2 Samuel 19:16-40

CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES.—

2 Samuel 19:16. “Came down.” From the mountainous table-land into the Jordan valley.” (Erdmann.)

2 Samuel 19:17. “A thousand men.” “To show what force he could raise for or against the king.” (Jamieson.) “They show the consideration which Shimei enjoyed in the tribe of Benjamin. and testify that a change had taken place in the former hostile feeling of this tribe towards David, comp. 2 Samuel 19:31.” (Erdmann.)

2 Samuel 19:17. “Went over.” Rather, “they hasted or pressed over.” “Before the king,” rather, in the presence, etc. They passed over to the eastern bank, probably through a ford.

2 Samuel 19:18. “A ferry-boat.” “Probably rafts, which are still used on that part of the river. Josephus calls it a bridge of boats.” (Jamieson.) “As he was come over.” Keil, Bunsen and others refer this pronoun to David and read “as he (the king) was about,” etc. Erdmann understands it to refer to Shimei. Both place the transaction on the eastern bank of the river.

2 Samuel 19:29. “The house of Joseph.” “The rest of the tribes with the exception of Judah. This designation of the tribes that opposed Judah by the name of the leading tribe (Joseph. Joshua 16:1) was as old as the jealousy between these tribes and Judah, which did not commence with the division of the kingdom but was simply confirmed thereby into a permanent distinction. (Keil.) “He might have employed this phrase in order to exculpate his own tribe, by insinuating that it was drawn away by the preponderating influence of the great house of Joseph.” (Biblical Commentary.)

2 Samuel 19:22. “Ye sons,” etc. This expression shows that it was Joab’s proposal also. “Adversaries.” “Lit., a satan (See Numbers 22:22; comp. Matthew 16:23). (Erdmann.) “To-day.” David appears to lay stress upon this word—to-day, the day of restoration when he himself was receiving tokens of Divine forgiveness. “I am this day king.” David will show mercy, not because he has now become king and has the right to pardon, but because he sees in his restoration to his kingdom a proof of restoration to the Divine favour, and by showing favour to Shemei as his right will fulfil the obligation of gratitude to the Lord.” (Erdmann.)

2 Samuel 19:24. “Dressed his feet,” etc. Lit., had not “made his feet and his beard,” i.e., not washed his feet or arranged his beard. (See Ezekiel 24:17). “The Hebrews cut off the hair on the upper lip and cheeks, but in mourning let it grow carelessly, as on the chin. There are various modes of trimming the beard, but whatever the mode it is always done with the greatest care, and a small comb is usually carried for the purpose.” (Jamieson).

2 Samuel 19:25. “He was come to Jerusalem.” Most modern expositors read here “When Jerusalem (i.e., the inhabitants of the city) came to meet, etc. So Kiel and Erdmann. A few change the proposition—when he was come from, etc.

2 Samuel 19:26. “I will saddle,” etc. This is the literal rendering, but as Erdmann remarks “the lame prince could not have thought of going himself to saddle the ass, and in all languages the expression “to do a thing” is equivalent to have it done. It is therefore better to translate “I will cause to be saddled.”

2 Samuel 19:27. “He slandered.” Mephibosheth had not merely inferred this from David’s words, and the tone in which they were spoken, but had certainly found it out long ago, since Ziba would not delay very long to put David’s assurance, that all the possessions of Mephibosheth should belong to him, in force against his master.” (Keil). “An angel,” etc., i.e., “he sees all just as it really is” (Keil) or, “he knows what is truth and right.” (Erdmann).

2 Samuel 19:29. “Why speakest thou,” etc. Some see in these words of David a disbelief in the explanation of Mephibosheth, and others an expression of displeasure against Ziba. But they seem rather to express David’s vexation at his former hasty decision, and, at the same time, his lack of courage to confess himself wholly in the wrong on that occasion.

2 Samuel 19:29. “I have said,” etc. Some expositors think that David here goes back to the first arrangement mentioned in 2 Samuel 9:7., whereby Ziba, as the tiller, would of course have an interest in the produce. But Keil remarks that the words here are directly at variance with the first promise: “I will restore thee all the land of Saul,” etc. The half-measure here adopted was, says Erdmann, “only a half-exculpation of an innocent man, and David was herein probably controlled by political considerations, being unwilling to make the respectable and influential Ziba his enemy.” “Jerome says, that the later Jews believed the division of David’s kingdom was an act of retributive justice for the unequal measure awarded to Mephibosheth.” (Jamieson.)

