Unless otherwise stated, all citations are taken from the New International Version (NIV).
Originally, this was all one book. So, there really shouldn’t be a break between 1 and 2 Samuel. At the same time, what a cliffhanger! This is reminiscent of the end of The Empire Strikes Back (1980). At the end of the film, the viewer discovers that Vader is Luke’s father, Han Solo is frozen in carbonite, and the rebellion is on the run. The viewer can’t wait to find out what will happen in the sequel.
Similarly, 1 Samuel ends on a massive cliffhanger: Saul and Jonathan are dead, the Philistines have overtaken Israel, and David is in exile. Will David ascend to the throne? If he does, he will have an entire nation to fight (Philistia) and an entire nation to reform (Israel). His country is under foreign occupation, and they are a vicious enemy.
2 Samuel 1 (David Mourns for Saul and Jonathan)
Summary: An Amalekite reports to David how Saul died. He says that he killed him because Saul was half alive. He was probably in the city, scavenging for dead soldiers (1:10), and he was most likely lying, hoping for some kind of reward. David kills him instead (1:15). David mourns for Saul, even after all of that chasing and plotting (1:12). David grieves over the death of Jonathan—his dear friend.
(1:1) After the death of Saul, David returned from defeating the Amalekites and stayed in Ziklag two days.
David returns from defeating the Amalekites to hear this news: Saul and Jonathan were not as fortunate on the battlefield as he was.
(1:2-4) On the third day a man arrived from Saul’s camp, with his clothes torn and with dust on his head. When he came to David, he fell to the ground to pay him honor.
3 “Where have you come from?” David asked him. He answered, “I have escaped from the Israelite camp.”
4 “What happened?” David asked. “Tell me.” He said, “The men fled from the battle. Many of them fell and died. And Saul and his son Jonathan are dead.”
The trip from Mount Gilboa to Ziklag is 80 miles (or a three-day trip).[1] He looks like he just returned from the battle, so David asks to hear the report. The Amalekite gives him the bad news: Saul and Jonathan are dead.
(1:5) Then David said to the young man who brought him the report, “How do you know that Saul and his son Jonathan are dead?”
David becomes suspicious at this point. How does this man know this? He asks the Amalekite to tell his story.
The Amalekite recounts his (false) report
(1:6-10) “I happened to be on Mount Gilboa,” the young man said, “and there was Saul, leaning on his spear, with the chariots and riders almost upon him. 7 When he turned around and saw me, he called out to me, and I said, ‘What can I do?’ 8 “He asked me, ‘Who are you?’ “‘An Amalekite,’ I answered. 9 “Then he said to me, ‘Stand over me and kill me! I am in the throes of death, but I’m still alive.’ 10 “So I stood over him and killed him, because I knew that after he had fallen he could not survive. And I took the crown that was on his head and the band on his arm and have brought them here to my lord.”
The Amalekite tells David that he was the one responsible for killing Saul. He probably thinks that David will be happy that Saul is finally dead. The man must have collected the crown and armband before the Philistines came to capture the dead body.
(1 Sam. 31 & 2 Sam. 1) How did Saul die? 1 Samuel 31 says that Saul died by suicide, but 2 Samuel 1 says an Amalekite killed him. Which account is true?
In the original manuscript, there was no division between 1 and 2 Samuel. These were all one book. Therefore, if this is actually contradictory, then the author contradicted his own story one chapter later! This seems to be too difficult to believe.
To answer this difficulty, 1 Samuel 31 is the accurate account of Saul’s death, while 2 Samuel 1 is an accurate account of the Amalekite’s false story. While the inerrant narrator explains Saul’s death in 1 Samuel 31, a lying Amalekite gives an account in 2 Samuel 1. This Amalekite, no doubt, believed that he would receive a reward from David and the new administration by telling him this story of killing Saul (i.e. taking credit for Saul’s death). However, this backfired, and David slew him (v.15). Later in 1 Chronicles 10, the author reaffirms the account in 1 Samuel 31—not the Amalekite’s story.
Bergen[2] thinks that the Amalekite does give personal eyewitness details. For example, he mentions Saul “leaning on his spear” (2 Sam. 1:6). Furthermore, his presence explains how the Philistines didn’t get the crown. He thinks that the Amalekite hastened Saul’s death after Saul fell on his sword.
