Read 2 Samuel 21:1-14

We have not watched the television news for years. Not because of any specific objection to the bias which the media routinely shows, but simply because of the horrific scenes which they so often show. There is enough pain in my family’s world already without importing more of it to affect their innocence or their dreams. My children will have more than their fill of it when they are older, sadly.

But while we can switch the television news off, we cannot escape gruesomeness in life, nor does the Bible skirt over it. This passage in 2 Samuel 21 confronts a gruesome event during David’s reign, when covenant curses which Saul brought upon Israel had to be dealt with. This same passage contrasts Saul’s covenant breaking with David’s covenant keeping, and reminds us that our own covenant breaking required a gruesome death too – that of David’s greater son, Jesus, for us.

The events in chapters 21 onwards of 2 Samuel do not follow on chronologically from the previous chapters. Rather, they are events which occurred but which help flesh out and sum up aspects of David’s reign as king over Israel.

The first event is the story of how Saul’s actions brought disaster upon Israel, and the solution required. It is likely that these events occurred in the early years of David’s reign over Israel.

Ominously, “there was a famine in the days of David for three years, year after year” (v.1). While our modern interest in weather prediction and meteorology might deceive us, this was actually a sign of God’s displeasure and indicated they had breached the covenant (Deut. 28:23-24).

David did not know what the issue was, so sought an answer from God, who mercifully answered that “there is bloodguilt on Saul and on his house, because he put the Gibeonites to death” (v.1).

The Gibeonites were Canaanites who escaped death at Israel’s hands in Joshua 9 by tricking Israel. As verse 2 states, Israel swore an oath by God’s name to spare the Gibeonites, but Saul in a spate of pro-Israel fervour had tried to wipe them out anyway (v.2).

Effectively, Saul had trashed God’s reputation; he had breached the covenant by blaspheming God’s name (Ex. 20:7). He had also brought the covenant curses of the pledge sworn by Israel upon it (Josh. 9:16-21). As king, what Saul did, Israel did.

David went to the Gibeonites and asked them what he could do to fix it (v.3). The Gibeonites answered that it was not about money, but blood (v.4). Since Saul could not be put to death, the Gibeonites asked for seven of his sons to be handed over to be hung before God to atone for Saul’s acts (vv.5-6).

While this seems cruel to us, this was not an individual sinning but a representative. In these situations, the descendants sometimes bear the cost (cf. Josh 7).

And bear it they did (vv.8-9). But David was a covenant keeper (more than Saul, anyway), and kept his oath before God to Jonathan to spare his son Mephibosheth (v.7). Others were chosen in Mephibosheth’s place.

I am glossing over what was an awful and gruesome event. We know it was, because the bodies were not buried but left out on display for the carrion eaters. Which is why one of Saul’s concubines went and held a grisly vigil for her sons, chasing away the birds and beasts from their bodies from the beginning of the barley harvest to when God sent rain (v.10).

To show David’s respect for her vigil, David took their bodies and buried them along with Saul and Jonathan’s bodies and buried them together in their home territory (vv.11-14). Because God’s anger was satisfied, and he had sent rain again to the land (vv.10, 14).

While we may turn off the news, we should not turn away from these grisly passages. They remind us that covenant breaking brings a terrible price. The sacrifice of animals at the temple was not clean, like meat at the supermarket. Nor was this. A terrible crime committed by Saul, a gruesome penalty to pay by his descendants.

God has mercifully revealed to us our own covenant breaking too. In Adam, who represented us, we all fell. We are all liable to the covenant curse of death, the wrath of God for breaking his laws.

But God has spared us, like David spared Mephibosheth, by substituting his son Jesus, our covenant keeping king, in our place. The empty cross reminds us that Jesus is risen, and has defeated death. But at Calvary, that cross bore Christ in a gruesome and grisly death to satisfy God’s anger at our covenant breaking.

We gloss over this at our peril. It makes the penalty too light and breezy; sin too easy. But our forgiveness came at a terrible cost. It deserves the same loving vigil which a mother showed her sons, while we await the day for the fullness of God’s covenant blessings to rain down on us once again.

