Absalom’s court, advised the opposite. 

Absalom, for reasons known to us (God’s sovereign hand) but not to the others, preferred Hushai’s counsel to Ahithophel’s. Nevertheless, Hushai ensured word got to David (via an underground communication network which was nearly busted) to warn him of the two possible courses of action Absalom could take, so David could act accordingly.

With David safely informed, the text switches back to Jerusalem and the reaction of Ahithophel to Absalom’s decision. Ahithophel “saddled his donkey and went off home to his own city. He set his house in order and hanged himself, and he died and was buried in the tomb of his father” (v.23).

I do not think this was a magnificent temper tantrum. It is possible that Ahithophel thought that he would be the real power behind the throne, and when Absalom went against his wishes, realised his own dreams of power were dashed.

However, it is probably more likely that Ahithophel could see the handwriting on the wall. He could see that delay played into David’s hands, and realised that the whole venture was doomed to ultimate disaster. So he decided to end his own life before David’s vengeful troops ended it for him.

Essentially, Ahithophel deserted Absalom’s cause when he saw that times were about to get tough.

Contrasted to this is the support which David received. David retired further from the River Jordan to Mahanaim (v.24), which was Ish-bosheth’s capital in his own ill-fated attempt to seize the throne. Absalom assembled his army and crossed the Jordan himself, appointed a new general (Amasa rather than the experienced Joab, another portent of disaster), and encamped in Gilead (vv.25-6).

At Mahanaim, David received support from three very different sources. First was Shobi, “son of Nahash from Rabbah of the Ammonites”, second was “Machir the son of Ammiel from Lo-debar” and third was “Barzillai the Gileadite from Rogelim” (v.27).

What is notable is who these men represented. Shobi was an Ammonite, a pagan vassal of David’s (2 Samuel 10). Potentially Absalom’s rebellion could have allowed him to regain independence. 

Machir was formerly a sympathiser of Saul’s clan, because he housed Mephibosheth (2 Sam 9:4-5). He could have been tempted by a little dynastic revenge. 

Barzillai was a wealthy and elderly civil servant (2 Sam. 19:31-37). He had nothing to gain.

Yet all three brought “beds, basins, and earthen vessels, wheat, barley, flour, parched grain, beans and lentils, honey and curds and sheep and cheese from the herd, for David and the people with him to eat” (vv.28-9) for they understood David and his followers’ need in this hour of trial.

They could have kept away. There was great risk in supporting the potential losing party, and something to be gained by opposing David for two. Yet they did not. They supported God’s Anointed King and stood by him, even to their own immediate and potentially greater future cost.

They understood that David was their Covenant King. He was the one God had put over them, through one means or another. He had every right to expect and require their obedience and help, even if risky. Given the reverse, David would do the same for them.

As followers of God’s Anointed King, Jesus, the same holds for us too. Times in this life are not always easy. Sometimes, there is a cost to following Jesus. It could be reputational. Financial. Personal. Physical, even. Sometimes immediate, sometimes potentially greater in the future.

But Jesus is our Covenant King. He is the one who can expect and require our support and obedience in this world, despite the potential for gain or avoiding loss by siding with the enemy, or staying on the sidelines.

After all, did not Jesus give his own life for us, his Covenant People? If he paid that cost for our eternal security, then we can confess his name even if it costs us something now. The kingdom to come is a far greater reward!

Like Ahithophel, we can see that this world’s gig is up. Better to support God’s Anointed King than be crushed in the coming final battle.

Read 2 Samuel 17:15-22

As I write this the house is otherwise empty. The children are at school and my wife is out. I know that they live in this house because the signs are everywhere. On my wife’s part, a house that does not look like a weird cross between a bachelor pad and a woodwork shop. On my childrens’ part, the artwork and crafts, and toys and bits of lego dangerously awaiting contact with my feet. While their presence is currently “hidden” in a sense, the evidence of their presence is all around me.

God’s sovereignty is a bit like that too. While the big picture parts are clear, the broad sweep of God’s sovereignty and his working out of events is often unclear. But if you look, there are signs of God’s providence and care for us everywhere. Hushai and David operated with the same constraint; knowing God’s sovereignty, but not knowing how it would play out. But God’s providence shines through in this passage, demonstrating God’s support for his anointed king and those who support him.

In the beginning of chapter 17, Hushai engaged in some subtle undermining of Ahithophel’s (likely successful) plan to crush the resistance to Absalom’s rebellion once and for all. At the end of verse 14, we learn that “the LORD had ordained to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, so that the LORD might bring harm upon Absalom.”