(1:11-12) Then David and all the men with him took hold of their clothes and tore them. 12 They mourned and wept and fasted till evening for Saul and his son Jonathan, and for the army of the LORD and the house of Israel, because they had fallen by the sword.
The Amalekite man wouldn’t have been prepared for this reaction. He thought that he was bringing good news (see 2 Sam. 4:10), but David and his men begin to mourn, instead. David fasts and mourns until evening, and then, he has a second conversation with the Amalekite.
(1:13) David said to the young man who brought him the report, “Where are you from?”
“I am the son of an alien, an Amalekite,” he answered.
David asks the man who he is, and he reaffirms the fact that he was an Amalekite. (And David had just been killing Amalekites!)
David likely asks this question because he wanted to know if the man had some understanding of Israelite religion. When he discovers that the Amalekite claims to be a member of Israel (v.13), he acts as judge, jury, and executioner.
(1:14) David asked him, “Why were you not afraid to lift your hand to destroy the LORD’s anointed?”
David himself resisted doing this very thing (1 Sam 24:6, 10; 26:9, 11).
(1:15-16) Then David called one of his men and said, “Go, strike him down!” So he struck him down, and he died. 16 For David had said to him, “Your blood be on your own head. Your own mouth testified against you when you said, ‘I killed the LORD’s anointed.’”
David heard the man’s confession from his own mouth.
David’s lament
(1:17-18) David took up this lament concerning Saul and his son Jonathan, 18 and ordered that the men of Judah be taught this lament of the bow (it is written in the Book of Jashar):
David expresses his grief through writing a song. Perhaps, writing music and poetry was a way for him to grieve.
(2 Sam. 1:18) Why don’t we still have this book in the canon?
(1:19) “Your glory, O Israel, lies slain on your heights. How the mighty have fallen!”
The beauty of Israel has turned into a tragedy.
(1:20) “Tell it not in Gath, proclaim it not in the streets of Ashkelon, lest the daughters of the Philistines be glad, lest the daughters of the uncircumcised rejoice.”
David doesn’t want this song to reach the Philistines; otherwise, they will rejoice over it. The cities are a merism that “stand for the whole of Philistia.”[3]
(1:21) “O mountains of Gilboa, may you have neither dew nor rain, nor fields that yield offerings of grain. For there the shield of the mighty was defiled, the shield of Saul—no longer rubbed with oil.”
This mention of dew and rain could refer to a curse on the land (1 Kings 17:1). Youngblood writes, “In Hebrew thought, dew was often a symbol of resurrection or the renewing of life (cf. Ps 110:3; Isa 26:19).”[4] Bergen comments, “David called for the mountains of Gilboa to be denied life-giving liquid because it was on them that Saul’s life fluids were poured out.”[5]
(1:22-27) From the blood of the slain, from the flesh of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan did not turn back, the sword of Saul did not return unsatisfied. 23 “Saul and Jonathan—in life they were loved and gracious, and in death they were not parted. They were swifter than eagles, they were stronger than lions. 24 O daughters of Israel, weep for Saul, who clothed you in scarlet and finery, who adorned your garments with ornaments of gold. 25 How the mighty have fallen in battle! Jonathan lies slain on your heights. 26 I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women. 27 How the mighty have fallen! The weapons of war have perished!”
We see a contrast between the women in Philistia and in Israel. Bergen comments, “Though the Philistine daughters were to remain silent (v. 20), the ‘daughters of Israel’ by contrast were to ‘weep for Saul’ (v. 24).”[6]
David mentions Jonathan first, rather than Saul. It’s interesting that David doesn’t mention any of Saul’s sins in this lament. There might be a principle here for funerals today. Under grace, we focus on the good deeds—not the sin.
“I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; you have been very pleasant to me” (2 Sam. 1:26a). David referred to both Saul and Jonathan as “beloved and pleasant” (v.23, nāʿîm). This surely doesn’t suggest that David was in a same-sex relationship with Saul—a man who had repeatedly tried to murder him.
“Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women” (2 Sam. 1:26b). This is a poetic lament—not a love song. When he refers to the love of Jonathan, modern people are simply committing eisegesis when they read same-sex erotic love. The “love of women” may “also include [a] mother’s love for her children and that of a wife for her husband.” Moreover, this same Hebrew word is used of “Yahweh’s love for his people (cf. Isa 63:9; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:4).”[7]
(1:26) Were David and Jonathan gay? (cf. 1 Sam. 18:3-4)
Concluding insights
The Amalekite was most likely lying to David, but David still took him at his word for killing Saul.
David expresses his grief through writing and music.
David’s eulogy sounds like there was no problem between them. David was able to view Saul’s life under grace, singing about the good aspects of his life, rather than the bad. David chose to let the bitterness go. David focused on the good things. David focused on his own forgiveness. He heard of this when he was in Ziklag—where he back slid.
2 Samuel 2 (Civil War: David is Anointed King)
Summary: David wonders what to do from here. He is probably lacking direction: The Philistines have conquered Israel, Saul is dead, and so is his best friend. Should he try to take back the throne himself? Is this the right timing?
David goes up to Hebron (v.2). The men of Judah anoint him king over Judah (v.4), and David blesses the men who buried Saul (v.5).
At the same time, Ish-Bosheth was made king over Israel, because he was Saul’s son (v.8). This only lasted for 2 years. It eventually led to a civil war. It took 5 years for Abner to fight off the Philistines and gather the tribes of Israel. While 2:10 says that Ish-Bosheth reigned for two years, it took 5 years for him to actually be made king. Compare with 5:5.
The men of David and the men of Ish-Bosheth met in Gibeon, and Abner suggested that the young men engage in a “battle royale” in front of them (v.14). Twelve pairs of men stabbed each other at the same time (v.16). This was probably some sort of street fight that spread into a battle between Ish-Bosheth (Saul’s son) and David’s men. Who should take over the throne? This battle would answer it. David’s men won. This entire event led to war between David’s clan and Ish-Bosheth’s clan (2 Sam. 3:1).
David is anointed king over Judah
(2:1) David is still standing very close to God, seeking direction. God leads him to Hebron. David is probably wondering if there is still hostility against him—even though Saul is dead. Should he go claim the kingdom now? Is this the right timing? God say, “Go.”
(2:2-3) David takes his entire crew of people: his wives, his men, their families, etc.
(2:4) The men of Hebron anoint David. This is an outward service that shows what God had already done.
David blesses the men who buried Saul (Jabesh-gilead)
(2:5) The men of Jabesh-gilead were the ones who had been rescued by Saul. Remember, Nahash the Ammonite had wanted to pluck out an eye of every man, woman, boy, and girl in their town. But Saul had come to their rescue (1 Sam. 11). This could be why they were so brave in burying Saul. This is also why David meets with them first: (1) to pay his respects for their service and (2) to win them over to loyalty to his kingship.
Note that David refers to Saul as “your lord” twice in this conversation (v.5, 7). David is paying respect to their loyalty to Saul.
(2:6-7) David promises to show this same loyalty to these men if they follow him.
Abner
Regarding this section, Youngblood writes, “Saul may be dead, but Saulide interests are very much alive.”[8]
(2:8-9) Abner grabs the sole surviving son of Saul to become the next king. David had already been anointed king in Judah (the northern kingdom), but Abner props up Ish-Bosheth as the king in Israel (the southern kingdom). However, the use of the words “all Israel” implies that Abner was trying to take over the entire nation.
Ish-Bosheth is most likely the full name of “Ishvi,” who was mentioned in 1 Samuel 14:49. Ish-Bosheth may have been cowardly, because he didn’t fight and die alongside his father and brother (1 Sam. 31). Abner seems to be using Ish-Bosheth as a “puppet king,” because Abner is really pulling the strings in this account.[9]
David had already spoken with the men of Jabesh-Gilead (v.5), but Abner makes a power play and names Ish-Bosheth as the king of Gilead (v.9).
(2:10) This led to a civil war in Israel. The people were divided in their loyalties between David and Ish-Bosheth.
(2:11) Some considerable time has passed.
Face off
(2:12) Abner is Saul’s cousin.