Read 2 Samuel 20

Whether in work, in chores, or raising a family, it feels like things spin around in circles. Yes time marches on and events play out in the grand salvation story, but when you are in the middle of one of its scenes, the story feels repetitive. Whether in life or church, some things will always be the same this side of Jesus’ return.

David must certainly have felt that he had read the script before. Not five minutes it seems after he defeated Absalom but yet another rebellion seems to erupt. This time it is intra-tribal rivalry which sets things off. And there is yet more tragedy. And yet, David’s kingdom carries on. Sounds a bit like Christ’s kingdom. Disagreements, rebellion, and tragedies. But Christ’s kingdom carries on.

The end of chapter 19 ended with a face-off and fierce words between Judah and the northern tribes over who would lead David home to Jerusalem. David thought he had patched things up in the kingdom, but he was mistaken. There were still grudges and wounds held which would rip open again.

A worthless man named Sheba from the tribe of Benjamin, possibly even a relative of Saul’s hankering for the good old days, was the focal point when he raised the flag of rebellion once again (v.1). This time it was the northerners who followed the good for nothing fellow, while Judah brough David home (v.2).

Next came the first tragedy of the chapter. Absalom had helped himself to David’s concubines, and now David could no longer associate with them. So David ensured their provision and care as best he could, but they were left to live out their days like widows in an isolated, boring existence (v.3). Ten women doomed, through no fault of their own, because of the sins of another.

Then David turned to his new general, and gave him three days to raise the Judahite militia (v.4). But Amasa took longer, and David grew restless at the lack of action, so sent Abishai (Joab’s brother) after Sheba (vv.5-6). Out went Abishai with David’s crack troops, and “Joab’s men” among them (v.7).

And so, the second tragedy. Amasa finally caught up with Abishai’s troops north of Jerusalem. While Joab reached out to Amasa with supposed affection for the new general, his sword in his hand said otherwise (vv.8-9). Sadly Amasa did not notice, and Joab murdered Amasa for no other reason than Amasa had taken Joab’s spot (v.10). And then, matter of fact, took back off in pursuit of Sheba, as if nothing had happened.

But something had happened, and every trooper who came past saw their old commander dead on the ground (vv.11-12). So Joab’s lackey dragged the body into a field and covered it with a garment, so everyone would move on (vv.12-13). Some funeral.

Sadly for Sheba, the support never showed up and he found himself in the far north town of Abel with only his clansmen to back him up (v.14). Joab, newly re-self-appointed general, laid siege to the town (v.15). Suddenly a wise woman appeared, wanting to know why the town was under attack (vv.16-19).

Joab responded that he had no interest in destroying the town except that Sheba, the traitor, was there (vv.20-21). Hand him over, and Abel could go back to its prosperous ways.

The woman told him to wait for the head to sail over the walls, headed into town to convince the townsfolk to solve their problems with one swift swordstroke, and over the wall sailed Sheba’s head (v.22). Problem solved, everyone went home (except Amasa and Sheba).

So rebellion over, and Joab was back where he wanted to be; in charge of the army (v.23). And David’s kingdom carried on. Its ministers were still at work, keeping the ship of state running (vv.23-6). David was still king.

So another rebellion against God’s anointed king. More disagreements. More tragedy and needless death and suffering. But David’s kingdom carried on. Once it seemed so strong, then it appeared quite shaky, but it continued.

Same with Christ’s kingdom, the Church. Sometimes it seems strong. Sometimes, it looks shaky. But Christ is still king.

The Church is full of tragedies, as our sins against each other cause others to suffer because of our sins. A Sheba pops up and causes disputes and schisms in the Church, and further hurts instead of healing them. A Joab pops up and hacks with a sword so long as he can keep his place and his prerogatives.

It should not be like this, but it is. Just as our own lives are a little “rebellion encore” against God every day in our own uniquely similar sinful ways, so too the life of the Church suffers from rounds of disagreement, suffering, tragedy, and rebellion. We all have a role to play, like the wise woman of Abel, to help stop another rerun of the story, before more suffer hurt and tragedy.

But even as we fail, Christ is still king.

