2 Samuel 14

Egypt on the south, to the Euphrates River on the north, and on the east he conquered Edom, Moab, and Ammon, and on the north defeated the Arameans and the Syrians, including Hamath. Because of God’s gifts and help, David undoubtedly became Israel’s greatest king and greatest military genius. He was blessed with courageous men like Joab and Abishai, plus his “mighty men” (2 Sam. 23; 1 Chron. 11:10–47).

We have seen in the first ten chapters of 2 Samuel how God empowered David to defeat Israel’s enemies and establish and expand the kingdom. Then David committed the sins of adultery, murder, and deception (chap. 11—12), and the rest of the book describes David wrestling with problems caused by his own children. His days are dark and disappointing, but he still depends on the Lord, and the Lord enables him to overcome and prepare the nations for the reign of his son Solomon. What life does to us depends on what life finds in us, and in David was a muscular faith in the living God.

Absalom is the chief actor in this part of the drama, for it was Absalom who helped to turn the drama into a tragedy. The three heirs to David’s throne were Amnon, David’s firstborn, Absalom, his third son, and Adonijah, who was born fourth (1 Chron. 3:1–2). God had warned David that the sword would not depart from his own household (12:10), and Absalom (which means “peaceful”) was the first to take up that sword. David’s judgment against the rich man in Nathan’s story was, “He shall restore the lamb fourfold” (12:6), and that judgment fell upon David’s own head. Bathsheba’s baby died; Absalom killed Amnon for raping Tamar; Joab killed Absalom during the battle of Mount Ephraim; and Adonijah was slain for trying to usurp the throne from Solomon (1 Kings 2:12–25).

David was reigning over Israel, but sin and death were reigning within his own family (Rom. 5:14, 17, 21). God had forgiven David’s sins (12:13), but David was discovering that the consequences of forgiven sin are very painful. God had blessed David with many sons (1 Chron. 28:5), but now the Lord would turn some of those blessings into curses (Mal. 2:1–2). “Your own wickedness will correct you, and your backslidings will rebuke you” (Jer. 2: nkjv). The events in chapters 13 and 14 unfold like a tragic symphony in five movements: from love to lust (13:1–14), from lust to hatred (13:15–22), from hatred to murder (13:23–36), from murder to exile (13:37–39), and from exile to reconciliation (14:1–23).

Joab knew his king very well and recognized the signs of David’s yearning for his exiled son. As head of the army, Joab was concerned that Israel have a crown prince ready to reign just in case something happened to David, who was now close to sixty. But Absalom couldn’t come home unless David gave permission, and the king wouldn’t give permission until he was convinced it was the right thing to do. It was the king’s duty to uphold the law, and Absalom was guilty of plotting the murder of his half brother Amnon.

David loved his son and undoubtedly was convicted about the way he had pampered him, but how could he get out of this dilemma? Joab provided the solution to the problem.

Joab reasons with the king (vv. 1–20). Just as Nathan had confronted David the sinner by telling him a story (12:1–7), so Joab confronted David the father and king by putting a fabricated account of a family problem into the mouth of a woman who was both wise and a very good actress. She came to the king dressed in mourning and told him about her family troubles. Her two sons had an argument in the field and the one killed the other. (This sounds like Cain and Abel, Gen. 4:8–16.) The other relatives wanted to slay the guilty son and avenge his brother’s blood (Num. 35:6ff.; Deut. 19:1–14), but she opposed them. Killing her only son would put an end to her family and “quench her coal” (v. 7). According to the law, the surviving son was guilty and should be slain (Ex. 21:12; Lev. 24:17), but she wanted the king to pardon her surviving son.

Nathan’s story about the ewe lamb touched the heart of David the shepherd, and this story about a warring family moved the heart of David the father. His first response was to assure her he would “take up the case” (v. 8), but that wasn’t good enough for her. Sometimes the wheels of government turn slowly, and her case was a matter of life and death. When she said she would assume the guilt of whatever decision he made, David promised to protect her if anybody approached her about the matter (vv. 9–10). But the woman still wasn’t satisfied, so she asked the king to take an oath to assure her that her son would not be slain, and David agreed (v. 11). Taking an oath in the Lord’s name was binding and could not be ignored.

The woman now had David in a corner (vv. 12–17). If he had agreed to protect a guilty son whom he did not know, how much more was he obligated to protect his own son whom he loved! She had come to him with a matter involving the future of one small family, but the matter concerning Absalom concerned the future of an entire nation. The king didn’t want to see her only son and heir destroyed, but he was willing for the crown prince to be left in exile. He forgave the murderer of her son, so could he not forgive the man who plotted the murder of Amnon? How much longer will the king wait before he sends for his son? After all, life is brief, and when life ends, it’s like water spilled into the earth and can’t be recovered. Slaying the murderer can’t bring back the victim, so why not give him another chance?