(2:13) Joab is David’s nephew (1 Sam. 26:6).
The “pool of Gibeon” was discovered by archaeologist James B. Pritchard in 1956. It is thirty-seven feet in diameter and thirty-five feet deep.[10]
(2:14-15) Abner suggests a fighting contest (similar in principle to David’s contest with Goliath). The fact that there are twelve men is symbolic that they are fighting for the twelve tribes of Israel.
The counted off randomly, rather than picking their best men.
(2:16) The contest ended in draw. The name “Helkath Hazzurim” means “Field of Daggers.”[11]
(2:17) This must have led to more fighting, because David’s men beat the men of Abner. Note that the parallel is between David and Abner, rather than David and Ish-Bosheth. Abner was the puppet master behind Ish-Bosheth.
Asahel pursues Abner
(2:18-19) With the battle spreading, Abner decides to run away. But Asahel (Joab’s brother) runs after him.
(2:20-22) Abner tries to talk Asahel out of fighting him. But Asahel is determined to kill Abner.
(2:23) Asahel’s momentum must have been the reason for why the spear thrust through him so completely. Abner used the “butt end” of the spear, but it still pierced completely through him.
The other soldiers who saw this happen “stood still.” They must have been thinking, “Oh no… Now things have become serious… Joab is not going to like this!”
Joab pursues Abner
(2:24) Joab and Abishai pursue Abner to Gibeon.
(2:25) Abner gets the men of Benjamin to fight with him, and from a military standpoint, they have the upper hand (“they stood on the top of a certain hill”).
(2:26) Abner pleads with Joab to stopping the revenge-killing.
(2:27) Joab could be referring to Abner’s initial words at the pool of Gibeon (2:14), or it could refer to his recent words (v.26). In the first instance, Joab could be telling Abner that the reason for the violence was Abner’s idea in the first place (2:14), In the second instance, he could be saying that Abner has talked him out of killing him.
(2:28) Joab ends the conflict and walks away with his men.
(2:29) Abner’s men and Joab’s men both walk back to their respective home bases.
(2:30-31) David’s men won on an 18:1 ratio. Abner’s arrogance was decidedly shown to be fatal.
(2:32) The men give Asahel a proper burial in the tomb of his father in Bethlehem.
Concluding insights
We might’ve thought that the story would be over for David once Saul dies. But he has a whole nation to reform.
Notice that Ish-Bosheth was cited as the leader, but they didn’t follow him (v.10). They followed David. Leaders are recognized—not created.
Abner is the real villain of this chapter. He uses Ish-Bosheth as a puppet king, but he is really pulling the strings behind the scenes.
This chapter shows how severe blood feuds could become (“You kill one of mine… I’ll kill one of yours!”).
2 Samuel 3 (Civil War: Death of Abner)
Summary: The lines of Saul and David continue to war, and David’s side grows stronger (v.1). David has six sons (vv.2-5). Abner slept with one of Saul’s old concubines, and he got angry that Ish-Bosheth called him out on this (v.8). Abner decides to put David in charge of the kingdom, instead of Ish-Bosheth. David demands that he marry Michal, and she is forcibly divorced from her husband to marry David (v.15). Her husband was in distress over this (v.16). Joab was angry that Abner (a former enemy) could be an ally to David (v.23). Before Abner can round up the leaders of Israel, Joab stabs him in the stomach, because Abner had killed his brother, Asahel (v.27). Asahel was the fast “gazelle” who followed Abner (back in 2 Samuel 2:23).
David was a musician, and it seems like he is just sitting down and writing these songs (v.34; see also 1:19ff). David wept over the death of Abner (v.35). David was continually doing the right things in the eyes of the people (v.36).
David’s sons
(3:1) Youngblood understands this to be a summary statement regarding the battles of 2:8-32.[12] During this time of war, David has six sons. This period was seven years long (2 Sam. 2:11).
(3:2) Amnon (David’s firstborn) would later be killed by Absalom (David’s third born; 2 Sam. 13:28-29).
(3:3) Chileab is only mentioned here.
Absalom was born from a Geshurite princess. Absalom flees to Geshur after killing Amnon (2 Sam. 13:37-38).
