The material contained in Chapter 21 is difficult to understand from a spiritual viewpoint and I doubt if we will arrive at an answer that satisfies all our questions. Even the most well-respected Bible scholars of the ages have had difficulty with this passage of the Bible. We will do our best to study the information we're given and then will discuss whether or not we think David was right or wrong to handle the problem the way he did.
Our chapter begins with a famine in Israel that lasts for three years. The author of 2 Samuel doesn't tell us at what point in David's reign the famine occurs but many scholars believe it occurs exactly where it appears in the book: right after the rebellion of Sheba is ended. The author simply says it happened "during the reign of David" but it's generally accepted that it happened during the latter years of his reign.
"During the reign of David, there was a famine for three successive years; so David sought the face of the Lord." (2 Samuel 21:1a) It's not uncommon to have a year or two of drought or poor harvests. But by the third year David begins to suspect something more is going on. Perhaps it is a judgment of the Lord for sin in the land. The author tells us he "sought the face of the Lord" and in David's day this usually meant consulting a priest or prophet who would inquire on the king's behalf.
"The Lord said, 'It is on account of Saul and his blood-stained house; it is because he put the Gibeonites to death.'" (2 Samuel 21:1b) The Bible has not previously told us of any incident during which King Saul slaughtered any of the Gibeonites. The Israelites were forbidden to assault the Gibeonites because they had sworn an oath to them in Joshua 9. In Joshua 9 we find the Gibeonites (who are descendants of the Amorites, whom the Lord instructed the Israelites to destroy from the promised land) deciding to deceive the Israelites by pretending to be from a far country. They heard how the Israelites destroyed Jericho and Ai and they want to trick them into making a treaty with them so their own cities will not be destroyed. So they go to the Israelites like a delegation that has been traveling for many days, dressed in old patched clothing, with worn out and mended sacks and wineskins loaded onto their donkeys, and with molded bread in their sacks. They know the Lord commanded the Israelites to destroy all their close neighbors (the heathen tribes of Canaan) and they claim to be from far away. Joshua doesn't check out their story and makes an alliance with them in the name of the Lord. Upon finding out that they've been deceived, the Israelites are bound by their promise not to harm the Gibeonites. But at some point in King Saul's reign he did harm the Gibeonites and the priest or prophet who consults the Lord for David tells David that the three years of famine are the result of the blood that was wrongly shed by King Saul.
Why did Saul attack people he was commanded not to attack? The author gives us a clue in this next segment after David summons the leaders of the Gibeonites to the palace. "The king summoned the Gibeonites and spoke to them. (Now the Gibeonites were not a part of Israel but were survivors of the Amorites; the Israelites had sworn to spare them, but Saul in his zeal for Israel and Judah had tried to annihilate them.)" (2 Samuel 21:2) Saul was a man with a rebellious spirit. Over and over we found him doing things his way instead of God's way. Then, when confronted with his rebelliousness, he always made excuses for it. He never wanted to admit his disobedience or take responsibility for it. The slaughter of many of the Gibeonites must have been one of those occasions where he decided to take matters into his own hands. He took it upon himself to kill some of the descendants of the Amorites even though he was forbidden to lay a finger on them. Prior to the mistake made in Joshua 9, the Israelites had been instructed to make an end of the Amorites. But because of their oath to the branch of the Amorites known as the Gibeonites, they could not completely fulfill the Lord's instructions. Their oath made in the Lord's name supersedes the original instructions.
Joshua made a mistake in accepting the Gibeonites' story without making sure the story was true. The people made a mistake in making a treaty with the Gibeonites in the name of the Lord. But just because they were wrong to make the treaty doesn't mean they don't have to abide by it. Using the Lord's name is a serious matter. To go back on an oath made in His name would be to disrespect His name and to disrespect all that He stands for. The Lord is righteous and does not tell lies or make empty promises. If the Israelites had gone back on their word to the Gibeonites, the heathen peoples of the land would have had an opportunity to blaspheme the name of the Lord. They would have had a reason to ask themselves, "If the word of the people of the Lord can't be trusted, can the Lord Himself be trusted? Can we even be sure the God of Israel is real? If He does not judge His people for breaking the oath they made in His name, we have no proof that He exists."
David wants to do something to satisfy the Gibeonites' need for justice and something to end the famine in Israel. The people may have had enough stored grain to make it through the first and second years of famine but by the third year things are looking pretty dire. Their storehouses must be nearly empty by now. David asks the leaders of the Gibeonites what he can do. "David asked the Gibeonites, 'What shall I do for you? How shall I make atonement so that you will bless the Lord's inheritance?'" (2 Samuel 21:3) He doesn't propose a solution himself; he asks what will be an acceptable solution to them.
"The Gibeonites answered him, 'We have no right to demand silver or gold from Saul's family, nor do we have the right to put anyone to death.'" (2 Samuel 21:4a) Under the terms of their agreement with the Israelites, the Gibeonites became subject to them. Legally they cannot go to any of Saul's family and demand money as compensation for the way Saul wronged them. Legally they cannot arrest and execute any of Saul's family. The rights of the Gibeonites are limited in Israel and the king would have to demand money or arrests and executions on their behalf. When they mention death, David understands that they are asking him to fulfill the law of "an eye for an eye". Which brings us to this next verse: "'What do you want me to do for you?' David asked." (2 Samuel 21:4b)
In tomorrow's text they are going to ask for the execution of seven members of Saul's family. We will discuss reasons for and against believing their request is lawful. We will discuss whether or not David should have granted this request. There is an additional condition to their request that will cause extra grief and shame to the families of the executed men and in my opinion David should not have allowed that particular condition to be carried out. However, when he realizes his error he will quickly correct it. One thing we can say about David is that, although he makes mistakes (sometimes shockingly big mistakes), as soon as he realizes he's made a mistake he's quick to repent of it and to rectify the mistake whenever possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment