You may subscribe yourself at the Ascension site here and receive notifications in your email, or just follow along on my blog. Bible in One Year Readings Index
Agape Bible Study
2 Samuel Chapter 1
There is probably no other man in Salvation History other than the "man who is God," Jesus of Nazareth, who had such an intensely personal relationship with Yahweh as the shepherd-warrior-king David of Bethlehem. It is true that Abraham and Moses both had unique relationships with Yahweh, but it is David who writes such profoundly beautiful and deeply spiritual poetry expressing his love and devotion to the God who called him both to suffering and greatness (see the Psalms attributed to David). David's name in Hebrew is dawid, which means "beloved." He may have had another Hebrew name, but he is called "David" from the moment of his anointing by the prophet Samuel (1 Sam 16:12-13), and he is known from that time forward as God's "beloved."
The author of the Book of Samuel is unknown, but as in the case of first part of this book known as 1 Samuel, some scholars have assigned authorship first to the prophet Samuel and after Samuel's death to David's prophet Nathan or possibly the prophet Gad (see 1 Chr 29:29). Some of the material from 2 Samuel seems to have come from a lost ancient book of poetry called the Book of Jasher or Yashar (Hebrew = seper hayyasar, "Book of the Upright or Just" or "Book of the Song." See references to this lost text in 2 Samuel 1:18; Joshua 10:13; and 1 Kings 8:12.
The second book of Samuel begins immediately after Saul's death when David becomes the king of Judah. The book can be divided into three parts. Part I covers chapters 1:1-11:1 and deals with David's triumphs in driving out the last of Israel's enemies and in consolidating his rule over the twelve tribes of Israel to become Israel's king with Jerusalem as his capital.
Part II, in chapters 11:2-20:26, deals with David's struggles and tragedies within his nation and within his family, including his sons' intrigues concerning the succession.
The third part is an appendix consisting of several stories from David's outlaw period to his years as Israel's king.
The book ends dramatically with David's offer of self-sacrifice to save his people from the wrath of God and with the building Yahweh's holy altar on the height of Mount Moriah in Jerusalem. The building of God's sacrificial altar on Mount Moriah is a prelude to the building of the Jerusalem Temple in 1 Kings by David's son and heir, Solomon. The main theme of the book is David as God's "messiah/anointed one" who is Yahweh's instrument in moving forth His plan for mankind's salvation. In this sense David is the precursor for his descendant, Jesus of Nazareth (Mt 1:1), for it is in David's role as God's anointed that the tradition of royal messianisam begins (see 2 Sam 7:10-17) and which will climax in Jesus' self-sacrifice on a lower elevation of Mount Moriah for the salvation of all humanity.
Chapter 1: The Death of Saul and the Defeat of Israel
At the end of the first book of Samuel, the Philistines were launching a campaign for control of northern Israel and the Israelites were preparing to meet the Philistines in battle in the Valley of Jezreel. David had been dismissed by his Philistine overlord, the king of Gath, and therefore David and his men made the three day journey back to their town of Ziklag in the Negeb of Judah (1 Sam 29). Upon arriving at Ziklag, they discovered that the undefended town had been burned to the ground in a raid by the Amalekites who had come up out of the southern Negeb. The Amalekites had captured their wives, children, and animals and had taken them south. David and his men immediately set out in pursuit of the Amalekites, caught up with them, and defeated them in battle. They recovered their wives and children, the captives from other towns in the Judean Negeb, and all the herds and flocks of animals (1 Sam 30).
In the meantime, the Philistines engaged the Israelite army of King Saul in battle at Mount Gilboa at the western end of the Jezreel Valley. Saul and three of his sons, including David's friend Jonathan, were killed on Mount Gilboa and the Israelites were defeated by the Philistines. The Philistines desecrated the bodies of Saul and his sons and hung them on the walls of the captured town of Beth-Shean.
2 Samuel 1:1-10 ~ David Learns of Saul's death
The second half of the Book of Samuel begins in the same way as the Book of Joshua and the Book of Judges by announcing the death of a major figure in salvation history. The Book of Joshua begins by announcing the death of Moses (Josh 1:1) and the Book of Judges begins by announcing the death of Joshua (Josh 1:1).
On the third day after David's victory over the Amalekites in 1 Samuel 31, a young man comes into David's camp with torn clothes and dirt on his head, the conventional signs of mourning (verse 2). The young man wants to make it clear that he regards Saul's death and Israel's defeat as a catastrophic event, but as we shall see he really sees the event as an opportunity.
Notice the mention of the "third day;" it is the fourth mention of "three days" since 1 Samuel 30:1, 12, 13. Three is always the symbolic number of some important event, especially an important event in God's divine plan. This is the inspired writer's way of telling us that all these events are directed by God's divine providence.
