Doctrines Covered

Doctrines Alluded To

Edom

Moab and Ammon

The Philistines

Amalekites

Psalms Alluded To

Psalm 60

Psalms Appropriately Exegeted with this Chapter

Other Chapters of the Bible Appropriately Exegeted with this Chapter

2Sam. 8

Definition of Terms

Dispensations

God has divided up human history into sectors of time, and each era has its own individual characteristics. From Abraham to Christ, we have the dispensation of Israel, where God works through a particular people (the Jews). They write the Word of God and disseminate it. This dispensation was cut short by the dispensation of the Hypostatic Union or the Age of Christ. At this point in time, God came to the earth and lived among us. He offered Israel the kingdom, and they rejected Him. We now live in the Church Age, a dispensation where God works through the body of believers, who could be found all over the globe, and varying concentrations in various nations.

For more information, see www.kukis.org/Important_Topics/dispensations.htm or

www.kukis.org/Important_Topics/dispensations.pdf

Suzerain-vassal treaty

The Suzerain-Vassal Treaty is a conditional covenant. This type of covenant bound a subordinate vassal to a superior vassal. It was binding only upon the one who swore it. The purpose of the covenant was to emphasize the goodness and kindness of the lord to his vassal with a view to cause the vassal to gladly accept his responsibilities and obligations.

Some of these definitions are taken from

http://www.bibledoctrinechurch.org/?subpages/GLOSSARY.shtml

http://www.bigrick.org/pubs/terms.pdf

http://www.gbible.org/index.php?proc=d4d

http://www.eternalministries.org/studies/covenants.html

The following two doctrines were lifted directly out of my exegesis of 2Sam. 8. If you suffer from any human viewpoint thinking, e.g., you believe that we can stop war in our lifetime, then you need to carefully read through these doctrines.

One of the things I had problem, when it came to R. B. Thieme Jr.’s ministry was his glorification of the military, as I had not been brought up with those values. It took me many years of study, but now I appreciate his approach and his emphasis. Since 2Sam. 8 and 10 have David warring against a half dozen nations, there are some things which we need to know about war.

Some Points on War

1.      War is a normal human activity, and all of the marches for peace in the world will not end war. If the United States buried all of his weapons and dismantled its armies, we would be attacked and possibly even defeated within a year or two of doing such a stupid thing. People all over the world lust for what we have, and many think that it is simply a function of living in a prosperous country. However, the key to our prosperity is twofold: (1) the grace of God and (2) economic freedom. However, they do not recognize this, so they think if they conquer our land and us, that will make them prosperous.

2.      Like most students, I was brought up with a limited education when it comes to war. I saw wars from a very American-centric view. I never fully appreciated that, at any given time, there are probably 10 or so wars being fought around the world, and that wars have continued throughout human history, even increasing as time goes on; and that the soldier represents probably the best that a country has to offer.

3.      There is a lot of war in the Bible, and the honoring of the soldier is found throughout Scripture. The greatest compliment that Jesus paid to any individual was to a Roman soldier. Jesus did not berate the man for being a soldier; Jesus did not tell him, “Now, to be perfect, you need to lay down your weapon, desert the Roman army, and follow Me.” What Jesus said was, “I have found no one in Israel with a greater faith [than this Roman soldier].” Matt. 8:5–10

4.      Some of the greatest men in the Bible were soldiers or men of war: David, Joshua and Moses. And in the end of the Jewish Age, Jesus will return in the 2^nd Advent, and He will kill so many enemies in war, that the blood will flow as high as the horse’s bridle for nearly 200 miles (Rev. 14:20).

5.      God taught David’s hands to war. Psalm 18:34 144:1

6.      No matter how you feel about war in general, the Bible presents it matter-of-factly, and the soldiers of war are presented as heroes (e.g., David’s mighty men—2Sam. 23 1Chron. 12). There will always be wars and rumors of war (Matt. 24:6); and the occupation of a soldier is honorable. This is the view of the Bible, whether you like it or not.