But while we know God’s intentions and his sovereign plans, neither Hushai nor David did. In fact, the text indicates that Hushai, through his immediate acts, did not know the deliberations that Absalom and the Israelite leadership under his banner conducted either. 

Hushai was not aware of the decision that Absalom had made, because he went to Zadok and Abiathar the priests and told them firstly what Ahithophel had counselled, and secondly what he had counselled instead (v.15). He did this not because of a need to emotionally unburden himself, but because King David needed to prepare for two possible contingencies, and the priests were the head of the information chain to David in exile.

On the one hand, if Absalom followed Ahithophel’s advice which was the worst case scenario, David needed to hide to avoid the looming “decapitation strike” planned (v.16). Alternatively, if Absalom followed Hushai’s advice, David needed to prepare for a major fixed battle.

The communication network sprung into action. Two men, Jonathan and Ahimaaz, were waiting at En-rogel a short walk south of the city (v.17). A female servant was dispatched (because nobody worries about where servants come and go) to transmit the warning.

Unfortunately, Jonathan and Ahimaaz were notables, unlike the servant, and they were spotted by a young man of Absalom’s camp, who went and told Absalom that something was up (v.18). The two men realised they were being followed, and so at Bahurim they snuck into a supporter’s place and asked to hide, which they did. Down a well (v.18).

The man’s wife threw a tarp over the well and spread some grain to cover the hiding place (v.19). It looked like just another day in sleepy Bahurim.

But Absalom’s trackers came rolling into town. Would the secret communications ring be uncovered? 

No! For when they asked the man’s wife if she had seen Jonathan and Ahimaaz, she deceived them by saying they had already gone on (v.20). When they could not find tracks to follow, they headed back, foiled, to Jerusalem.

With the coast clear, Jonathan and Ahimaaz were able to climb back out of the well (v.21). Straight away they headed to King David to provide him with the news from Hushai.

“They said to David, ‘Arise, and go quickly over the water, for thus and so has Ahithophel counselled against you’” (v.21). David did just that, and by morning he and his entire band of followers had crossed the Jordan to immediate safety (v.22).

The tale reads like a classic storyline with rising tension, climax, and resolution. For those involved, it was a very real event! They did not know God’s sovereign choices to bring down Absalom.

But taken as a whole, the passage shows signs of God’s providence littered throughout. Hushai gets word to the priests, who get it to David. Jonathan and Ahimaaz escape capture. David is forewarned of Absalom’s two courses of action, and can respond. Absalom does not seem the wiser as to what is going on under his nose to change course.

God was looking out for David, his anointed one, and David’s followers. It was there for them to look and see, and serve as an encouragement to them in dark days.

We don’t see all the parts of God’s sovereign plan; why he chooses some political leaders, why he prospers some church works and not others, why nations rise and fall in morality. But God’s providence watches out for the cause of his Anointed, King Jesus; and his followers, us, the Church. 

It is there for us to look and see. To be encouraged. To trust in God’s sovereign plan.

Read 2 Samuel 17:1-14

Courtroom drama makes good television or novels. Lawyers proposing different approaches to determining the case, the judge (or jury) determining the outcome. Who knows how the case will go? Ultimately, the true decider – the writer of the drama.

Two duelling counsel line up in this passage too, to try and convince Absalom the self-appointed king of the best approach for the way forward. Absalom to decide between them. But really, the ultimate decider is the author of the drama of Scripture – God. In this passage, we are reminded of God’s control over all things, and how the sceptre will not pass from his anointed king, even when things seem desperate.

At the end of chapter 16, David had fled Jerusalem and crossed exhausted, with his followers, the River Jordan. Absalom had entered Jerusalem and followed Ahithophel’s advice, which was considered “as if one consulted the word of God” (v.23).

The high esteem in which Ahithophel’s counsel was held sets up the drama that then played out between Ahithophel and Hushai.

In Ahithophel’s opinion, David was on the ropes and Absalom could quickly secure victory. He asked Absalom to let him pick a crack force of 12,000 men to quickly chase after David and his fleeing supporters (v.1). Ahithophel would strike while they were tired and exhausted, routing them, while Ahithophel killed only David (v.2). 

With David gone, David’s supporters would no longer have a focus or a purpose in resisting Absalom’s reign, and the conflict would be over (v.3). Absalom and the elders of Israel were impressed with Ahithophel’s argument. Let’s be honest, it makes good sense, even for those of us whose military “expertise” is limited to video games.

So why did Absalom pause? Why ask for a second opinion?

