Samuel
The book of Samuel is customarily thought to be part of the Deuteronomistic History, whose
final form was achieved no earlier than the mid sixth century B.C.E. The narrative of the book of
Samuel continues that of Joshua and Judges, and it has a sequel in Kings. This history
incorporated earlier documents dealing with the childhood of Samuel (1 Samuel 1-3), the ark
narrative (1 Samuel 4-6 and 2 Samuel 6), pro and anti-monarchical documents (1 Samuel 9-11);
a history of David’s rise to power (1 Samuel 16-2 Samuel 5), a succession narrative (2 Samuel 920; 1 Kings 1-2), and other pre canonical documents. Other scholars find these “hypothetical”
sources unnecessary. This essay will deal in any case only with the ethical implications of the
final form of the book of Samuel.
In contrast to the Pentateuch, the book of Samuel contains no laws, and no critiques of
social injustice, like those in the Latter Prophets. Hence ethical observations cluster around
institutions such as kingship, on which the book of Samuel presents divided evidence, or around
leading characters, whose words and actions present ethical examples or ethical failings. No
person looms larger than David, whose story makes up about three quarters of the book of
Samuel (1 Samuel 16-2 Samuel 24). Israel’s first king, Saul, is also prominent, beginning in 1
Samuel 9 and continuing until his death in 1 Samuel 31. Women also play major roles, with
ethical implications: Hannah, Michal, Abigail, Bathsheba, Tamar, and the wise woman of Tekoa.
From the start of the book the prophet Samuel is at center stage, and while he dies in 1Samuel
25, he is brought up from the realm of the dead by the medium at Endor in 1 Samuel 28. Nathan
and Gad are other significant prophets, not to mention the bands of prophets who appear in 1
Samuel 10 and 19. Violence characterizes the lives of Joab and his brothers Abishai and Asahel
and the lives of Abner, Absalom, and Amasa. Both the sons of the priest Eli and the sons of
1
Samuel, who served as judges, are accused of ethical corruption and considered unfit to succeed
their fathers. As we study these principal characters we will draw ethical conclusions from their
words and/or their deeds.
I.
Kingship
The book of Samuel is highly ambivalent about the institution of earthly kingship. At times the
people’s wish for a king is dismissed as the simple desire to be like the nations and have a king
to fight their battles (1 Sam 8:5, 19-20; 9:16), or as the rejection of God (1 Sam 8:7; 10:19).
Samuel’s defeat of the Philistines at Mizpah, however, suggests that a king was not necessary for
national defense (ch. 7). Samuel warns that turning to earthly kingship would lead to forced labor
and royal acquisition of lands and crops (1 Sam 8:11-18). But the book of Samuel also
recognizes the social complexity of the emerging nation and how the severity of threats from an
external enemy like the Philistines, including their capture of the ark in 1 Samuel 4-6, made
something like earthly kingship almost inevitable.
The book of Samuel also contains passages that affirm that earthly kingship is a gift of
God. Samuel is instructed by God to anoint Saul as king (1 Sam 9:16; 10:1; 15:1, 7), and Samuel
subsequently receives similar instructions with regard to David (1 Sam 16:1-13). The divine
spirit comes upon Saul after this anointing (1 Sam 10:6; cf. 11:6; 16:13), as it does on David (1
Sam 16:13). When Saul is identified as the king by casting of lots (1 Sam 10:20-23), it is
implicitly an indication of divine approval of kingship. Samuel makes that explicit when he asks:
"Do you see the one whom the LORD has chosen” (1 Sam 10:24)? The people then acclaim Saul
as king. Since the king has been anointed by the LORD, he stands under divine protection. David
has an opportunity twice to kill Saul, but he refrains from it, precisely because Saul is the
2
anointed of the LORD (1 Sam 24:6; 26:9). David sharply criticizes Abner for not providing
protection for Saul, the LORD’s anointed (1 Sam 26:15-16). One suspects that David’s demand
that the LORD’s anointed be protected may reveal a great deal of self-interest on the part of
himself and his successors.