7.      Jesus promised that there would be wars and rumors of wars until He returned (Matt. 24:6 Mark 13:7 Luke 21:9). At no time in the Bible is there any indication that man by reaching some point in civilization or in spiritual enlightenment, will ever move beyond war. Jesus will return and rule over the earth in the Millennium, and that will end warfare (until Satan is loosed); but prior to that Jesus will kill millions of people; and prior to that, war will be a part of human history (Isa. 2:2–4 Micah 4:1–4 Rev. 19:11–21).

Please see http://www.spokanebiblechurch.com/powerpoint/WarandGod.pdf, which is a slide show presentation of the Doctrine of War in a pdf format.

There is a lot of war throughout the Bible, and there is no indication that man is going to suddenly become civilized and no longer engage in war. War continues throughout man’s history, and there is no empiracal evidence that, at some point in time, man will evolve beyond war.

In the United States, in the year 2009, when I write this, the current president, during his campaign, indicated that Iraq was not where American soldiers needed to be. He said that he opposed the Iraq War from the beginning, and the President Bush, by committing troops to Iraq, got his eye off the ball, which was the war in Afghanistan. Since we live in a democracy, and vote, it is worthwhile to try to figure out, when is it right to go to war?

What is a Righteous War?

1.      Bear in mind that, 99.999% of the time, we are not going to be in the position to determine whether or not we, as a nation, go to war. Even in a democracy like ours, we do not vote to go to war. What if your country is on the wrong side? What if you are a coward? I will answer those questions in this doctrine.

         1)      We are under the authority of the government of the nation in which we are born. God has placed these authorities over us, and we are subject to these authorities. Rom. 13

         2)      Jesus, when He spoke to the Roman soldier, said, “Not in all Israel have I found such a great faith.” Jesus did not tell this Roman soldier, “Now, to be perfect, you need to lay aside your weapon of war and follow Me.” This man, a soldier in Caesar’s army—a centurion, a man in authority, was fine right where he was, and Jesus did not suggest any further steps which he needed to take. Matt. 8:5–10

         3)      Therefore, when our nation calls upon us to go to war, we go to war. 99.9% of the time, that is our correct decision with regards to going to war.

         4)      Now, what if you disagree with the man in command? What if you think the president is a doofus? Paul, under Roman rule, tells us that those in authority over us are placed there by God, and we ought to obey them. Rom. 13

         5)      Let’s say you are under an incredibly unjust government and they want you to go to war, what do you do? Let’s say, your government is on the wrong side in a war, what do you do? Or your government begins the wholesale slaughter of its own citizens, what do you do? These are some very rare situations for the average believer. If you have believed in Jesus Christ, and you believe in your heart of hearts that your country is completely wrong and the enemy is complete right, then the Bible also tells us what to do—renounce your own nation and join the enemy. Here is where Jane Fonda was wrong (Jane Fonda was an actress who went to our enemies during the Vietnam War and allowed herself to be photographed by them for propaganda purposes). She did not want to stop being an American; she was not willing to renounce her citizenship and the benefits of her citizenship. She was not willing to use her money and move to North Vietnam and say, “I want to become a part of your nation. I am willing to support you in any way that I can; I want to become one of you.” All she was willing to do was to work against her own nation, and yet remain a part of America and continue to reap the benefits from being an American. On the other hand, Rahab the prostitute worked with Israel and Joshua against her own country and became a part of Israel (Joshua 2 Matt. 1:5). Had Israel failed, she would have died as a traitor to her own country. She threw in with the enemy of her country 100%; she did not straddle any fences.

         6)      The situation of Rahab is quite rare for the believer, but no doubt, it exists.

