NBBC SS: 2 Samuel 9-10

Introduction: In the chapters before us today, David has just come off of some incredible victories over the Philistines, the Moabites, and the Zobites (who were allied with the Arameans).

In the midst of this peace, David makes an important inquiry in 2 Samuel 9.

Then, in the midst of sorrow, David makes another inquiry in 2 Samuel 10.

However, both of these chapters are bound together by David’s intention to demonstrate something to 2 different individuals. See if you can pick up on what that is as we read.

One final thing, we’re going to see how David’s intentions are received in 2 different ways. David’s response and the reasons for the responses of the others are going to be instructive for us.

Let’s start by reading the whole of 2 Samuel 9 and follow up with some observations.

2 Samuel 9 “1 Then David said, “Is there yet anyone left of the house of Saul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan’s sake?” 2 Now there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba, and they called him to David; and the king said to him, “Are you Ziba?” And he said, “I am your servant.” 3 The king said, “Is there not yet anyone of the house of Saul to whom I may show the kindness of God?” And Ziba said to the king, “There is still a son of Jonathan who is crippled in both feet.” 4 So the king said to him, “Where is he?” And Ziba said to the king, “Behold, he is in the house of Machir the son of Ammiel in Lo-debar.”5 Then King David sent and brought him from the house of Machir the son of Ammiel, from Lo-debar. 6 Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, came to David and fell on his face and prostrated himself. And David said, “Mephibosheth.” And he said, “Here is your servant!” 7 David said to him, “Do not fear, for I will surely show kindness to you for the sake of your father Jonathan, and will restore to you all the land of your grandfather Saul; and you shall eat at my table regularly.” 8 Again he prostrated himself and said, “What is your servant, that you should regard a dead dog like me?”9 Then the king called Saul’s servant Ziba and said to him, “All that belonged to Saul and to all his house I have given to your master’s grandson. 10 “You and your sons and your servants shall cultivate the land for him, and you shall bring in the produce so that your master’s grandson may have food; nevertheless Mephibosheth your master’s grandson shall eat at my table regularly.” Now Ziba had fifteen sons and twenty servants. 11 Then Ziba said to the king, “According to all that my lord the king commands his servant so your servant will do.” So Mephibosheth ate at David’s table as one of the king’s sons. 12 Mephibosheth had a young son whose name was Mica. And all who lived in the house of Ziba were servants to Mephibosheth. 13 So Mephibosheth lived in Jerusalem, for he ate at the king’s table regularly. Now he was lame in both feet.”

Let’s take a look at David first from this passage.

What are some things that stand out to you concerning David in this first chapter?

David is the one who takes the initiative in this inquiry.

Why does David make this inquiry?

For the sake of Jonathan.

What is David referring to here in making this statement?

He’s referring to the commitment that he made with Jonathan.

But, Jonathan’s dead.

Does Jonathan’s deceased status make any difference on the commitment that David made with Jonathan?

No.

David is being faithful to a commitment that he made.

What do we call it when someone is faithful to a commitment that they made, regardless of the accountability?

Integrity.

David’s initiative demonstrates integrity.

It’s important to remember that 1 Samuel 16 identifies that God’s Spirit is with David as this point.

Therefore, any actions of David’s part that please the Lord can be attributed to the Spirit at work in him, just like in us.

Additionally, integrity or “moral excellence” is referenced in 2 Peter 1 as being one of those virtues that demonstrates the change that God is making in one confirming that they belong to Him.

Hence, just as David needed the Spirit to empower him to keep his commitments regardless of the circumstance, so do we.

Notice next what David intends to do through this initiative.

He chooses to show kindness.

The kindness here includes: 1) restoration and 2) gracious provision.

What’s fascinating is that the term “kindness” is used in the next chapter.

However, that usage has a different provision than the restorations and gracious provision indicated here.

Thus, kindness need not have a uniform resulting action.

Kindness is used to meet the need of the moment.

Significantly, David adds on an important qualifier when he meets with Ziba.

The kindness of God.