The farewell speech of Samuel in 1 Samuel 12 attempts to strike a balance between kingship
as sinful and kingship as the gift of God. The sinful request for a king when Nahash king of the
Ammonites attacked them (v. 12) replaced the cry to the LORD for help in earlier crises (vv. 8,
9). This reliance on a king was a denial that the LORD was their king. The people admit this sin
and confess: “We added to our sins an evil by asking for a king for ourselves” (v. 19).
Paradoxically, Samuel affirms that the LORD had in fact given them Saul as king (v. 13).
Samuel sets forth for the people two choices under the doctrine of retribution: Success of the
king and the people if they serve the LORD, but antagonism from the LORD if they do not obey
the voice of the LORD and rebel against the deity’s commands (1 Sam 12:14-15). Exile for the
king and the people, in both the Northern Kingdom and Judah had already become a reality by
the time the final editing was done on 1 Samuel 12 (see v. 25).
The divine promise of an everlasting dynasty to David in 2 Samuel 7 shows the full
incorporation of earthly kingship into the faith of Israel and makes the issue of royal succession
paramount throughout the rest of 2 Samuel. The promise to David is recalled several times in the
book of Kings as the reason why the LORD preserved the line of David from extinction despite
the wickedness of several rulers (e.g., 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19), and that same promise to
David led to the development of messianic hopes when the monarchy proved corrupt or when it
finally came to an end. In the “Last Words of David,” the king affirms that the LORD has made
3
with him an everlasting covenant and that it is the spirit of the LORD who speaks through him (2
Sam 23:1-7).
II.
Ethical Assessment of the Reign of David
A. The Legitimacy of David’s Succession to Saul
The book of Samuel endeavors to prove the legitimacy of David’s rise to the throne during the
kingship of Saul and to show why permanent kingship was denied to Saul (see below).
According to 1 Samuel 16-31 David launched a number of guerrilla attacks against the forces of
Saul, and, after Saul’s death, there was a four year civil war between David and the forces of
Ishbosheth, one of the surviving sons of Saul.
David’s rise was endorsed by a series of significant voices. Samuel’s clandestine anointing of
David gave David the endorsement of the LORD and a leading prophet, who previously had
anointed Saul (1 Sam 16:1-13). After Samuel had anointed David, the spirit of the LORD came
mightily on him from that day forward. Later the people of Judah anointed David in Hebron (2
Sam 2:1-4), and subsequently the elders of Israel anointed him in the same city (2 Sam 5:1-3).
These elders cited an otherwise unknown oracle of the LORD: “It is you who shall be shepherd
of my people Israel.”
Saul’s son Jonathan made a covenant with David and stripped off his robe, armor, sword,
bow, and belt and gave them to David (1 Sam 18:3-4). Thereby Jonathan apparently ceded to
David the right to succeed Saul as king. Jonathan also interceded with his father Saul on David’s
behalf, warning the king that he should not sin against David since David had not sinned against
him. He also pointed out how David had risked his life in attacking the Philistine Goliath (1 Sam
19:1-7).
4
After David’s defeat of Goliath nameless women, coming to meet Saul, sang “Saul has killed
his thousands, and David his ten thousands,” showing had David was gaining popular support at
the expense of Saul (1 Sam 18:7). Michal, Saul’s daughter and one of David’s wives, defied her
father by helping David escape those whom Saul had sent to arrest him (1 Sam 19:8-17). In 1
Sam 24:20 even Saul told David that he would surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel
would be established in his hand. Later Saul observed that David would do many things and
succeed (1 Sam 26:25). Abigail, a rich widow and later one of David’s wives, said, “The LORD
will certainly make my lord [David] a sure house” (1 Sam 25:28). Abner, Saul’s top military
commander, invited David to make a covenant with him and promised to help bring all Israel
over to David (2 Sam 3:12). Abner even told the elders of Israel about a promise of the LORD:
“Through my servant David I will save my people Israel from the hand of the Philistines and
from all their enemies” (2 Sam 3:18). While some of these statements, particularly those by Saul,
seem to be fictional, the text of the book of Samuel itself makes a strong defense of David’s
legitimate right to succeed Saul. Since David opposed Saul before this king had died, one might
have interpreted David’s skirmishes with Saul as disloyal and unpatriotic.
B. Personal failings of David
The most well-known ethical failing of David was his affair with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11-12).