2 Samuel 19:35. “Can I discern.” Perhaps “intellectually too dull to be useful as a counsellor.” (Erdmann) or simply too weak in body to enjoy the luxuries of a court.

2 Samuel 19:37. “Chimham.” According to Josephus, his son. This is confirmed by 1 Kings 2:7.

2 Samuel 19:40. “Half Israel.” “The thousand Benjamites who came with Shimei, and other Israelites who dwelt near.” (Keil and others).

2 Samuel 19:41. “All the men,” etc. The representatives of the other tribes. This is generally understood to have taken place at Gilgal.

2 Samuel 19:42. “Have we eaten,” etc. i.e., Have you reason to be envious of us because we have enjoyed advantages that yon were deprived of?” (Erdmann).

2 Samuel 19:43. “That our advice,” Both Keil and Erdmann read here “And was not my word first to bring back the king.” From 2 Samuel 19:10, it appears that they were the first to propose David’s recall.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— 2 Samuel 19:16

SHIMEI, MEPHIBOSHETH, AND BARZILLAI

David on his way back to his capital exhibits in his conduct and experience some of the penalties, the dangers, and the blessings of prosperity.

I. One of its penalties. The man who had most bitterly insulted David in his day of adversity was the first to render him homage on his restoration to power. Taking into account the change in David’s circumstances, we can scarcely be doing Shimei an injustice if we assume that he was much more real when he was cursing and stoning the fugitive king than when he was asking pardon at the feet of the victorious monarch. It is one of the blessings of adversity that men then reveal their real feelings towards us; we are not sought by the hypocrite, or the self-seeker, when there is nothing to be gained by serving us or professing to esteem us. And on the other hand, all who are prosperous to any great extent, must pay the penalty of sometimes being in doubt about the sincerity of some of those who court their favour and sound their praises. The more exalted the position, the more likelihood there is of attracting false friends and of finding it difficult to discern between the real and the seeming in those who surround us, and it is one of the trials which those in high places must always have to bear. It meets David on the very threshold of his return to prosperity.

II. One of its dangers. The treatment which David gives to Mephibosheth exhibits an indifference to the feelings of the son of Jonathan, and an amount of injustice which are very unworthy of him. Almost all students of the Bible agree in accepting Mephibosheth’s explanation as the truth of the matter—the meekness with which he submits to David’s decision reminds us of the unselfish spirit of his father, and makes us feel sure that he had been the victim of a false and designing man. How painful, then, must have been the reception which David gave him, granting him no opportunity of proving his innocence and fidelity, but dismissing him with the implication at least that he and his traitorous servant stood on a level in David’s estimation. Various motives have been assigned to account for David’s unworthy conduct in this matter. Some think he acted from motives of policy (see critical notes), and others that he was irritated by the consciousness that he had been deceived by Ziba, yet was unwilling to confess himself wrong. But in whatever light we regard his action we must find David guilty of an arbitrary exercise of rights which might belong to him legally, but which were no more morally his than if he had been in a private station. If Mephibosheth had had only the ordinary claim of a subject, David could have had no moral right to dispose of his case in this summary manner, and deprive him of half his estate without good reason. But it would have been difficult for David to find any man in the land to whom he owed so much as to the son of Jonathan, and his obligation was not lessened but increased by the error of judgment into which he had lately fallen. The fact that he had passed so unjust a sentence upon him on the former occasion made it his duty now to make every reparation in his power, instead of which he treats him with a haughty indifference, if not with disdain. This indifference to the feelings and claims of those whose destinies are in their hands is a sin to which men in power are especially prone; when their deeds are not liable to be called in question by their fellow men they are apt to act as though their will was the rule of the universe, and to forget that the higher the position the greater the responsibility. David at this time seems to have thus fallen into this common temptation.