This suggests for us that David wants to show kindness in a way similar to how God would show kindness.

In other words, David is wanting to be godly and show kindness to another.

Hence, David is demonstrating a characteristic of godliness here: kindness.

Importantly, the term translated kindness can also be translated as mercy.

This theme is picked up in the NT in James 2:13.

The above verse points out not just the importance of showing mercy but also the difficulty.

Hence, if it’s difficult but required, we need to rely on something more than just ourselves to demonstrate mercy to others.

We must, instead, rely on God’s Spirit Who worked in David to produce this virtuous kindness/mercy and can do the same in us.

In demonstration of the Spirit at work in him, David took the initiative to extend virtuous mercy in fulfillment of his commitment to his departed friend.

What is the temptation when showing kindness that is associated with a commitment made prior?

To show kindness out of obligation.

When showing kindness out of obligation there’s a particular temptation.

That being to complain.

Peter addresses this in his first letter when he encourages the diverse group of believers to 1 Peter 4:9 “9 Be hospitable to one another without complaint.”

Brothers and sisters, while we get no hint that David was anything but eager and happy to show this kindness, this is nevertheless a temptation that we will face that we must rely on the Lord to purge from our heart so that any kindness shown, even under commitment, occurs from a heart happy to show such kindness.

Let’s shift from looking at David to reflecting on the object of David’s virtuous mercy.

Who ends up being identified as the one who will be the recipient of David’s kindness?

Mephibosheth.

What’s incredible is that way that Mephibosheth acts here.

He is described as prostrating himself, bowing low in demonstration of deep respect for the king.

He refers to himself as the servant of David, whereas he’s from the line of royalty the previously occupied the throne.

David tells Mephibosheth to not be afraid, suggesting that the former could tell that the latter was fearful in David’s presence.

He exclaims in wonder that he’s unworthy of the king’s kindness, comparing himself to being nothing better than a dead dog.

Notice, who affirms Mephibosheth’s estimation of himself?

No one.

David seemingly moves on from that discussion to setting things in order for Mephibosheth’s ongoing care.

This continues to not only evidence Mephibosheth’s humility but also David’s kindness.

David isn’t concerned about Mephibosheth’s estimation of himself.

David is concerned about faithfulness where the circumstances are warranted.

Brothers and sisters, when the Lord calls upon us to show faithfulness to an individual, we must do so regardless of the person, their character or circumstances.

These are not characteristics of a former administration.

Mephibosheth could have demonstrated hostility and bitterness since his family was the heir to the Israelite throne.

Instead, what word could we use to describe Mephibosheth’s actions and words?

Humility.

What I can’t help but reflect on are James words quoting from Proverbs 3:34, James 4:6 “6 But He gives a greater grace. Therefore it says, “God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to the humble.””

Mephibosheth received abundant, undeserved kindness and demonstrated humility - God’s Word promises grace to those who are humble.

Brothers and sisters, when we receive any kindness, whether unexpected, abundant, or otherwise, let us be sure to respond humbly acknowledging our gratitude.

This is something that I have had to learn, particularly following the Lord making Harold my son.

Our church family responded with such generosity post Carrie’s heart attack and Harold’s arrival that I had to learn how to be a gracious receiver reminding myself that my church family wants to do these generous things because of what the Lord is doing in them.

Therefore, I don’t want to stand in the way of someone being blessed by sharing with my family.

Mephibosheth’s humble response to David’s virtuous mercy is a high point in this book that is disappointingly countered by the next chapter.

2 Samuel 10 “1 Now it happened afterwards that the king of the Ammonites died, and Hanun his son became king in his place. 2 Then David said, “I will show kindness to Hanun the son of Nahash, just as his father showed kindness to me.” So David sent some of his servants to console him concerning his father. But when David’s servants came to the land of the Ammonites, 3 the princes of the Ammonites said to Hanun their lord, “Do you think that David is honoring your father because he has sent consolers to you? Has David not sent his servants to you in order to search the city, to spy it out and overthrow it?” 4 So Hanun took David’s servants and shaved off half of their beards, and cut off their garments in the middle as far as their hips, and sent them away. 5 When they told it to David, he sent to meet them, for the men were greatly humiliated. And the king said, “Stay at Jericho until your beards grow, and then return.”