         7)      What if your country is only so-so as a country and you just do not like the idea of the wars we are engaged in? When Paul laid down the law when it came to being under the authority of national leaders, he was a citizen of Rome. He would eventually be decapitated by this government. He still supported Roman authority. Rom. 13

         8)      There has to be more to your opposition than, “I don’t believe in war.” We as believers do not get that luxury. We know that war is going to continue to be a part of our experience; that there will always be wars and rumors of wars, and that nowhere in the Bible are we given an out to conveniently support our enemies while remaining beneficiaries of our own country.

         9)      Let say that you are a coward, and the draft has been reinstituted, and war has broken out. What do you do? You have to obey the laws of the land and go into the military. At some point in time, before your location is determined, you need to privately make your cowardice known to your superior officers. There is justification in the Bible for removing cowards from the military. Ideally, you should jockey for a non-combat, support position, and there are thousands of such positions. After that, you allow God to determine where you end up.

2.      The Bible does not anywhere encourage us to be conscientious objectors or to oppose war as a general principle. On the other hand, most of us have heard the passage which reads, Your sin will find you out (Num. 32:23). The context of this passage is, this is referring to a particular sin, the sin of pacifism. 3 of Israel’s tribes decided that they were happy with the land on the east side of the Jordan and they petitioned Moses to be able to live on that land (which had been cleared of enemies on Israel’s northern trek). Moses told the leaders of this tribe, that would be fine, but they had better participate militarily in clearing out the rest of the land of Israel’s enemies. Num. 32:1–33

3.      It is certainly helpful when the population supports a war, does not protest against a war, and is unified against our enemies. We fought a disastrous war in Vietnam, a war which divided the country, and a war where the United States suffered its first defeat. One movie star—Jane Fonda—showed her approval of the acts of our enemies, and allowed her picture to be taken while on an enemy tank which was used to kill American soldiers. Other Americans sent blood to our enemies. No doubt, the marching protestors against this war had a hand in the defeat of their own country in war, and the slaughter of approximately 3 million people by the Communists which followed our retreat. Given this turmoil, we need to understand when war is justified.

         1)      As an aside, had we continued in this war for another few weeks or months, we would have obtained surrender from our enemies, according to their General Giap, who was very surprised that America suddenly withdrew its troops.

         2)      Furthermore, this would have stopped the murderous slaughter of 3 million Asians in Vietnam and Cambodia.

         3)      Our deserting our Vietnamese allies was one of the most cowardly, selfish things which out country has ever done, and our allies—men and women who put their trust in us—were killed in the streets and in their homes because of us.

4.      Most people would understand that going to war after being attacked is justified. There are a significant number out there who, if we suffered another attack similar to 9/11, would blame this attack on America and our support of Israel or our presence in the Middle East; but, the majority of Americans would support military action against whatever movement or country attacked us. Only a very small number of Christians would suggest that those in the United States turn the other cheek because that is what Jesus would have done (in their own minds). It is important to understand that, turn the other cheek applies to retaliation because of a personal vendetta and nowhere does Jesus give this a wider interpretation.

5.      In the Old Testament, much of the time, God would guide Israel to go to war against certain nations. We do not have this same guidance. If some president said that God told him to go to war against nation X, we would vote him out of office.

6.      However, there is evidence in the Old Testament as to what sort of wars we as a nation ought to be involved in.

7.      God told Abraham that this land which He gave his progeny would not be a reality until the iniquity of the Amorites became full (Gen. 15:16). At that point in time, Amorite meant westerner, and this referred to the peoples who inhabited the Land of Promise which God gave to Abraham (the Amorites were also a specific people in that region as well). When Abraham came into this land, most of the peoples there were okay. They were unbelievers, but they were not degenerate unbelievers (with the exception of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah). When their iniquity became full-blown, then God would give the land to the seed of Abraham.

8.      Abraham’s seed also had to become a significant population as well. So we have two things which have to come to pass: (1) a significant number of Jews who believe in Jesus Christ who are willing to trust in God and (2) the people in the land God has given the Jews have to reach a tipping point of degeneracy. 40 years after Moses led the children of Israel out of Egypt, both of these things came to pass.