While the troops were in the field, where sexual activity was forbidden, David exercised royal
privilege in Jerusalem by sleeping with the wife of one of his soldiers. The narrator spares us
many details about the incident, and Bathsheba’s only words are “I’m pregnant.” The subsequent
cover-up was worse than the adultery itself. David invited Bathsheba’s husband Uriah to
Jerusalem, but he refused to go to his house for sexual relations because the ark and the troops
were in the field. His ethical values were greater than those of David. Even when David got him
5
drunk, he refused to go home. So David sent Uriah back to the front with a note that would lead
to his death in battle. The general Joab exposed Uriah to a fatal attack and sent word back to
David. David reassured Joab that deaths happen in war, and he understood what had happened. A
son was born to David and Bathsheba. The prophet Nathan told David a parable, and the king
responded by calling for the death penalty for the leading character in the parable, little realizing
that the parable was really about himself. David confessed his sin (2 Sam 12:13; cf. Psalm 51).
Adultery and murder are capital crimes in the Hebrew Bible, but in this case it was the
illegitimate child that died, not his parents. A second child born to David and Bathsheba was
Solomon. In the sequel to the book of Samuel, Bathsheba and Nathan urged David to pick
Solomon as his successor, and Bathsheba passed on to Solomon Adonijah’s request for Abishag,
a request that led to his execution (1 Kings 1-2).
A second Davidic failing came in the aftermath of his son Amnon’s rape of his half-sister
Tamar. David had given Tamar permission to prepare food for the ailing Amnon, not recognizing
that this was a ruse to attack her. Tamar’s defense against the attack is problematic in that she
suggested that if Amnon were to ask David, he might give permission for a sexual liaison
between Amnon and his half-sister Tamar. When David heard of the crime Amnon did, he
became angry but refused to punish because he loved Amnon as his firstborn. His inaction led to
Absalom’s assassination of Amnon and contributed to the rebellion of Absalom against his father
(2 Samuel 13).
A third failing occurred when David conducted a census of the people. The LORD incited
David to do this, which presents its own ethical problems (2 Sam 24:1; contrast 1 Chr 21:1). It is
not clear what was wrong with taking a census, but Joab tried to talk David out of doing it. Since
the census dealt with the number of able-bodied soldiers, it is probable that the census
6
demonstrated David’s trust in military power rather than in the LORD’s role in a future conflict.
David admitted his sin and asked the LORD to take away his guilt. The prophet Gad offered
David three alternate punishments: three years of famine, three months of military defeat, or
three days of pestilence. David chose the third option since this punishment would be brought
directly by the LORD, and it would be better to fall into the merciful hand of the LORD rather
than into human hands. The result was that seventy thousand people died. The LORD’s mercy is
shown when he stopped the angel from attacking Jerusalem (2 Samuel 24).
C. Apologetic Denial of Davidic Failings
The book of Samuel makes several claims about David’s innocence where readers of the
book of Samuel have suspected that a charge might have been lodged against David of doing
culpable actions. David, for example, used strong-armed tactics to demand that Nabal feed David
and his four hundred men. David claimed that Nabal’s men were done no physical harm nor did
they lose possessions while they were with David on an earlier occasion. Nabal responded
brusquely to this request, an attitude that led David to begin a military response. Nabal’s wife
Abigail brought David supplies and assured him that her husband was a fool, just as the
etymology of his Hebrew name indicated. When Abigail told her husband what she had done,
Nabal’s heart became like a stone, the LORD struck him, and he died. David then married this
rich and impressive widow. Does this story in 1 Samuel 25 present an idealized picture of this
incident, covering up the fact that David was responsible for the death of Nabal?
David and Saul were involved in internecine warfare for a considerable period of time. One
possible result of such a conflict would be the death of one’s rival. Yet on two occasions when
David had a chance to kill Saul—once when Saul was relieving himself in a cave and once when
7
David came upon a sleeping Saul in his camp--David intentionally refrained from killing his
enemy, who is identified as “the anointed of the LORD.” Were David’s thoughts and actions
toward Saul really so non-violent in their intent (1 Samuel 24 and 26)? After all, Saul had been
hunting David to take his life (1 Sam 24:11, 14). Saul recognized that David was more righteous
than he was since David had treated him well, but Saul had treated David evilly (1 Sam 24:17).