Read 2 Samuel 19:9-43

Stories and movies sometimes suggest that once the crisis is over everything reverts back to normality and happiness. Perhaps it is better in reality to acknowledge that once the crisis is over, things revert back in some way to how they were before, but with greater suspicion and ruffled feathers to settle. A reminder, indeed, that we are not yet at the end of the big story of history.

Certainly that is the case when we view the outcome of Absalom’s rebellion. Absalom was dead and the rebellion all but over, but David still needed to heal over the wounds. While he could paper over cracks to stabilise his reign, the whole situation had created divisions which would only cause further problems later. Because David was not the Messiah, and a better rule and reign was still to come.

Absalom lay dead and buried, and Israel had fled home fearing the confirmed king’s wrath (v.8). They recognised that David had defeated their enemies, but they had driven him out when they appointed Absalom as king; so how could they get David back on the throne? (vv.9-10)

David recognised the opportunity and wrote to the elders of Judah, via Zadok and Abiathar, inviting them to take the lead in bringing him back. He played on their pride and on their shared tribal relationship (vv.11-12). He even demonstrated his willingness to move on by appointing Amasa, who led Absalom’s army, as his own general (v.13). 

In other words, given Judah had been a hotbed of rebellion (which had started in Judah’s city of Hebron), he was willing to bury the hatchet. Clearly his kinsfolk believed him, because he swayed the heart of all the men of Judah” and they turned up at the River Jordan to escort him home (vv.14-15).

Judah weren’t the only ones seeking restoration. Shimei, who had earlier cursed David as he fled (16:5-8), came crawling back as David returned to power (vv.16-18). Shimei acknowledged his wrong (he was now, after all, guilty of treason), but also that he was the first of Joseph’s tribes to acknowledge the true king (vv.19-20). He had also convinced a bunch of Benjaminites to come and acknowledge David too (v.17). So despite Abishai wanting Shimei to get the chop (v.21), David acknowledged pragmatic reality and spared Shimei’s life (vv.22-3).

Next came Mephibosheth, the descendant of Saul whose servant Ziba had indicated had joined the rebellion (16:1-5). Mephibosheth’s appearance displayed this was not the case; his rough appearance was that of extended mourning, not celebration (v.24; a dangerous thing to do in Absalom’s sight). Mephibosheth explained that he had attempted to join David but had been stranded by his servant in Jerusalem; but David should treat him as he wished as he was under his sufferance anyway (vv.26-8).

David somewhat understandably but unfairly split Mephibosheth’s estate in two, because Ziba might be a liar, but he was useful (vv.29-30).

Third came elderly Barzillai, who had courageously and generously supported David (vv.31-2; cf.17:27-9). David wanted to reward him, but Barzillai declined and offered a surrogate instead (vv.33-8). Barzillai was content with his service to God as its own reward, and David was content to honour him as he asked (vv.39-40).

But all was not quite well. David’s procession passed over the Jordan for Jerusalem, but along came men from the northern tribes of Israel asking why Judah was busy escorting him back (v.41). The men of Judah responded that David was their kinsman, and they had not abused this relationship beforehand (v.42).

The men of Israel shot back that David was ten-twelfths theirs, and were first to talk of bringing David back (v.43). Even so, the men of Judah were sharper with their words (v.43). The rebellion might be over, but the bickering amongst God’s People continued.

David had fought a civil war, and needed to mend fences. So David made various calls to attempt to restore or, at least, repair the damage caused by Absalom’s rebellion. But tensions still simmered, as the devil and human sinfulness undermined the kingdom of God’s anointed leader.

The same things happen today in the Church. Disruptions, schisms and arguments, and sometimes compromises to keep or establish the peace. Even when there is relative calm, there is often bickering and arguing over little things between us as the devil and our sinfulness undermines the Church’s peace. 

Clearly the Holy Spirit is at work keeping us together. Pray that he continues to grace us with greater love for each other and willingness to overlook past wrongs!

Sadly, this side of eternity, God’s Kingdom in its visible form here on earth will suffer from bickering and compromise. It will suffer from people who move with the tide (Shimei), and whose usefulness can make leaders overlook wrongs (Ziba, regarding Mephibosheth).