Because that is what Absalom did. Hushai was brought in, and Absalom outlined Ahithophel’s counsel, and then asked Hushai’s opinion (vv.5-6).

Now Hushai knew Ahithophel’s counsel, he could cast reasonable doubt on the whole exercise. Not surprisingly, considering Hushai was actually David’s “inside man”, he took the opposing view and suggested Ahithophel had it all wrong (v.7). Then he threw arguments into Ahithophel’s counsel like chucking sand into gears, to make it all seize up.

Firstly, Hushai suggested two reasons for caution. He reminded Absalom of how David and his band were mighty and experienced warriors and “enraged, like a bear robbed of her cubs in the field” (v.8). In other words, they would fight like wounded animals.

Since David was such an expert warrior, he had probably already slipped away from his followers to hide himself from capture anyway (vv.8-9). You cannot kill who you cannot find, especially in the dark of night (without drones and night vision goggles).

So, Hushai suggested, you could only imagine what would happen next. David can’t be found, Ahithophel’s troops are ambushed as they search, and some of Ahithophel’s crack troops are killed (v.9). What a blow for morale that would be! (v.10) It might cause everything to fall apart on a gamble.

Finally, Hushai played the trump card. He played Absalom himself. Or rather, Absalom’s vanity. Hushai suggested a better approach was to call out all Israel, with Absalom himself leading them into battle (v.11). Then Absalom (and “we” following him) would fall upon David wherever he was, and put an end to David, all his supporters, and his anti-rebellion (vv.12-13). 

Absalom would have his revenge! No need to placate the vanquished if there are no vanquished to placate.

Ahithophel’s arguments made good strategic sense. Hushai’s arguments played well to the audience, Absalom, a man so vain he really did think it was all about him. So Absalom decided to follow Hushai’s counsel, which he decided was better than Ahithophel’s (v.14).

Why did Absalom do so? Why go with the second opinion?

“For the LORD had ordained to defeat the good counsel of Ahithophel, so that the LORD might bring harm upon Absalom” (v.14). Ah. That is why.

Absalom may have been the decider between the two duelling counsel. But God was the real decider. God writes the story. Absalom was like the character in a court drama. He decided as he was ordained to decide by the writer.

And that is the lesson for us, too. Even when it seems like the Church is on the ropes, God is in control, writing the story. Even when it seems God’s Kingdom is in dire straits, God is in control writing the story.

The same God who decreed the “sceptre shall not depart from Judah” (Gen. 49:10), but would forever remain in the hands of God’s Anointed (lit. “Messiah”; see Psalm 2).

Just as the prequel king (David) of the True King (Jesus) looked to be in trouble but was not because God ordained it, so too the True King’s kingdom, even when it looks in trouble, is firm and secure. Because God ordains it. Not necessarily with flashy signs and wonders, but working away, behind the scenes.

God ordains. Jesus reigns. The story is written.

Read 2 Samuel 16:15-23

Recently I enjoyed one of those father-son bonding moments as I watched some of the Star Wars movies with my older son. There are famous scenes aplenty, but one which always sticks with me (and is one of many online memes) is where Emperor Palpatine talks about his plans to finally destroy the rebellion. Ever the schemer, after manipulating various events, Palpatine states “everything is proceeding as I have foreseen”.

The idea of a puppet master (usually sinister) pervades thinking today, from shady cabals to Deep States and other conspiracies. The truth is something different, and in a sense far better. Because there is someone in ultimate control, and not in a sinister way – God. Ahithophel’s advice to Absalom is evidence of this, and reminds us of the ultimate betrayer, Judas Iscariot, whose act of betrayal was all part of God’s Plan and bidding for our salvation.

While David and his supporters had largely fled Jerusalem toward the Jordan River (apart from a “resistance” which remained), Absalom entered into Jerusalem to take up his prize (v.15) with Ahithophel his adviser.

Ahithophel was a betrayer. His counsel should have been kept only for David and his anointed successor, not for an upstart attempting to seize the throne. He was not switching employers and ignoring a “do not compete” clause. He was, in the truest sense, rebelling not just against King David but against God.

As Absalom and Ahithophel entered Jerusalem, Hushai appeared before Absalom. The author reminds us that Hushai is “David’s friend” (v.16), since Hushai is not a betrayer but a secret agent On His Majesty’s Service.

We can see this in the ambiguous way Hushai muscles into Absalom’s graces. “Long live the king! Long live the king!” (v.16) Hushai said to Absalom. Yes, but which one?