David is reflecting on a relationship with Nahash that is otherwise not specified in detail in any other part of the Scripture.

Like Mephibosheth, David wants to show kindness but in a way other than material.

This time, it’s kindness through consolation in the wake of the passing of Hanun’s father

There was no way that David could have anticipated what would have happened next.

This suggests for us that this David’s circumstance could happen to anyone, even when the other party is facing a loss.

While it’s possible that David may have regretted sending this party to the Ammonites, it was nonetheless the right thing to do.

This reflection reminds us that we don’t act because of results.

Instead, we do what we do, regardless of the response, because we are convinced that it pleases the Lord Whom we want to please.

Yet, what complicates this gesture of kindness?

Hanun’s counselors.

Where do Hanun’s counselors come up with this idea?

Spies in the Israelite kingdom?

The text does not specify.

In fact, it suggests that this idea was concocted by them in particular.

So, if they concocted this idea, where did this idea originate?

Themselves and their perception of the circumstances.

These counselors would have doubtless been aware of the relationship that Nahash had with David that would have prompted David’s response.

Hence, they would have already known what kind of person David was.

And, in knowing David’s character, they should have known the integrity of David’s overtures here.

Relatedly, in researching the usage of the term “spy” with David a result turns up in 1 Samuel 26:4.

If you recall, David is being pursued by Saul, now for the 2nd time.

Though David sent out spies and removed the king’s spear and water jug, David has no intention of killing Saul, even while he had every opportunity and encouragement to do so.

Hence, our expectation is that, even if David were sending spies, it would be for information to preserve life instead of taking life.

Additionally, since David’s intentions were made explicit at the beginning of the passage, we have no reason to believe that they weren’t explicit to Hanun in the first place.

Therefore, Hanun has no excuse to believe the counsel he has received and, ultimately, acts upon in such a way as to damage the relationship with David’s kingdom.

What I also find fascinating about this narrative is that Nahash’s threat against Jabesh-Gilead that prompted and Israelite intervention was potential.

Nahash had threatened, in 1 Samuel 11, that he would gouge out their right eye.

Here, Hanun did not announce his prank but undertook it.

Hanun’s counselors concocted a narrative that went against David faithful intentions.

What do we call it when someone has made something up that is contrary to reality?

A lie.

And, unfortunately, Hanun acts on this lie by humiliating David’s representatives and, thereby, David’s royal administration and authority.

Lies can lead to a response to shame another.

The unfortunate reality, brothers and sisters, is that we continue to see this happen today, do we not?

The news spins a narrative that then prompts further catfighting.

Or, a social media influencer promotes a tale that impacts their followers and their harsh rhetoric online.

The ease with which Hanun believes this lie points out the common human disposition towards believing lies.

Yet, we need not be at the mercy of these lies.

Instead, we can rely on the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, Who will lead us to believe what is true and act upon it.

Unfortunately, not only do Hanun’s actions prompted by the lie he believed break down relations with David’s kingdom but also escalates even further.