The book of Samuel reports that David had a political relationship with Achish, the Philistine
king of Gath, and fled to him to escape violence that might come to him from Saul. Since the
Philistines were mortal threats to early Israel, David’s liaisons with them are difficult to justify.
David asked Achish for a town where he could live without becoming a burden to Achish, and
Achish gave him the city of Ziklag. David practiced a scorched earth policy against several
neighboring peoples, but lied to Achish saying that he was attacking regions belonging to Judah
or against Israelite tribes such as the Jerahmeelites and the Kenites. David killed all the people
living in the non-Israelite areas he attacked lest anyone disclose his true activity to Achish.
Since Saul was killed in a battle with the Philistines, David’s involvement with them would have
been very damaging politically. As this battle approached, the Philistines were supposedly leery
of David’s loyalties, and various Philistines put pressure on Achish to keep David away from the
battle. David protested his innocence to Achish, but the Philistines insisted that he be kept away.
So, the book of Samuel claims, despite David’s strange affiliation with the Philistines, that he
played no part in the battle in which Saul fell (1 Samuel 21, 27-29).
After the death of Saul, an Amalekite came to David with Saul’s crown and armlet and
claimed that he had killed King Saul at the latter’s request. David ordered the Amalekite’s
immediate execution because he had raised his hand against the LORD’s anointed (2 Samuel 1).
Saul’s general Abner defected to David after Saul’s son and successor had accused Abner of
8
having a sexual liaison with Rizpah, Saul’s concubine. David made a covenant with Abner, who
promised to bring all Israel over to David and to return Michal, Saul’s daughter and David’s
wife, whom Saul had given in marriage to Palti. David put pressure on Ishbosheth, who sent
Michal back, much to the distress of her husband. Later Michal criticized David sharply for his
dancing when he brought the ark to Jerusalem. David spoke defiantly to her, and we are told that
she had no children. Perhaps since David had been anointed by both Judah and Israel he had no
longer needed to be married to his predecessor’s daughter to justify succeeding him as king. In
the end, Joab murdered Abner in a sneak attack at Hebron, and David saw to his appropriate
burial. David complained bitterly that the sons of Zeruiah (Joab and his brothers) were too
violent for him (2 Sam 3:39), thus exonerating himself from any accusation that he had a hand in
the death of Abner.
Later Rechab and Baanah decapitated Ishbosheth and brought his head to David, hoping for a
reward. David accused them of killing an innocent man in his bed. He executed them, cut off
their hands and feet, and hung their bodies beside the pool at Gibeon. David gave proper burial
to the head of Ishbosheth by placing it in Abner’s tomb (2 Sam 4:9-12). The narrator in Samuel
is intent on showing that David had divine and human support for his kingship and that he did
not succeed Saul by violent actions.
Descendants of Saul were always a threat to reclaim their father’s throne. During a three-year
famine it was determined by divine oracle that the famine resulted from bloodguilt since Saul
had allegedly put certain Gibeonites to death. David asked what he would have to do for the
Gibeonites and they requested that seven of Saul’s descendants be handed over so that they could
execute them. David handed over to the Gibeonites two sons of Rizpah, Saul’s concubine, and
five sons of Merab, Saul’s daughter. The Gibeonites executed them, perhaps by impaling them.
9
Rizpah later protected the unburied bodies of her sons from attacks by wild animals. David
provided appropriate burial for Saul’s two sons and his five grandsons, and he used the occasion
to bury Jonathan and Saul as well, whose bodies the people of Jabesh-gilead had taken from the
wall where the Philistines had hung them in Beth-shan. In short, David got rid of potential rivals
to his kingship by handing descendants of Saul over to the Gibeonites, who saved David from
any bloodguilt in this matter. And David showed appropriate respect for the bodies of Saul and
other potential Saulide claimants to the throne.
III.