9.      How does this relate to our topic? Israel had to have an army; the people that they were going to destroy had to have transgressed more than just occupying the land which Israel wanted. Together, these things resulted in a series of wars and battles, from the time of Joshua to the time of David, when Israel secured much of the land which God had given them. God had not decided that Palestine belonged to the Jews and that He would simply destroy anyone living in this land in order to give it over to the Jews. Israel was to follow God’s leading to take the land militarily.

10.    When the Jews took the land under Joshua, they were to offer terms of peace first (Deut. 20:10 Joshua 9:15 10:1 11:19). Quite obviously, this would be overruled by a direct command from God (Joshua 6). Since God is omniscient, God knows the hearts of the people of the cities where Israel would invade. If they are 100% in negative volition toward God, then Israel did not need to offer them terms of peace.

         1)      You may note that this principle has parallels to the doctrine of heathenism. God offers peace (peace between God and man) to all mankind; however, when someone reaches God consciousness and is not interested in knowing God, God is not morally required to give the gospel to that person.

11.    What was the main problem with every evil nation in the land of Palestine? Idolatry, which led to either immoral or moral degeneracy.

12.    You recognize evil in some nations by whom they choose to ally themselves with. Although I know a little about the history of Nazi Germany, I know almost nothing about Japan’s pre-WWII history. However, I recognize that if Japan chose to ally themselves with Nazi Germany, then that reveals their true colors at that point in history.

13.    Similarly, we know the heart of a country based upon whom they identify as their enemies. When thousands of Muslims in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria or Iran march in the streets, burn American flags and shout, “Death to America,” we know where their hearts are.

         1)      Now, you may think that this is unfair, and that we should not always identify the people with their leaders, as their leaders can be despots. God gives a people the leader they deserve or a leader who is appropriate for them.

         2)      Think about our last 3 presidents (I write in 2009) and their greatest weaknesses.

                  (1)     President Clinton strove to be popular, followed the polls, and often did the popular thing—which indicates no core values. His acts of immorality in office and his attempt to cover them up (along with a lifetime of such acts) did not substantively hurt his popularity, even when he flat out lied to the public. This is a reflection of us, the people. The public support President Clinton, despite knowing that he looked us in the eye and lied to us. As long as the economy was good, we liked him.

                  (2)     After him is President George Bush, who began strong, recognizing our common enemy (whom Clinton did not fully recognize), recognize that we were at war, and took steps to deal with it. However, in moving ahead with 2 reasonably popular wars, these wars were not over fast enough, and much of the public began to moan and groan, as if this affected them directly. All they really suffered was seeing it on tv night after night after night. Although Bush remained steadfast in his opposition to terrorism and to the correct outcome of these two wars, he went haywire when it came to the economy—and when he was right (about FNMA, about social security), our other leaders stood up against him. Interestingly enough, America enjoyed some of its greatest prosperity under President Bush, and yet they turned against him—many citing the economy as a chief reason.

                  (3)     And he is followed by President Obama, who was elected primarily because he can speak well with a teleprompter, can dance around both sides of almost any issue (our news reporters call this taking a nuanced position), and exudes an attractive personage. Within a few months, he has proposed a mountain of debt tied to worthless spending unlike anyone has ever seen before and yet there are a significant portion of our population who refuses to recognize it because he is Obama. We are now at 10.2% unemployment (which translates to 17% real unemployment), and yet, there is a significant portion of Americans who do not hold President Obama responsible. He is such a good speaker and he appears so thoughtful and intelligent that a huge number of people assume it is all Bush’s fault. A huge segment of our population refuses to recognize that President Obama has absolutely no economic experience whatsoever, and therefore, has no idea how to deal with our economy (apart from spending huge sums of money). So you see how reflective our leaders are of the population?