6 Now when the sons of Ammon saw that they had become odious to David, the sons of Ammon sent and hired the Arameans of Beth-rehob and the Arameans of Zobah, 20,000 foot soldiers, and the king of Maacah with 1,000 men, and the men of Tob with 12,000 men. 7 When David heard of it, he sent Joab and all the army, the mighty men. 8 The sons of Ammon came out and drew up in battle array at the entrance of the city, while the Arameans of Zobah and of Rehob and the men of Tob and Maacah were by themselves in the field. 9 Now when Joab saw that the battle was set against him in front and in the rear, he selected from all the choice men of Israel, and arrayed them against the Arameans. 10 But the remainder of the people he placed in the hand of Abishai his brother, and he arrayed them against the sons of Ammon. 11 He said, “If the Arameans are too strong for me, then you shall help me, but if the sons of Ammon are too strong for you, then I will come to help you. 12 “Be strong, and let us show ourselves courageous for the sake of our people and for the cities of our God; and may the Lord do what is good in His sight.” 13 So Joab and the people who were with him drew near to the battle against the Arameans, and they fled before him. 14 When the sons of Ammon saw that the Arameans fled, they also fled before Abishai and entered the city. Then Joab returned from fighting against the sons of Ammon and came to Jerusalem. 15 When the Arameans saw that they had been defeated by Israel, they gathered themselves together. 16 And Hadadezer sent and brought out the Arameans who were beyond the River, and they came to Helam; and Shobach the commander of the army of Hadadezer led them. 17 Now when it was told David, he gathered all Israel together and crossed the Jordan, and came to Helam. And the Arameans arrayed themselves to meet David and fought against him. 18 But the Arameans fled before Israel, and David killed 700 charioteers of the Arameans and 40,000 horsemen and struck down Shobach the commander of their army, and he died there. 19 When all the kings, servants of Hadadezer, saw that they were defeated by Israel, they made peace with Israel and served them. So the Arameans feared to help the sons of Ammon anymore.”

Importantly, which side shows the aggression here?

The Ammonites.

Though David is described as having an attitude that is repulsed by the Ammonite behavior, there’s no signal of aggression on his part.

The term “odious” that’s used here has the idea of disgust and is even used of rotting flesh.

I prefer the term repulsive.

Example: groundhog under shed.

In other words, Hanun had really messed up his relationship with David.

Notice, though, Hanun does not seek the reconcile!

Instead, he builds up the military.

Hanun, though he could have reconciled, is ready to fight when proven that he’s in the wrong and demonstrates a great deal of what’s going on in his heart here.

Rather than reconciling, if an individual is ready to fight, there’s something more going on in their heart.

When confronted with a wrong, we want to respond in humility.

Then, as we have previously considered from James 4:6 and Proverbs 3:34, we will receive grace.

Instead, he prepares for a skirmish only in response to the Ammonite military buildup.

I believe that the sentiment of the Israelites is reflected in Joab’s speech.

Joab encourages the people to show courage, “for the sake of our people” (cf. 2 Sam 10:12).

In other words, Joab sees this engagement as protecting his countrymen from the aggression of Ammonites.

Relatedly, Joab quickly returns to Jerusalem from the fighting once the Arameans (Syrians) and Ammonites flee!

Hence, Joab simply wants to protect the people rather than escalate the conflict.

Brothers and sisters, the point that I’m seeking to make here concerns the fact that Joab and the Israelite army are not seeking to punish the Ammonites.

They’re only seeking to dissolve the threat for the safety of the people.

The temptation when a kindness is rebuffed and there’s an escalation of hostilities is to punish the aggressor.

Instead, Joab has the right idea.

Protect the people.

Importantly, Joab not only has the correct perspective to deescalate the hostilities but also as to Who is in charge of the whole affair.

He states as much in 2 Sam 10:12.

“may the Lord do what is good in His sight.”

Joab is both doing the right thing and confident in the Lord.

Chances are, not many if none of us will be called upon to deescalate military tensions such as we read in the passage today.

However, we all will face interpersonal circumstances where we might be called upon to offer a timely word to deflate the conflict/tension.

Like Joab, we don’t want to make things worse by escalating tensions.

Instead, we want to apply the right strategy, trusting the Lord for the protection of His people and the sake of His name (“the cities of our God” - where His Name dwells, hence, reputation) towards stifling the aggression.

Conclusion: Brothers and sisters, we have seen various reactions to David’s kindness, one in humility and the other and deceived aggression.

Under the Spirit’s empowerment, let us show others abundant mercy regardless of commitment and without the burden of obligation.

Like Mephibosheth, let us respond to such graciousness with humble gratitude.

Unlike Hanun, let us seek the Holy Spirit to teach us what is true and reject what is false that could lead to escalated tensions and conflict.

Like Joab, let us trust the Lord with our efforts to deescalate conflict for the good of His people and the praise of His Name.