Ethical dimensions in the reign of Saul
After an initial period when Saul was anointed by Samuel, gifted with the spirit, chosen by lot,
and acclaimed by the people, the first king spiraled downward until he died by suicide on the
battlefield. Among the leading features of Holy War were that such wars were waged only after
the LORD’s authorization and that wars were not for the gaining of personal booty since all
goods and many humans were simply put under the ban. Saul had scheduled a sacrifice at Gilgal
at which Samuel was to officiate. When Samuel did not show up for seven days and the army
was slipping away from Saul, the king himself officiated at the sacrifice. Shortly thereafter
Samuel did arrive and told Saul that he had acted foolishly and had not kept the command of the
LORD. As a result, Saul’s dynasty or kingdom would not endure. Presumably the sacrifice was a
mechanism to see what the LORD would decide about engaging the Philistines in warfare, and
Saul had created the impression that he had manipulated the results (1 Sam 13:8-15). Two
chapters later Samuel instructed Saul, on the basis of an oracle of the LORD, to utterly destroy
Amalek, including all its animals and people. Such a genocidal goal, of course, is deeply
offensive to modern readers. Samuel, however, castigated Saul for failing to carry out the divine
mandate. Instead Saul had captured Agag, the Amalekite king, and the best of the Amalekite
10
livestock, destroying only those animals that were worthless. At the LORD’s command Samuel
confronted Saul about the animal sounds he heard, and Saul argued that the people had spared
these animals for sacrificial purposes. Saul protested that he had kept the commandment of the
LORD although he acknowledged that he had captured Agag, and the people had saved the best
of the animals for sacrificial purposes. Samuel pointed out that obedience is better than sacrifices
(cf. Isa 66:2-4; Hos 6:6; Am 5:21-24; Mic 6:6-8). Because Saul had rejected the word of the
LORD, the LORD had rejected him as king. Although Saul confessed his sin and begged for
forgiveness, his request was not granted. Samuel told him that the LORD had taken the kingdom
of Israel away from him for this violation of the principles of Holy War and had given it to a
person who was better than he. The modern reader is shocked, however. when Samuel hewed
king Agag to pieces in the sanctuary at Gilgal (1 Samuel 15).
We are told that the spirit of THE LORD departed from Saul and that an evil spirit tormented
him (1 Sam 16:14, 15, 16, 23; 18:10; 19:9), leading to the selection of David to play soothing
music for him. Saul’s radical mood change led to his throwing a spear at David twice in an
attempt to kill him (1 Sam 18:10-11; 19:10-11). Saul also attempted to kill his son Jonathan with
a spear (1 Sam 20:33). Twice the spirit of the LORD threw him into a prophetic frenzy. The first
report of this phenomenon seems to be positive (1 Sam 10:9-13), and the second negative (1 Sam
19:18-24).
The book of Samuel also reports inconsistent behavior by Saul. At first Saul offered his
daughter Merab to David in marriage and wished him success in battle, hoping that the
Philistines would succeed in killing him whereas he has not succeeded (1 Sam 18:16). David
expressed his own unworthiness for such a marriage, but when the time for marriage came, Saul
gave Merab to someone else (1 Sam 18:19). Ironically, Michal, another daughter of Saul, fell in
11
love with David, and Saul tried to use this circumstance to bring about David’s demise. He
demanded a bride price of one hundred Philistine foreskins. Since these could only be obtained
by killing that many Philistines, Saul was clearly trying to use others to get rid of David
violently. David, however, accomplished this Herculean task, and Saul gave him his daughter
Michal in marriage.
When Saul learned that David had sought food and a weapon from the priests of Nob (1 Sam
21:1-6), he seized Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, the head of those priests, and sentenced
Ahimelech to death. Saul’s assistants refused to carry out this assignment, but Saul then called
on Doeg the Edomite, who killed eighty-five priests. Doeg also killed the lay citizens of Nob and
their livestock.
Before his final battle with the Philistines, Saul was greatly afraid, and when he inquired of
the LORD, he got no answer through dreams, Urim, or prophets. Saul then in disguise sought out
a medium at Endor. The medium at first resisted his request to bring him the dead Samuel by
reminding her unidentified guest that Saul had banned mediums and wizards from the land.
When the medium succeeded in bringing up Samuel, the prophet reminded Saul that the LORD
had turned away from him and become his enemy. In addition, Samuel noted that the LORD had
torn the kingdom from Saul and had given it to David. He cited Saul’s disobedience in regard to
Amalek in 1 Samuel 15 and predicted that Saul and his sons would join Samuel in the realm of
the dead on the next day. Throughout the account it is difficult to know whether we are reading
an accurate account of Saul’s deeds or one colored by a pro-Davidic narrator.