         3)      Of course, the examples I gave were from a democracy, but bear in mind, God is in charge, and God places appropriate leaders in charge of nations.

         4)      Iran, for example: Iran is not a democracy, and its leader-figurehead is this tiny crazy person who denies the holocaust (and the real reigns of government seem to be in the hands of the mullahs). Although many have tried to distinguish Ahmadinejad from the Iranian people, these people still flood the streets, celebrate 9/11, shout “Death to America” for hours, and desire to see Israel destroyed. Ahmadinejad is their appropriate figurehead and leader. Obviously, there is a significant number of Iranians who are pro-American, but there has been no power shift as of yet (again, I write this in the year 2009).

14.    Furthermore, we know which countries are white hats based upon whom they choose to ally themselves with. We have alliances with nations such as Mexico, Canada, England, France, Germany, Japan and Britain (to name a few); their choosing to associate with us and to ally themselves with us tells us about their people and governments.

15.    In this chapter, Syria (Aram) will ally themselves with Hadadezer and go to war with David. King Toi, from the same region, will honor David when he defeats Hadadezer. This tells us about the hearts of the people and governments in this chapter at this time—those who ally themselves with David are blessed of God and those who chose to war against David are cursed by God.

16.    Note that God did not have Israel continually acting in a hostile manner against her neighbors. God did not put Israel into a 24/7/365 war mode. Egypt was continually in idolatry. God warned Israel not to go to Egypt or to depend upon Egypt, but God did not tell Israel, “You need to raise up your army and go destroy Egypt.” God did send Israel to war on many occasions against her enemies, but not against all of her enemies. At the time of Jeremiah, God expected His people to place themselves under the authority of Assyrian king Nebuchadnezzar, who had just conquered Israel. There was a remnant in the land, under Gedeliah as their governor and under Jeremiah as their spiritual leader. God did not tell them to rebel against Nebuchadnezzar; God expected them to submit themselves to Nebuchadnezzar’s rule.

17.    Let’s apply all of this to today. God has not told any of us or any of our leaders to invade this or that nation, but let’s just suppose that is somehow our decision—how do we make such a decision?

         1)      When someone goes to war against us, we have two choices: we either give up and place ourselves under their authority or we fight to preserve our freedom. Most of the time, God had Israel fight for her freedom (the book of Judges). However, in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, the people of Israel who remained alive were not to rebel against him; they were to submit to his authority. The same would have been true of the Jews under Roman rule. Rome crushed Israel because of her rebellion, but allowed Christianity to flourish, despite some heavy persecution in the beginning. Determining when to fight and when to lay down your weapons and submit requires spiritual maturity.

         2)      There are characteristics of the heathen in Palestine which are still here today: idolatry which leads to human and, particularly, child sacrifice—that is evil and is to be wiped out. You may protest and say, “No one out there is engaging in child sacrifice—not as a country.” However, when you raise your children to hate Israel and to hate America; and you raise them to commit themselves to suicide missions through cartoons and constant propaganda, and they are to do this for the glory of Allah, that is modern-day child sacrifice. Some have even strapped bombs to children and detonated them. This is highly degenerate (religious degeneracy), and it is reasonable to suppose that if God had Israel destroy peoples like this in their day, that such an enemy is fair game for us today. www.obsessionthemovie.com or http://obsessionthemovie.com/27minversion.php

         3)      Along the same lines, wanton murder by any government of its own citizenry (by Muslim fanatics or by Communists or by Nazis) is justification by itself for a righteous nation to step in. The Nazis killed millions of Jews and Christians; and the Communists have killed tens of millions of those who would not go along with their program (mostly those who believe in God; Christians and Jews and those of other religions). Wars against such forces of evil are righteous wars. In other words, our wars in Korea and Vietnam were as righteous as our war against the Nazis. When we pulled out of Vietnam, this was unrighteousness, and what followed was a bloodbath which far, far exceeded in a couple of years the number of casualties over a 16-year war. In this alone, we know that we were right to fight against the bloody Communists and that we should have defeated them (and, in case you did not know, even one of the top generals in North Vietnam was only weeks or months away from surrendering to the United States when we pulled out).