But despite this, God’s Kingdom is still advancing and Christ will be victorious. Bickering and compromise will cease, when God’s reign and rule is fully restored over everything.

Read 2 Samuel 18:19-19:8

Absalom lay dead, and buried. His army scattered, his rebellion shattered. But David was back at the base, waiting to hear the news and fretting for his son.

The news of the victory, and Absalom’s death, needed to be brought to David. Ahimaaz the son of Zadok was keen to bring the news to David (v.19), but Joab refused given that David’s son had died that day (v.20). Instead, Joab had a Cushite run to bring the news (v.21). Ahimaaz persisted in desiring to run back, even if he did not get the glory of bearing the “good news”, and so Joab gave in (vv.22-3). Thus two runners competed for the “glory”.

Whether due to local knowledge or some other reason, Ahimaaz outpaced the Cushite. Meanwhile, David was sitting fretting at the city gates, waiting for news of victory (v.24). Of course, David also seemed to want the contradictory situation of Absalom’s survival…

A watchman spotted the approaching courier, and relayed the news to David (v.24). David replied that a single runner was good news (multiple runners would imply the first to flee from a rout), but when the watchman announced the second runner David had to work harder to convince himself the news was good (vv.25-6). 

Thankfully the watchman recognised the apparently distinctive gait of Ahimaaz, which reassured David because “he is a good man and comes with good news” (v.27). Ahimaaz cried out “all is well” as he neared the king to catch his breath (v.28). Then he announced his news. “Blessed be the LORD your God, who has delivered up the men who raised their hand against my lord the king” (v.28).

This was good news, but not all the news David wanted to hear (cf. v.5). When David asked about Absalom, Ahimaaz fluffed his answer suggesting a great commotion rather than delivering the bad news (v.29).

At David’s command Ahimaaz stood aside while the earlier leaving Cushite arrived (v.30). Again the same message and response played out; good news for the king, but how is Absalom? (vv.31-2). The Cushite though was willing to give the bad news that David did not want to hear. “May the enemies of my lord the king and all who rise up against you for evil be like that young man” (v.32).

The implication was clear, Absalom was dead. It could be no other way, for God willed it (17:14). But David was heartbroken, and fled to his chamber to weep for his lost son (v.33).

Not the right response to a resounding victory, but in some ways understandable for a man dealing with grief driven by a sense of guilt. Absalom’s rebellion and death were the consequences of David’s own sinful acts with Bathsheba. Whatever Absalom’s contribution to his death, David would have felt that he set the train in motion.

So David wept and mourned, and Joab and the army’s great victory turned to one of sadness (9:1-2). Victory seemed like a defeat, as the army snuck back into town for fear of upsetting David even more (vv.3-4).

If David was to maintain the kingdom which Joab had secured for him by disobeying orders and dispatching Absalom, then things had to change. So Joab confronted David with some more tough news.

Joab reminded David that his actions made his army, and his loyal servants look like they had acted shamefully in defying and defeating Absalom, as if David would have preferred them dead and Absalom alive! (vv.5-6). If he did not start acting grateful, he would have a worse rebellion on his hands in short order (v.7).

So David listened to Joab and got up, went to the gate, and thanked the troops for their acts on his behalf (v.8). Mourning could come later.

David as king was more than a father, he was a symbol. The Davidic king demonstrated God’s provision of godly leadership to his people, pointing forward to an even greater leader to come. That greater leader would decisively defeat sin, and one day will decisively crush all rebellion under his feet (Rev. 19).

These words are good news to us, because they announce our salvation, and our deliverance from both sin and death, but also one day from all earthly opposition and persecution. But these words are also tough news for us, because it means there are plenty who will not heed the call to repent before it is too late, and will suffer the ultimate penalty at God’s hands as he executes judgement. Some of those are people we love.

Of course, David bore his own grief and sorrow over his own sins. Christ, David’s true and greater son, bore our griefs and sorrow over our sin through his life and on the Cross for us. He did so in order that those griefs and sorrows could one day be lifted from us, and free us from the burden they bear. And so one day, God can wipe away every mournful tear.

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.