When Absalom questioned Hushai’s new-found loyalty to him given his past support of David (v.17), Hushai again ambiguously responded. 

“No, for whom the LORD and this people and all the men of Israel have chosen, his I will be, and with him I will remain. And again, whom should I serve? Should it not be his son? As I have served your father, so I will serve you” (vv.18-19).

To quote another Star Wars character, what Hushai told Absalom was true… from a certain point of view.

Hushai was in, but the focus of this passage is on Ahithophel the betrayer. And it is to him the text turns again as Absalom sought advice on how to cement his authority (v.20).

Ahithophel’s advice was to have intimate relations with David’s concubines to show he was cutting all ties with David (v.21). There would be no reconciliation after this act.

Apparently in those days, the harem passed to the king’s successor, though potentially more as a symbol than in substance. By acting in this way, Absalom was making it clear he viewed himself as David’s successor, who was now officially “dethroned” and there would be no kiss and make up between Absalom and David from now on.

So Absalom, liking the idea, very publicly did as advised in a way to make sure it was “broadcast” through all Israel (v.22).

But Ahithophel’s advice was considered very highly, so even though it was in Absalom’s baser interests to follow it, “the counsel that Ahithophel gave was as if one consulted the word of God” (v.23) and esteemed by both David and Ahithophel.

How ironic. Because in a sense, Ahithophel’s counsel was as if he had consulted the word of God, specifically 2 Samuel 12:11-12 (which he hadn’t because it likely wasn’t written down yet).

“Thus says the LORD, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbour, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun. For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.’ ”

Ahithophel was a betrayer of God’s Anointed King, King David. But he was also at the same time doing God’ bidding, fulfilling the very thing God promised would fall upon David for his sinful adultery with Bathsheba and murder of Uriah. This was judgement on the Covenant King, David, at the hand of God.

David of course deserved it. A millennium later, another Covenant King was also betrayed by one of his close counsel, but he did not deserve it. Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus (1 Cor. 11:23) to the religious leaders. But even this was part of God’s definite plan (Acts 2:23). 

It was God’s will that betrayer Judas Iscariot would betray Jesus, but it was God’s doing. And that is where hope shines in judgement’s darkness. “He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?” (Rom. 8:32).

Even God’s enemies can only do God’s will. And if God is for us, who can stand against us?

Read 2 Samuel 16:1-15

The hardship of someone can bring out the worst in others. Whether it comes through manipulation and lying, or curses and “you deserve this” attitudes, the road of difficulty is sadly sometimes one we walk with unhelpful companions.

David’s exodus from Jerusalem brought him encouragement from faithful servants, but also encounters with manipulators and a man who took delight in David’s apparent downfall. While these examples certainly point us away from behaving like that to those we know in hard times, they also remind us of the true king who suffered curses and lies to reverse the curse of our sins.

As David fled from Jerusalem, he was encouraged by support from a Gittite, the priests, and his counsellor Hushai. In the midst of a trialling time, when David recognised he was receiving discipline from God for his prior sins, this must have been like a cup of cool water on a hot day.

So not surprisingly, David’s guard was down when Ziba approached him. Ziba was the servant of Mephibosheth, and was responsible (at David’s command) to take care of the lands of Saul for Mephibosheth’s benefit (v.1, cf. ch.9).

Ziba came bearing gifts on donkeys of food and drink (v.1). No doubt welcome in the rush to leave. No doubt David appreciated Ziba’s apparent thoughtfulness (v.2).

Ziba’s presence led naturally to Mephibosheth, and where he was. Ziba responded that “he remains in Jerusalem, for he said, ‘Today the house of Israel will give me back the kingdom of my father’” (v.3).

Let’s be blunt. It was a lie. Mephibosheth would hardly have expected Absalom to hand the kingdom to him, when the desires of Israel were for Absalom as king! But Ziba was the gift-giver present, and Mephibosheth was not there to defend himself.

So naturally, David sided with Ziba, and handed Mephibosheth’s lands to the servant (v.4). Ziba benefited for himself by manipulating David in a time of weakness, like a loan shark preying upon the poor.

Down the road at Bahurim, a relative of Saul’s named Shimei took the opportunity to curse David (v.5). He threw stones and abuse at David (vv.6-7), suggesting that David was reaping the consequences of his seizing the throne from Saul’s line many years ago (v.8). He probably never believed that David had nothing to do with Abner or Ish-bosheth’s death (chs. 3 and 4).

All the abuse got a little much for David’s followers, and Abishai suggested that Shimei’s abuse called for capital punishment (v.9). After all, headless bodies do not cry out curses.