God is no respecter of persons, and His law is true, but even God devises ways to show mercy and forgive offenders (v. 14). He punishes sin, to be sure, but He also seeks for ways to reconcile sinners with Himself. (She may have had in mind Ex. 32:30–35 and 34:6–9.) Had He not forgiven David’s sins? The woman confessed that she was afraid that her family would slay her son and rob her of the inheritance God had given them.

It was a stirring speech and David took it to heart. But being a wise man, he realized that the full import of the woman’s plea went far beyond the boundaries of her family and property. David had insight enough to know that she was speaking about the king, Absalom, and the future of the nation of Israel, God’s inheritance. At this point he also must have understood that the entire story was pure fiction and that somebody else was behind all that the so-called widow had spoken. Then the truth came out that indeed it was Joab who had plotted the whole thing, but his motive was a noble one: “Your servant Joab did this to change the present situation” (v. 20 niv).

Joab gives thanks to the king (vv. 21–27). No doubt it was Joab who brought the woman to have this audience with the king, and he probably remained in the room and heard all that the woman and the king said to each other. David had sworn to protect the woman and her son, so the king could do nothing but allow Absalom to come home, and he ordered Joab to go to Geshur and bring the exile back to Jerusalem. Joab’s words in verse 22 suggest strongly that he had discussed the subject with David on more than one occasion, and he was overjoyed that the matter was now settled. Geshur was about eighty miles from Jerusalem, and Joab would waste no time making the journey, so Absalom could have been back home a week or ten days later.

However, there were restrictions placed on the crown prince. He had to remain on his own land, which almost amounted to house arrest, and he wasn’t allowed to go to the palace and see his father. Perhaps David was testing his son to see if he could be trusted, or David may have thought that these restrictions would assure the people that the king wasn’t pampering his difficult son. However, these limitations didn’t hinder the expansion of Absalom’s popularity, for the people loved and praised him. The fact that he had plotted the murder of his half brother and had proved his guilt by running away meant very little to the people, for people must have their idols, and what better idol than a young handsome prince? Lack of character was unimportant; what really mattered was status, wealth, and good looks. In contemporary language, Absalom was a he-man, someone with “machismo,” and the people envied and admired him. Times have not changed.

Whatever Absalom may have had, one thing he didn’t have was a large number of sons to carry on his “famous” name. The three sons mentioned in verse 27 must have died very young, because 18: informs us that Absalom had no sons living at that time. We aren’t surprised that he named his daughter after his sister Tamar. Always the egotist, Absalom erected a pillar to remind everybody of his greatness.

Joab brings Absalom to the king (vv. 28–33). A deceptive “wise woman” could see the king’s face, but the king’s own son was banished from his presence. Absalom put up with this arrangement for two years, trusting that Joab would bring about reconciliation between himself and his father, but Joab did nothing. Absalom knew that being banished from the king’s presence meant he wasn’t expected to be heir to the throne, and more than anything else, Absalom wanted to be king of Israel. A shrewd man like Joab must have realized that Absalom had designs on the throne and that the prince’s growing popularity could provide him the support he needed to take over the kingdom. Knowing how volatile the situation was, the discerning general stayed away from Absalom lest he give the impression he was being controlled by the egotistical prince.

After two years of waiting, during which he had summoned Joab twice and been ignored, Absalom decided that drastic action was necessary. He commanded his servants to set fire to his neighbor’s barley crop, and his neighbor happened to be Joab. This got the general’s attention, for the law required that an arsonist repay the owner of a field whose crop he had destroyed (Ex. 22:6). People knew about the fire, so Joab could visit Absalom without fear of being misunderstood.

Absalom presented Joab with two alternatives: either take him to the king and let him receive his son and forgive him, or take him to court and prove that he was guilty of a capital crime and deserved to die. Absalom would rather be slain than go on living in shameful house arrest. Joab was on the horns of a dilemma, for it was he who had masterminded Absalom’s return to Jerusalem. Joab knew that the people would never permit their favorite royal personage to be tried and convicted of a crime, but how could Joab guarantee that the king would be reconciled to his son? Joab gave Absalom’s message to David and David invited his son to come to see him, and the king received him with a kiss of reconciliation. Father and son were together after five years of separation (13:38; 14:28).

There is no record that Absalom was repentant and sought his father’s forgiveness, or that he visited the temple and offered the required sacrifices. Father and son were together again, but it was a fragile truce and not a real peace. Absalom still had his hidden agenda and was determined to seize David’s throne. Now that the prince was free, he could be visible in the city and enjoy the adulation of the crowds, while at the same time quietly organizing his sympathizers for the coming rebellion. David was about to lose his throne and crown, his concubines, his trusted adviser Ahithophel, and ultimately his son Absalom. It would be the darkest hour in David’s life.