III. One of its greatest blessings. There can be no more blessed gift of wealth or power than the ability which it affords a man to show gratitude to those who have befriended him in his time of need. It is always more blessed to give than to receive, but it is a special joy to a grateful heart to repay those whose kindness has cheered it in the dark days of sorrow, and to show them that we know how to value the most precious gift which one human creature can bestow upon another. David experienced this joy when he found himself in a position to say to Barzillai, “Whatsoever thou shalt require of me, that will I do unto thee,” and we may be sure that he did not fail to fulfil his promise to the son, although unable to do so to the father. We can but desire that he who rewarded Barzillai’s fidelity in the person of Chinham, had remembered to repay Jonathan’s love by being generous to Mephibosheth. In this inconsistency of David—in this mingling of dutiful remembrance and ungrateful forgetfulness, we see how far removed are the best men from that symmetry of character which marked the Perfect Man, Christ Jesus.

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS

2 Samuel 19:30. It is just a soul capable of such noble self-denial that feels most keenly the sting of any suspicion of its love or fidelity, and as no further reference is made to Mephibosheth in the sacred narrative, especially as David gives no charge concerning him to Solomon at his death eight years later, it is not unlikely that he did not long survive the grief and pain that Ziba’s treachery caused him.—Taylor.

Mephibosheth thought, perhaps, of the word of the law, that God visits sins on children unto the third and fourth generation.—Peter Martyr.

2 Samuel 19:31. The picture and example of a venerable and pious old age.

1. Blessed of God, it devotes the temporal goods it has received to the service of compassionate brotherly love, far from all avarice;

2. Honoured by men, it desires not the vain honour of this world far from all ambition;

3. Near the grave, it longs only for home, far from all disposition to find blessedness in this life;

4. But as long as God grants life, even with failing powers it still serves the Lord and His kingdom, and in this service honours him by the devotion even of its dearest—far from ail self-seeking.—Lange’s Commentary

Barzillai’s words remind us of the influence that age produces upon men. I. A mellowness of heart. There is a feeling soft and subdued running through the words of this patriarchal Gideonite. Old Time has, I think, generally this effect on the hearts of men. “Men, like peaches and pears,” says Holmes, “grow sweet a little while before they begin to decay. I don’t know what it is—whether a spontaneous change, mental or bodily, or whether it is through the experience of the thanklessness of critical honesty, but it is a fact that most writers, except sour and unsuccessful ones, get tired of finding fault at about the time they are beginning to grow old. At thirty we are all trying to cut our names in big letters upon the wall of this tenement of life; twenty years later we have carved them or shut up our jack-knives. Then we are ready to help others and care less to hinder any, because nobody’s elbows are in our way. Do you know that in the gradual passage from maturity to helplessness the harshest characters have sometimes a period in which they are gentle and placid as young children? I have heard it said, but I cannot be sponsor for its truth, that the famous chieftain, Lochiel, was rocked in a cradle like a baby in his old age.” Time produces upon men.—II. An indisposition for exertion. It seems benevolently arranged that, as the limbs get feeble and incapable of action, the inclination to exertion decreases too. The patriarch, therefore, gets reconciled to his position. The mind ceases to will what the body is incapable of performing. A craving for rest creeps over the frame as years advance. It is well that it should be so, in order that the soul may calmly ponder upon questions of its imperishable interests and that death may come with no sudden shock. If age brings on this indisposition to effort, let us work while we can—work while the mind is active and the limbs are blithe. Time produces upon men—III. A lack of interest in the world. At one time an invitation to attend in state a king to his capital would have been a very strong temptation to this very great man, but now such an invitation has no attraction; he declines the king’s pressing offer. To an old man the world is a plum that has lost its bloom—an orange that has been sucked till the peel is dry. Time produces upon men—IV. An incapacity for earthly enjoyments. Years not only steal away our strength, but our relish for earthly pleasures. In this I see divine benevolence, for it means a loosening of the bonds that link us to this mortal state. Time produces upon men—V. An interest in the dead. “Let thy servant, I pray thee, turn back again that I may die in my own city and be buried in the grave with my father and my mother.” Here is the filial instinct glowing in the breast of an old man. After the romantic wanderings of a long life, time brings the spirit back to the home of the childhood, and makes it yearn to sleep the long sleep of death by the side of “father and mother.” Here is a rebuke to worldliness. What if you amass a princely fortune? Whilst it will not make you happy, either in the morning of your youth or the zenith of your noon, it will be utterly worthless to you if you live to old age.

Here is too, an argument for religion. Form an alliance with those eternal principles that will make your spirits young and strong amidst the infirmities of age.—Dr. David Thomas.

The subject of 2 Samuel 19:41 belongs to the next chapter.