David’s response indicates his belief in God’s greater purposes. He told Abishai to stay his hand, because God had caused Shimei to come out to curse (vv.10-11). It was not for David or Abishai to question God’s purposes in Shimei’s harsh words.

Instead, David’s focus was directed elsewhere. “It may be that the LORD will look on the wrong done to me, and that the Lord will repay me with good for his cursing today” (v.12). Interestingly, “the wrong done to me” is traditionally in Hebrew “upon my iniquity”.

Either way, David is focused heavenward to God, not cross-valley to the abuser. He trusts that God will repay him good for the (unfounded) abuse hurled at him. Or, alternatively, he trusts that God will repay him good despite the cursing he deserves – not based on the false claims of Shimei, but the real sins of previous chapters.

Either way, God gives his people mercy and grace, even when they deserve the curse.

So onward David and his band trudged, as Shimei followed along, flinging more stones, more curses, and dust at them (v.13), to arrive weary and tired at the Jordan river (v.14).

It should come as no surprise that I do not see either of these men as “positive role models”. One manipulated for his own gain, the other cursed and abused a man in his hour of need. Neither of these are appropriate ways to treat someone going through difficult times.

Sadly, that is all too often a temptation for us. While we may not use someone’s desperate times to make ourselves richer, some certainly do, even while claiming to be part of Christ’s Body. May that never be said of us!

Nor should we argue that someone’s hard times are the result of past events! We do not know God’s providence, and whether these events are discipline, judgement, or the refiner’s fire.

But we need to remember that this is a story of King David, God’s Anointed. King David points us forward to the true Great King, Jesus, the better and greater king after God’s own heart.

Just as David took Shimei’s curses instead of lashing out, Jesus took the curses and lies of his people when he was arrested, tried, and convicted by lies. He did so to bear a greater curse, the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us when he was nailed to the Cross (Galatians 3:13), so we might be free.

Read 2 Samuel 15:13-37

A song on one of our CDs at home (remember those?) poses these questions to remind us of the importance of trusting God in good times and bad. “Shall I take from Your hand Your blessings / Yet not welcome any pain? / Shall I thank You for days of sunshine / Yet grumble in days of rain? / Shall I love You in times of plenty / Then leave You in days of drought? / Shall I trust when I reap a harvest / But when winter winds blow, then doubt?”

David would agree with the sentiment of that song. When Absalom rebelled, David took the wise course and left Jerusalem. But his faith in God shone through in his actions, and was encouraged by many who flocked to his cause. David’s flight reminds us of the world’s abandonment of Christ, the true king. It also reminds us that we find encouragement, and give encouragement, when we are supported or give support in times when faith comes under fire.

Absalom had sounded the horn, announcing his rebellion. Many flocked to his banner, convinced by his smooth talk. In Jerusalem, King David recognised that Absalom had seized the hearts of Israel, and fled Jerusalem with his servants (vv.13-17). By doing so, he was also sparing Jerusalem (and the inhabitants who could not flee) from the ravages of war.

David stopped at the outskirts and watched his supporters march out (v.18). As he did, he stopped Ittai, a Philistine from Gath, who was marching out with him despite only serving him a short time (vv.19-20).

Ittai’s response would have encouraged David in that dark hour. “As the LORD lives, and as my lord the king lives, wherever my lord the king shall be, whether for death or for life, there also will your servant be” (v.21). This was a double oath, on God and David, that he would stand by David the only real king in that land (not Absalom). His children would share in his fate, come what may (v.22).

While many mourned as David’s people left for safety (v.23), David was also supported by the priests. Zadok and Abiathar, with the Ark (and the Levites), joined David’s flight (v.24). 

However, David sent them back. He knew there was no secret talisman to God’s favour and presence. If God favoured David, then David would see God’s place of presence again; if not, then not (vv.25-6). 

Instead, David trusted God and trusted that the priests would serve as underground supporters and spies for him in Jerusalem, if God willed it (vv.27-9). Trust in God, use your brains.

Nevertheless, this was a time of sadness, as David ascended the Mount of Olives (v.30). More so when he heard that Ahithophel had joined the rebellion, and prayed that God would turn his counsel to foolishness for Absalom (v.31).

But no sooner has one advisor dumped him than another arrives. Hushai the Archite came to David, saddened at events (v.32). David saw an opportunity. Rather than accompany David, where he would be a burden, David sent Hushai to Jerusalem with instructions to get onside with Absalom and then undermine Ahithophel’s counsel (vv.33-4).