         4)      It is important to recognize that we are in a spiritual battle and that Satan is the god of this world, and his plans and deeds are not difficult to understand. We can choose to ignore them and our news services may ignore them, but much of his activity in the world is not difficult to discern. When you see the Word of God being suppressed and children being sacrificed and children being raised to hate, you know Satan is at work and has captured the hearts of much of the population where such things are taking place.

         5)      For those of you who believe that President Obama is arrogant—there is no creature so arrogant as Satan. Therefore, when he is allied with a country, it will be clear that he is. Satan is not going to take a backseat and work completely behind the scenes. Satan wants recognition, so the evil in one of his countries will be made manifest.

         6)      Even though this world is defined by a spiritual warfare, this sometimes spills over into human warfare.

         7)      When people reached a tipping point of degeneracy, God used Israel to destroy them—sometimes, every man, woman and child. Men with spiritual insight need to be able to recognize when this tipping point has been reached. This is one reason God has given us the Old Testament, so that by seeing Satan’s work in the Old Testament, we are able to recognize it in our contemporary world.

         8)      In a democracy, as we live in here, we need to elect leaders who are believers and who have a reasonable world-view. It should be clear that they are not given in to delusions, e.g., being able to smooth-talk our enemies; and they should demonstrate a clear understanding of America’s Christian heritage and future. Such men may not be doctrinally sound, but they may understand enough to be reasonable leaders.

         9)      You need to recognize that many world leaders are inspired by Satan; therefore, there is going to be no amount of clever reasoning which will overcome and neutralize them.

18.    Summary:

         1)      Satan exists and his hatred and ferocity are well-known. Although Satan is quite able to be subtle and present himself as an angel of light, he is also willing to take center stage when it comes to leading a nation dedicated to him. What I mean is, a honest appraisal of a nation makes it clear that they are led by Satan; this is not something which is carefully hidden. Anyone who has some historical knowledge of Communism, Nazism or of radical Islamic fascism recognizes how evil these ideologies are. Just yesterday, a suicide attack was carried out in Pakistan, against a Mosque, so that a maximum number of people could be killed or injured. 50 people were killed. Islamic fascists love to target innocent Muslims and innocent people in general. It should not take a spiritual genius to recognize that is absolute evil.

         2)      Because of Satan’s innate arrogance, we know that he wants recognition; therefore, we are able to recognize countries where he inspires their people and leaders.

         3)      God uses certain nations to defeat and sometimes to destroy nations which have become dangerous cancers in this world, just as He used Israel in the past. The Old Testament is given to us so that we can think through complex problems and make reasonable decisions.

         4)      God originally used Israel to defeat and destroy evil nations; and now He primarily uses client nations (nations in which a significant portion of the people believe in Jesus Christ and where Bible doctrine is taught and from which missionaries emanate).

         5)      War is an integral part of human history; its horror duly noted. Still, we will never see the end of warfare until the Millennium. All of the marching in the world and all of the peace protests will never change this. In fact, in many cases, this will give comfort and enthusiasm to our enemies, and increase the length of war, the determination of our enemy, and the body count of our own soldiers.

         6)       When a person decides to march for peace, they need to recognize that they will probably increase the number of deaths and lengthen the war they are marching against. Vietnam is a prime example of that. One of the military leaders of the North Vietnam army (General Giap) has written about that era, and was amazed that we pulled out of Vietnam. He admits that they were months if not weeks away from surrendering. Had we remained a few more months, we would have been victorious and literally millions of lives would have been saved (these are the lives of people who trusted us and who desired freedom, as well as the lives of many innocents). Our pulling out of Vietnam was an act of evil and cowardice, and many died because of it.