(3:4-5) Adonijah is later assassinated so that Solomon can take the throne (1 Kings 1-2).
We don’t know anything else about Shephatiah or Ithream.
David’s polygamy only increases during this time. It looks like all of these boys had different mothers.
Ish-Bosheth and Abner split apart
(3:6) Abner is the true leader behind Ish-Bosheth. Note that he “made himself strong,” versus David who was “strengthened himself in the Lord” (1 Sam. 30:6).
(3:7) This question comes out of the blue. This was an “an act by Abner that probably is intended to assert his claim to Saul’s throne.”[13]
(3:8) “Am I a dog’s head” is similar to Goliath’s statement: “Am I a dog?” (1 Sam. 17:43). Abner doesn’t deny the charge, but explains his loyalty to Ish-Bosheth. Abner implicitly threatens that he could have handed over the kingdom to David, if he had wanted to.
(3:9-10) Abner publicly states that he will hand the kingdom over to David.
(3:11) Again, Ish-Bosheth is a weakling. Abner is the true leader in this faction.
Abner defects to David’s side
(3:12) Abner could be rhetorically saying that the land of Israel belongs to him, or he could be saying that it belongs to David. Either way, Abner proposes a covenant to give the land over to David.
(3:13) David accepts the contract with one condition: his wife Michal (1 Sam. 14:49). Saul had taken Michal away from David (1 Sam. 25:44), and he wanted her back. David is multiplying even more wives (cf. vv.1-5).
(3:14) David even goes directly to Ish-Bosheth, demanding his wife back. After all, he had paid a price to marry her in the first place (1 Sam. 18:25-27).
(3:15-16) Ish-Bosheth was losing the war (v.1) and losing his commander Abner (vv.9-10). This is why he is so passive in consenting to David’s commands.
Abner calls on the elders of Israel to align with David
(3:17-18) The men of Benjamin never desired David to be king (v.17), and God never made this statement about David (v.18). Instead, these two statements refer to Saul (cf. 1 Sam. 8:4; 9:16). Perhaps Abner is arguing that their hearts’ true desire was for a king like David—not like Saul.
(3:19) The Benjamites were attached to Saul, because Saul was from this tribe (1 Sam. 9:1). So, Abner pays them a special visit to persuade them.
(3:20-21) David is pleased with Abner’s work, and he promises peace toward him. As it turns out, one of David’s men was not in agreement with this peaceful covenant.
(3:22) Again, David’s “peace” is reemphasized here.
(3:23-24) Joab hears about David’s peaceful covenant with Abner—the man who killed his brother (2 Sam. 2:23). This sends Joab into a rage-filled rebuke of David.
(3:25) Joab emphasizes the this is “Abner son of Ner.” Ner was Saul’s cousin. Joab thinks that Abner is trying to double-cross David, learning about his movements so he can assassinate him.
(3:26) Joab rebukes David (the king!) and leaves without hearing David’s response. Joab sets up a meeting with Abner, setting up a trap for him.
(3:27) Joab gets his revenge. He kills Abner by stabbing him in the stomach, which was the same way Abner killed his brother, Asahel (2 Sam. 2:23).
(3:28) David instantly distances himself from Abner’s murder (cf. 1 Kings 2:33).
(3:29) These five curses include physical ailments (3), war (1), and famine (1). “One who has discharge” refers to “infectious conditions as diarrhea and urethral emissions.”[14]
(3:30) Apparently Joab was working alongside his brother Abishai.
Later David tells Solomon that Joab was guilty for killing Abner during a time of peace, rather than war: “Now you also know what Joab the son of Zeruiah did to me, what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel, to Abner the son of Ner, and to Amasa the son of Jether, whom he killed; he also shed the blood of war in peace. And he put the blood of war on his belt about his waist, and on his sandals on his feet” (1 Kings 2:5).
David leads a lament for Abner
(3:31) David makes Joab (the murderer!) come to the funeral.
The “bier” is the couch or bed for the deceased.
(3:32) Rather than burying Abner with his people (i.e. the Benjamites), David honors him by burying him in Hebron.[15]
(3:33-35) The word “fool” (nābāl) could harken back to Nabal, whom David wanted to kill. We might expect David to feel happy that one of his enemies had died, but Youngblood comments that David’s lament is sincere: “If he mourned at length for Saul and Jonathan, he mourns no less for Abner.”[16]
(3:36-37) The people believed the sincerity of David’s lament.