There, Hushai could keep David informed of Absalom’s plans and intent through the priestly spy network (vv.35-6, cf. vv.27-9).

So, a faithful friend and advisor to David, Hushai went home, presumably changed his clothes, and entered Jerusalem just as the victorious Absalom was marching up from Hebron with his entourage to take possession of the capital himself (v.37).

While all seems in a bad way, David could see that all was not lost. God answered prayer by sending Hushai just when David wondered how he could foil the wise counsel of Ahithophel. God demonstrated that the clergy were on his side. God demonstrated that Ittai was with him, even at the potential cost to him and his family when he could have slunk back to Gath unharmed.

These show us that God is with his people in the good times and bad. When we go through tough times, when it seems our faith is under fire, God does not abandon us. God sends us comforters to support and encourage us in the trenches.

And we can support and comfort those doing it tough. When we do so, we are God’s hands and feet to our fellow believers going through troubles.

Because going through troubles is part of this present life. It is part of the effects of sin, and it is part of our sanctification for God’s glory. But it is our road because it was the road Christ walked before us, for our salvation.

Like David, in sin our hearts were swayed away from Jesus, the true King, the one who also wept on the Mount of Olives, but for those who rejected him (Luke 19:41-44) and would soon crucify him.

Yet Christ was faithful unto death for us and our salvation. And through trusting in him, we will one day emerge from the fire, cleansed and purified, faith made sight.

Read 2 Samuel 15:1-12

Apparently 2024 is the year where the most number of people in history will vote, with many elections scheduled across the world. That means an almost as large number of politicians pretending to be “one of the people”, shaking hands, kissing babies, and announcing simplistic solutions to difficult problems. Hopefully, when the votes are counted, the (ideally) free and fairly elected rulers are respected, rather than rebelled against.

There is plenty of the political touch in 2 Samuel 15, as Absalom begins a political schmoozing campaign to claim power. Not by free and fair elections though. By rebellion against God’s anointed king. While I am certainly not suggesting all politicians are evil, Absalom’s political manoeuvres and evil end goals remind us that sin and rebellion are often subtle and seductive, leading us away from the green pastures of fellowship with God and his anointed one, Jesus.

In chapter 14 we saw the return of Absalom from exile, and the return of Absalom into official public approval (whatever David may have personally thought about his son murdering son). The passage also pointed out to us that Absalom was an appealing and attractive man with an attractive family, who appealed to the ladies and the men alike. The sort of potential candidate that political operatives look for to sell their agenda.

Except Absalom appeared to be his own political operative. And Absalom was on the move.

To show he was a man of substance and note, Absalom “got himself a chariot and horses, and fifty men to run before him” (v.1) to improve his image. It was important to look like a man who was important.

The next step in the campaign was to attract the voters. Absalom would rise early like a common worker “and stand beside the way of the gate” (v.2). Essentially, like standing outside the court today. There he would engage with any traveller from Israel bringing a legal case to the king, with his concerned-frowny face and nod as the concerned party told their tale of woe (vv.2-3).

Having conveyed his supposed empathy with the claimant, he would sigh theatrically and bemoan the terrible injustice despite the rightness of their cause when there was nobody to hear and decide the case (ie, the king, v.3). Why if only Absalom were appointed a judge in the land, he would get the wheels of justice moving! (v.4)

Of course, while Absalom was a high-born fellow, he was also a man of the people. When the commoner would start to bow and scrape as appropriate to their better, Absalom would “would put out his hand and take hold of him and kiss him” (v.5), identifying himself as their equal. Great or small, near or far, the same treatment (v.6). 

What a man of the people! No wonder he “stole the hearts of the men of Israel” (v.6) compared to that old, out of touch King David. Time for a change?

After four years of this, Absalom contrived an excuse to get away from Jerusalem to Hebron, mixing in a little fake religious conviction about fulfilling vows and worshipping God (vv.7-9). Like Saul and Israel before him, Absalom was happy to use religion to get what he wanted.

But Hebron was not the destination for religious worship. It was the destination for rebellion! Where better to start than where David’s reign as Israel’s king had started. Messengers were sent throughout the land to warn them of the upcoming announcement of a new king (v.10), while innocent invited guests came along to unknowingly lend an air of officiality (v.11). Finally, Absalom called to himself Ahithophel, David’s adviser, to ease the succession (v.12).

Everything was proceeding as Absalom had foreseen. A plan for evil and rebellion against God’s anointed ruler. A plan which fulfilled God’s very words of warning and judgement from 12:10-12, God’s own foreseeing and foreordaining. Yet Absalom is responsible for his sin, not God.