In verse four Davis says: "What has happened?" He uses the same identical Hebrew words as were spoken in 1 Samuel 4:16 by the priest Eli when he was brought the news of Israel's defeat by the Philistines and the death of his sons. There are several echoes of that scene in this part of the narrative. Notice that the phrase in the Hebrew text: "the youth who was telling him" is repeated three times in verses 5, 6 and 13.
The account of Saul's death in 2 Samuel does not agree with the account in 1 Samuel 31:3-7 where it was recorded that Saul fell on his sword, committing suicide. Although only the manner of Saul's death disagrees with the first account, the other details are in agreement. There are two different ways to explain the apparent discrepancy:
- The young man was lying about dispatching Saul at his request to curry favor with David and receive some kind of a reward. He simply came upon Saul's dead body lying on the battlefield.
- The young man came upon a dying Saul whose attempt to commit suicide had not been successful. In verse 10 the young man says that "he finished" and not that he killed Saul who was dying. It is possible that when Saul fell on his sword that his armor bearer only thought he was dead.
In verse 8 we learn that the young man is an Amalekite. That is significant because an Amalekite, even one who was a resident alien in Israel, would have no religious reasons to hinder him from doing violence to an Israelite king who is "Yahweh's anointed." Notice the young man never refers respectfully to Saul as Israel's "king."
Biblical scholar Robert Alter writes that the sentence construction and vocabulary suggest that Saul knows that he is dying. He writes that the Hebrew noun appears to be related to a root that suggests "confusion" or alternately "weakness," and the construction of the verbal stem suggests that Saul is asking the Amalekite not to kill him but to finish him off before the Philistines can get to him. He also points out that the Hebrew sentence seems to leave off as though the Amalekite was suggesting that Saul was too weak to continue speaking (Ancient Israel, page 426). Since the young man stood "over" Saul to "finish him" in verses 9 and 10 (the more accurate wording in the Hebrew text), Saul was probably on his knees and leaning on his upright spear. It is also unlikely that the young Amalekite came upon Saul as the battle was raging as he suggests in verse 6. It is more likely that he was a battlefield scavenger who happened upon Saul before the Philistines. The young man took Saul's crown and bracelet, signs of Saul's identity, to bring to David as proof that he killed Saul. He probably hoped to curry favor with David by telling him that he had killed David's enemy. Unfortunately, it does not turn out as the young Amalekite planned.
2 Samuel 1:11-16 ~ David's Reaction to the News of Saul's death
David displays the tradition expression of grief by tearing his clothing and his men follow his example. They also weep and fast until evening (the beginning of the next day was at sundown).
Question: For whom do they weep?
Answer: They weep:
- for Saul
- for Jonathan
- for the (covenant) people of Yahweh
- for the "House of Israel"
Question: What order does David give concerning the young Amalekite and why?
Answer: David orders his execution for taking the life of God's anointed.
1 Chronicles: Tells much the same history contained in 1and 2 Samuel, but from another point of view. It emphasizes the religious aspect of David's reign, notably his preparations for the building of the Temple.
CHALLENGE: “The early Christians did not take Jesus’ words ‘This is my body’ and ‘This is my blood literally.’ They saw them as symbols.”
DEFENSE:The record shows that the Church Fathers interpreted these passages literally.
On the Fathers of the first and second centuries, Protestant patristics expert J.N.D. Kelly writes: Ignatius roundly declares that . . . the bread is the flesh of Jesus, the cup his blood. Clearly he intends this realism to be taken strictly, for he makes it the basis of his argument against the Docetists’ denial of the reality of Christ’s body. . . . Irenaeus teaches that the bread and wine are really the Lord’s body and blood. His witness is, indeed, all the more impressive because he produces it quite incidentally while refuting the Gnostic and Docetic rejection of the Lord’s real humanity (Early Christian Doctrines,
197–198).
Concerning the Fathers of the third century, he writes: Hippolytus speaks of “the body and the blood” through which the Church is saved, and Tertullian regularly describes the bread as “the Lord’s body.” The converted pagan, he remarks, “feeds on the richness of the Lord’s body, that is, on the Eucharist.” The realism of his theology comes to light in the argument, based on the intimate relation of body and soul, that just as in baptism the body is washed with water so that the soul may be cleansed, so in the Eucharist “the flesh feeds upon Christ’s body and blood so that the soul may be filled with God.” Clearly his assumption is that the Savior’s body and blood are as real as the baptismal water.
Cyprian’s attitude is similar. Lapsed Christians who claim communion without doing penance, he declares, “do violence to his body and blood, a sin more heinous against the Lord with their hands and mouths than when they denied him.” Later he expatiates on the terrifying consequences of profaning the sacrament, and the stories he tells confirm that he took the Real Presence literally” (211–212).
Kelly concludes: Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood (440).
Jimmy Akin, A Daily Defense: 365 Days (Plus One) to Becoming a Better Apologist
No comments:
Post a Comment