         7)      Going to peace marches is more of an expression of self-righteousness than anything else.

         8)      Nations which serve Satan will be anti-God, anti-Semitic and/or anti-freedom.

         9)      When they raise their children to be sacrificed in order to promote Satan’s agenda (which is anti-God, anti-Semitic and anti-freedom), they are equivalent to a nation which sacrifices its children to some false idol. The Hitlarian youth; young people not only schooled in Communism, but schooled in a world domination by Communism; Muslim children brought up to hate and with a desire to kill Jews, Americans or Brits for Allah, indicate that a nation has reached a dangerous tipping point.

         10)    Such a nation needs to be, at minimum, contained; and, at maximum, destroyed.

         11)    When do such nations need to be destroyed? When their iniquity is full.

         12)    Evil nations are a cancer in society and their evil is spread throughout their own nation and sometimes throughout the world. Radical Muslims are an example of this, an in this past decade, have launched thousands of attacks in hundreds of countries throughout the world. Since our news ignores this, I suggest you go to www.thereligionofpeace.com to see what they are up to this past month.

         13)    Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU so see how the world we live in can be changed in a few decades by this evil mindset.

         14)    When we know the heart of one nation, we can determine the heart of other nations by whom they choose to ally themselves with and whom they choose to identify as enemies.

         15)    Since we, as Americans, living in democracy, really have little or no say in determining whether or not we ought to go to war; we can rest assured that it is a war of God—a righteous war—if it is against a people who are anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic and/or anti-freedom.

         16)    Finally, I would argue that such wars—wars of choice—are more important and consequential than wars of defense against an immediate attack. Before we were attacked at Pearl Harbor, we should have recognized how evil Nazis were, who began to move against allies of ours.

         17)    Killing our enemies—and killing as many as possible of them—often results in fewer deaths and shortened wars. Most historians agree that when President Truman used atomic weapons against Japan, this shortened the war and probably reduced the total number of casualties.

         18)    As God is with David in the wars enumerated in this chapter (2Sam. 8:14b), so God will be with us as individuals and with our nation as a corporate entity.

19.    And in case you did not know this, we have one of the greatest militaries of our history serving the United States today. Even the soldiers of our allies cannot compare to our own military. A few months ago, British soldiers were captured by Iran and they allowed themselves to be used for propaganda purposes, although what they faced for the most part was, psychological warfare after being captured. The professionalism and heroism of our soldiers (almost totally ignored by our media) is an incredible blessing from God, and it reveals how closely God is working with the United States.

The weakness of the churches today is, there is not enough taught by way of mechanics and by way of application of Bible doctrine. Too many church-goers lack personal integrity and lack appreciation for our military.

This lack of personal integrity in believers in all realms exists because so little is taught of practical application.

Nations function as a corporate witness before God. A nation which kills its own people, which stifles freedom (particularly religious freedom) and which is anti-Semitic is cursed by God. Nations where there is freedom, where people believe in Jesus Christ, where the Word of God is taught, are nations which are blessed by God. There are times in human history where those nations blessed by God will be called upon to defeat and even to destroy cancerous nations cursed by God.

There are just a couple more points which are important to understand before we get started.

Some Introductory Points to 1Chronicles 18

1.      Some wars fought by David were defensive wars, e.g. is found in 2Sam. 5:17–25, when Philistines arrayed themselves against Israel.

2.      God also ordered David to kill some of his enemies. God even guided David when it came to strategy and tactics. 1Sam. 30:7–8 2Sam. 5:23–25

3.      However, none of that is found 2Sam. 8 or in 1Chron. 18. At no time does God order David to attack this or that people; and at no time is it clearly indicated that David is only fighting defensive wars here. Most of these wars appear to be offensive in nature. We might even call David predatory, inasmuch as he demands tribute from those he conquers (1Chron. 18:2, 11,13).