Absalom’s subtle moves show us the way in which sin and rebellion against God foments and simmers. In our own lives, in the world, and sadly, in the church.

Absalom’s seductive words of compassion and “if only” sound a little like the Devil’s tempting words in the garden. Questioning David’s (God’s) goodness, suggesting things would be better if someone else was in charge. And then, the rebellion.

So too in our lives. We question God’s goodness to ourselves, and wish that we were in charge. Then we could rule as we wish! Then we are in rebellion.

And this too in the world and the church. Questioning the goodness of the Law of Christ, and the Reign of Christ. Questioning the goodness of the Anointed One. A few slight suggestions for change to please everyone, and get people back in the sanctuary doors. Rebellion.

All this fulfils God’s decrees, but we will be held accountable for rebelling against God’s anointed one, Jesus. Who, unlike David, did not sin but instead sacrificed himself as one of us, that we might be one with him.

Read 2 Samuel 14:25-33

One former business in the Wellington Region had a slogan that it was “the putting right that counts”. What they meant was that it was easy to sell you a fridge, but where they really demonstrated their value was what happened when it broke, because that would be when they made things right.

In the second half of chapter 14 of 2 Samuel we see the continued “putting right” of relations between King David and his brother-murderer son, Absalom. Except it seems to be part of a scheme. And while the hand of providence appears to hover, making Absalom look like a man who dodged a bullet (or had it scrape his ear?), the truth is that all this putting right just makes things wrong. And will allow things to go terribly wrong. Such is the cost of choosing good looks and vibes over character and Christlikeness.

Absalom was back in Israel, but not back in favour. He had killed his brother out of revenge for Amnon’s violation of his sister, then fled to a foreign land. Through Joab’s scheming, David had permitted Absalom to return to Israel, and to Jerusalem (v..1-23). But not too close; David still forbade Absalom from entering his presence (v.24).

Here we pick up the story, with an interesting and foreboding sidenote. Absalom was a heartthrob, handsome and without blemish (v.25). Luscious locks that make us bald men green with envy and the ladies swoon (v.26). Good looking kids; three sons and a beautiful daughter named in honour of his beautiful sister (v.27). What was not to like?

One downside. Absalom was not in favour with Dad. Two years in Jerusalem without seeing King David (v.28)! This part of his public image needed putting right.

Where to turn? Joab had been helpful before (vv.2-3), perhaps he would again. Absalom sent for Joab to come to see him, so he could work his magic (v.29). Joab would not come.

Absalom sent again. Joab did not come (v.29). Whatever advantage Joab saw in bringing Absalom back two years ago, it did not exist now.

What to do? Joab and Absalom were neighbours! Absalom sent his servants to set his fields on fire to get his attention (v.30). Quite the burning platform. Sure enough this time, Joab responded (v.31).

Absalom brushed past the small matter of arson to get to the point. He wanted Joab to act as his messenger to King David, asking why they could not meet. In fact, Absalom said,  it would be better to be dead than in this “halfway house” so David should choose whether he wanted Absalom dead or not (v.32). Why bother coming back from foreign exile to home detention of a sort?

Absalom was of course taking a calculated gamble here. David had not executed his son before when he had the chance. Five years had passed. Absalom rightly believed David would officially bury the hatchet, and not in his back.

Absalom was right. Joab went to the king with Absalom’s message. We do not know what was said, but we do know that David summoned Absalom (v.33). Absalom bowed on the ground and did a little fawning. The king kissed Absalom, giving him his official recognition (v.33).

Public restoration complete. In the public’s eyes, all was restored between King and son. Things had been put right. But they were terribly, terribly wrong.

Why? For two reasons. Firstly, as we have noted repeatedly in David’s post-Bathsheba reign, David refused to act with justice when it came to his household. He failed to impose judgement on Amnon. When Absalom exacted revenge, he failed again. And now, in restoring Absalom publicly, he had removed the last chance for justice again.

Secondly, because Absalom clearly had an agenda. Verses 25 to 27 hint at what is coming. The handsome and good looking young man with the attractive family. Providence seems to smile upon him. Now he is restored to the king. Maybe God had big plans for this man, a bigger leadership role to play. Hmm. I think we know what is coming next.

 And that is the problem with picking leaders based on good looks and vibes. The world looks to the outside, God looks to the heart. We should too. Plenty of charismatic people have led churches, corporations, communities, and countries into disaster. It is not good looks that set you apart for great things, or seeming strokes of “good luck” or “providence” that means God must be with “x person” for “y role”.