(3:38) Even though Abner had been David’s enemy, he calls him a “prince” and a “great man.”
(3:39) Joab and Abishail were sons of “Zeruiah” (2 Sam. 2:18). David’s dominance of being the king is overshadowed by his grief.
Concluding insights
Just as he grieves over his mortal enemy Saul, David grieves over Abner. Why is David so tenderhearted toward his enemies after they die?
2 Samuel 4 (Death of Ish-Bosheth)
Summary: Ish-Bosheth depended on Abner, so he lost courage when he heard that Abner had died (v.1). Two raiders—Baanah and Rechab—sneak into Ish-Bosheth’s house and kill him in his sleep (v.6), decapitating him (v.7). They probably were seeing that David was rising to power, and they were on the wrong side of the political fence. They bring the head to David (v.8), and he rebukes them for killing Ish-Bosheth. He then orders that they have their hands and feet cut off (v.12). He has them hung beside the pool of Hebron for everyone to see.
(4:1) Even though Abner was a traitor to Ish-Bosheth, Abner was still Ish-Bosheth’s most powerful warrior. Abner left a “power vacuum”[17] in Israel. This is why “he lost courage.” The word spread to all of Israel that their top military commander had been killed, so this wouldn’t have been good for Ish-Bosheth’s public image.
(4:2-3) Ish-Bosheth’s other two military allies (Baanah and Rechab) got spooked, and they fled from the kingdom like rats fleeing a sinking ship. The phrase “commanders of bands” refers to “raiders” or “a band of rebels” (cf. 1 Kings 11:24).[18] These men were outlaws who worked for the king.
Saul’s son (parenthesis)
(4:4) This is a flashback to the time of Jonathan’s death. Why does the author insert this here? Because Ish-Bosheth is about to die, Mephibosheth would’ve been the next heir to the throne. The author is probably showing that the boy’s physical handicap renders him unable to inherit the kingdom as a warrior.[19] Mephibosheth would’ve been twelve years old when Ish-Bosheth was killed (cf. 2 Sam. 2:11).
Jonathan’s son (Mephibosheth) was just a young boy when his father died. In fleeing, he became even further crippled. He will come up again in 2 Samuel 9; 16:1-4; 19:24-30; 21:7).
Back to the story
(4:5-6) Baanah and Rechab assassinate Ish-Bosheth, realizing that they are on the wrong side of the battle. Being stabbed in the stomach becomes the preferred method of execution at this time.
(4:7-8) Baanah and Rechab took Ish-Bosheth’s decapitated head to David as a way of making peace with him, and showing loyalty to the new dynasty. They travel “at night” to avoid being seen.
(4:9-11) We saw how David treated the Amalekite who killed Saul earlier, so this reaction is not surprising.
(4:12) David makes a public spectacle of the men, but he carefully buries Ish-Bosheth’s head alongside Abner. This act of cutting of the hands and feet is similar to the disgrace given to Adoni-Bezek (Judg. 1:6).
Concluding insights
Again, we need to ask the question: Why is David so strict about men not killing God’s anointed? (i.e. Ish-Bosheth or Saul)
We see a repeated theme that God will work out the problems. When we put it into our own hands (killing Saul or Ish-Bosheth), this is wrong. We need to trust in the sovereignty of God. For discussion, we might ask, “What is the difference between trusting in God’s sovereignty, and being super-spiritual or lazy?”
[1] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 805.
[2] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 289.
[3] Joyce G. Baldwin, 1 and 2 Samuel: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 8, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 192.
[4] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 813.
[5] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 292.
[6] Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, vol. 7, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 292.
[7] David A. Hubbard et al., “Editorial Preface,” in 2 Samuel, vol. 11, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989), 19.
[8] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 822.
[9] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 823.
[10] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 825.
[11] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 825.
[12] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 828.
[13] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 833.
[14] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 839.
[15] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 841.
[16] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 841.
[17] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 844.
[18] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 844.
[19] Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 844.