IV.
The Ethical Conduct of Women in Samuel
12
Hannah is one of the two wives of Elkanah, but she was barren and was ridiculed by the
other wife, Peninnah who had children. A person having two wives was not an uncommon
experience (see the law in Deut 21:15-17, but we should note that Elkanah is the last commoner
in the Bible who is reported to have had more than one wife. Kings, however, regularly had a
number of wives (for David’s multiple wives, see 2 Sam 5:13-16). During her family’s annual
pilgrimage to Shiloh, Hannah prayed fervently for a child and vowed that this child would
become a lifelong Nazirite (1 Sam 1:1-11). Eli misunderstood her fervor and supposed her to be
drunk. Eli, however, was convinced by her explanation and promised her that she would bear a
child, which she did, Samuel (1 Sam 1:12-20). After Hannah had weaned the child, she returned
to Shiloh and fulfilled her vow by giving the child to THE LORD (1 Sam 1:21-28).
At this point the book of Samuel includes the Song of Hannah, which is one of the ethical
high points of the book (1 Sam 2:1-10). She speaks of the LORD as the great reverser: “The
barren has borne seven, but she who has many children is forlorn.” Her song continues this
theme by noting that the LORD kills and brings to life, the LORD raises up the poor from the
dust to make them sit with princes. The song ends anachronistically by affirming that the LORD
will give strength to his king and exalt the power of his anointed. In the final form of the book of
Samuel her prayer for the king is ironic since when Samuel was old, he was shocked to hear the
people’s request for a king (1 Sam 8:6).
Other women are noted for their fidelity in Samuel. See especially the wise woman of Tekoa,
who told David a parable designed to force David to bring back from exile Absalom (2 Sam
14:1-20). Abigail is also eloquent in apologizing for her husband Nabal and thereby saving him
from David’s violence (1 Samuel 25). One of the most outrageous abuses of women is
Absalom’s having sexual relations with David’s concubines in plain sight to demonstrate that he
13
was exercising royal power (2 Sam 15:16; 16:21-22). When David was restored to the throne, he
decided that he would no longer have sexual relations with these women (2 Sam 20:3).
Ishbosheth’s accusation that Abner had slept with Rizpah, the concubine of Saul, may suggest
that Abner also had royal ambitions (2 Sam 3:7-8). See also Adonijah’s request for Abishag (1
Kgs 1:52). See also the discussion of Tamar’s resistance to rape above.
V.
The Violent Sons of Zeruiah
Joab, Asahel, and Abishai, sons of David’s sister Zeruiah according to the biblical genealogy,
were consistently involved in acts of violence. Asahel, for example, relentlessly pursued Abner
despite the latter’s attempt to get him to desist. When Abner was faced with the bleak alternative
of killing Asahel or being killed by him, Abner struck Asahel in the stomach with the butt of his
spear, and it came out of Asahel’s back. Joab and Abishai then pursued Abner, but Abner warned
them of the bitter outcome they might face as the result of such fratricidal warfare. Joab stopped
his pursuit, but there were three hundred sixty casualties on Abner’s side and nineteen on Joab’s
side in the events of that day (2 Sam 2:18-32).
A potential treaty between David and Abner led Joab to assassinate Abner. First he
questioned Abner’s motives in negotiating with David (2 Sam 3:25) and then Joab killed Abner
because Abner had killed Joab’s brother Asahel (2 Sam 3:27). David honored Abner by burying
him and indicated that Joab’s actions were wrong (2 Sam 3:33-34). He indicated that the sons of
Zeruiah were too violent for him (2 Sam 3:39). All Israel agreed that David had no part in the
death of Abner (2 Sam 3:37).
During the campaign against Sheba, Joab murdered Amasa, the former military leader of
Absalom and then David’s own military leader, after the collapse of Absalom’s revolt. Joab’s
14
method was similar to the sneak attack he used to murder Abner (2 Sam 20:8-12). In the murder
of Abner and Amasa, one senses that Joab was killing rivals to his own military leadership.
When Joab put the forces of the rebel Sheba under siege, Joab persuaded a wise woman to throw
the severed head of Sheba over the city wall (2 Sam 20:14-20).