After all, if it was, the suffering servant Jesus would not have had “no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him” that we would despise and reject him (Is 53:2). Yet God’s great victory over his enemies is through Christ, not a heartthrob.

Our leaders and personal lives should pursue character and Christlikeness, not “the Absalom touch.” Then, humbly submitting ourselves to Christ, things will ultimately work together for right, not wrong.

Read 2 Samuel 14:1-24

There are ways to get things done which are wise according to God’s ways, as pronounced in God’s Word, and there are ways to get things done which are wise according to the world’s ways. The two usually do not line up very well, thanks to sin. Sadly, worldly wisdom often rules the roost in our own lives, and in the way that the church operates in the world today.

There is nothing new about being swayed by worldly wisdom. Often it calls to us with its call on our feelings over the call of our conscience. David came into contact with worldly wisdom in 2 Samuel 14, over Joab’s desire to bring Absalom back into the fold. While David saw that it was Joab’s scheming, he let his feelings sway his conscience.

Amnon lay dead, and Absalom had wisely (in a pragmatic sense) made the right move in fleeing to another land. David’s heart seemed to be in some conflict. On the one hand, his heart went out to Absalom (13:39-14:1). On the other hand, David seemed reluctant to bring Absalom back, perhaps because he also did not exactly want to reconcile with him. The underlying Hebrew is vague here. Perhaps reflecting, in truth, a conflict in David’s heart.

Joab on the other hand seemed to want Absalom back in town (v.1). Joab sent for a “wise” woman in Tekoa to come and play a part in convincing David to bring Absalom back home (v.2). He told her how to dress, how to act, and what to say in a court hearing (vv.2-3). 

Perhaps Joab had seen Nathan’s little story of previous chapters in action, and decided to recycle the plot.

In came the woman to see King David, and call upon his kingly wisdom and justice (v.4). She played her part well.

A widow, you see, reliant upon her “sons” for her prosperity (v.5). Except her two “sons” got into a fight in the field, and one slayed the other in a sudden rush of passion (v.6). Now her whole clan wanted to kill the other “son” in vengeance for her other son’s death (v.7). Except this is just a smokescreen, to “destroy the heir also” so that on her death they get to split her family’s inheritance up among themselves (v.7).

King David’s passion for justice stirred, and he promised to support the woman (vv.8-10). The woman asked David to go on oath to protect her remaining son, which David did (v.11).

Then the “oh by the way”. The woman casually points out that while the King is happy to intercede for her, his own inaction towards his son is hurting the nation (vv.12-13). We will all die, but God seems to find ways to bring back the banished (a living death) as with her own “son” (v.14). But these words are softened with flatteries about the king’s justice and angelic provision to try and make it seem like an aside to her own “plight” (vv.15-17).

The King could see what was going on, so he asked her if Joab was her puppet master (v.18). The woman then took a long-winded route to say “yes” (vv.19-20).

Despite this, David’s feelings overcame his conscience. He abandoned justice for murder (Absalom’s execution) for having him home again. But not too close. Joab was to bring Absalom back, but Absalom was still banished from David’s sight (vv.21-4). 

Joab got his wish. David, at least in some respects, his own wish too. Bloodshed could take a back seat to family blood. Wisdom ruled the day, or did it?

There was plenty of wisdom on display in this chapter. Joan’s plotting to sway the King. The woman’s words to sway the king in favour of her “son” and, in reality, of Absalom. David’s wisdom in spotting the real story.

But not godly wisdom. For the two stories are not alike. Manslaughter and murder are different things. The Law certainly distinguished; there was mercy for manslaughter, but justice for murder. 

Absalom was a cold-blooded murderer. Avoiding God’s justice for feelings is not mercy, but sentimentality. David was unwise, led by worldly wisdom. He did not act, he was led.

That is what worldly wisdom does. It leads us where our feelings want to go, not where God’s Word leads us. It leads us by the nose to foolishness, sin, and its consequences. Professing wisdom of a worldly sort, we become fools.

Schemes and plots are not wisdom. Sentimental acts, ungoverned by God’s Word, are not wisdom either. Worldly programmes and plans are not wisdom.

God’s wisdom might seem foolish to the world, but it is the way to life (1 Cor. 1:18). It is through God’s wisdom, not man’s wisdom, that God planned and accomplished our salvation. And God has shared that wisdom with us through his Word.

God’s Word, not the world, is full of nuggets of wisdom. In God’s Word, not worldly schemes and plans, we find the wise way to go.