In the course of Absalom’s revolt, Shimei, a colleague of Saul, cursed David and threw
stones at him. He called David a murderer and accused him of bloodguilt against the house of
Saul (2 Sam 16:5-8). Saul, Jonathan, Abner, and Ishbosheth had all died violently although
David himself did not seem to be directly involved in their deaths. David had turned over to the
Gibeonites two sons of Saul and five grandsons, whom the Gibeonites killed. If the events in 2
Samuel 21 took place before those of 2 Samuel 16, this may have given Shimei a legitimate
complaint. Abishai, a son of Zeruiah, volunteered to take off Shimei’s head, but David stopped
him, suggesting that the LORD may have ordered Shimei to curse David, that Absalom also
sought David’s life and Shimei had even greater reason to do so, and that the LORD might treat
David well because of Shimei’s cursing (2 Sam 16:9-14). When Shimei later apologized to
David, Abishai wanted to kill him. David decided that no one should be put to death and swore
an oath to Shimei that he would not die (2 Sam 19:18-23). It was Abishai who had offered to
strike Saul dead when he and David visited him in his encampment, but David brusquely rejected
this proposal (1 Sam 26:8-9).
In the sequel to these events, David advised Solomon to execute Joab because of his murder
of the two commanders, Abner and Amasa, in that he retaliated in time of peace for blood that
had been shed in war (1 Kgs 2:5-6). Benaiah carried this out even though Joab had sought
asylum by an altar (1 Kgs 2:31-32). David’s advice to Solomon about executing Joab and Shimei
(1 Kgs 2:8-9) perpetuates a cycle of violence.
15
VI.
Samuel and Other Prophets
Samuel puts himself forward as an example of unlimited integrity (1 Sam 12:15). He was a
king-maker for Saul and David, and a king-breaker for Saul. He models appropriate obedience to
the word of the LORD (1 Sam 3:10). The LORD was with him and made his words come true,
and all Israel recognized him as a trustworthy prophet (1 Sam 3:19-20).
Nathan is another noteworthy prophet. In 2 Samuel 7, after initially supporting David’s
proposal to build the temple, a divine oracle disclosed to him that the LORD would build a house
or dynasty for David, but that the temple would only be built by David’s son Solomon. In 2
Samuel 12 he tells a parable to David that chastises him for committing adultery with Bathsheba
and killing Uriah. In 1 Kings 1 he and Bathsheba convince the feeble David to designate
Solomon as his successor before he dies. Zadok and Nathan anointed Solomon (1 Kings 1).
The prophet Gad had the solemn duty of proposing three different punishments to David for
taking the census, and he instructed David to erect an altar for the LORD on the threshing floor
of Araunah (2 Samuel 24). For the man of God in 1 Sam 2:27, see the next section.
VII.
Corruption of Priests and Judges
Eli tried unsuccessfully to reform his corrupt sons, but they had inappropriate sexual
relations with women at the Tent of Meeting and took the best part of sacrifices that were
being offered. A man of God announced that these two corrupt sons of Eli would die in battle
against the Philistines and that the priestly house of Eli would be replaced by a faithful priest,
who turns out to be Zadok (1 Sam 2:22-36). Eli’s culpability for not restraining his sons is
repeated in the oracle to Samuel in 1 Sam 3:11-14. Eli fell and broke his neck when he heard
that the Philistines had captured the ark (1 Sam 4:18).
16
Despite the faithfulness of Samuel as prophet and judge, his sons Joel and Abijah, whom
he had appointed as judges over Israel, took bribes and perverted justice (1 Sam 8:1-3)
Bibliography
Alter, Robert. The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel. New York:
W. W. Norton, 1999.
Birch, Bruce C. “The First and Second Books of Samuel.” Pages 947-1383 in The New
Interpreter’s Bible. II (ed. Leander E. Keck). Nashville: Abingdon, 1998.
Brueggemann, Walter. First and Second Samuel. Interpretation. A Bible Commentary for
Teaching and Preaching. Louisville: John Knox, 1990.
Klein, Ralph W. 1 Samuel. 2nd edition. Word Biblical Commentary 10. Nashville: Thomas
Nelson, 2008.
Tsumura, David Toshio. The First Book of Samuel. The New International Commentary on the
Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.
Ralph W. Klein
17