4.      However, twice in this chapter, we are told that Jehovah helped David wherever he went. 1Chron. 18:6, 13

5.      Therefore, in this chapter and others, it is clear that there are reasons for offensive warfare.

Therefore, by application, it is legitimate for nations blessed by God to engage in offensive warfare. Let me submit to you that such wars define a nation and its integrity and are often more important than the defensive wars in which we engage.

1Chronicles 18:1a = 2Samuel 8:1a

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

hâyâh (הָיָה) [pronounced haw-YAW]

to be, is, was, are; to become, to come into being; to come to pass

3^rd person masculine singular, Qal imperfect

Strong's #1961 BDB #224

ʾachărêy (אַחֲרֵי) [pronounced ah-kuh-RAY]

behind, after; following; after that, afterwards; hinder parts

preposition; plural form

Strong’s #310 BDB #29

kên (כֵּן) [pronounced kane]

so, thus; upright, honest; rightly, well; [it is] so, such, so constituted;

properly, an active participle; used primarily as an adverb

Strong's #3651 BDB #485

These two words together literally mean after so; however, they appear to mean afterward, afterwards, after these things, after this, [and] after that. See Gen. 15:14 23:19 25:26 Lev. 14:36 Deut. 21:13 1Sam. 10:5.

2Sam. 7:8–16 mark the David covenant; what God has promised to David.

Summary: All that God Told David—the Davidic Covenant

1.      God, through Nathan, Identifies Himself to David as God.

2.      This is the God Who took David from being a shepherd to the throne of Israel. David, more than anyone, realizes just how amazing this vertical move is.

3.      God has been with David always and He has cut off David’s enemies from before him.

4.      God promises David that He will make him a great name (or, He will make David’s reputation great). Many people even to this day, believers and unbelievers alike, know who David is.

5.      God promises Israel that He will plant them in a particular place and that they would not be moved nor will they be afflicted by their adversaries. This looks forward to the Millennium. However, there will be a near fulfillment, and that will be the reign of Solomon, which was marked by Israel being at peace with her neighbors (much of the reason for this is, Solomon represents our Lord’s rein in the Millennium).

6.      God promising David a house means that God will establish David’s dynasty over Israel (which will, in the future, when the northern and southern kingdoms split, be continued as a dynasty of the southern kingdom, Judah). This, in part, is a continuation as well as a promise of fulfillment of Gen. 49:10, when Jacob, in blessing Judah, said, “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until tribute comes to him; and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.”

7.      When David dies, God will bring forth a descendant from David and He will establish this man’s kingdom. This refers both to Solomon and to Jesus.

8.      God will be a Father to him and he will be a son to God. Again, this refers both to Solomon and to Jesus.

9.      God speaks of correcting this man, which obviously can only refer to Solomon. However, the language used in this verse (2Sam. 7:14) allows for the idea of the imputation of sin upon this person, which would be a reference to Jesus.

10.    God’s grace will never depart from this man, which refers to Solomon and to Jesus. For our Lord, this refers to the Divine Dynasphere in which He lived, powered by God the Holy Spirit.

11.    David’s lineage (or dynasty, signified by the word house) would be preserved forever.

12.    David’s kingdom, Israel, would be preserved forever. Not only will Israel live in this postage stamp of a country, but they will occupy a much larger piece or real estate, which is bloom like a garden in the Millennium.

13.    David’s throne—his kingship—will be preserved forever. Now, quite obviously, there was a break in David’s throne (and, eventually, in his kingdom Israel), but these will be a fixed part of the Millennium.

In case you have ever wondered, why the Millennium? Why the various dispensations? God allows His plan to work in a number of different situations, so that we are without excuse. Some will complain about the environment, and had the environment been good, then they would have turned toward God. In the Millennium, the environment will be perfect, and there will be no wars. Some will complain that they would have believed, but they needed God to tell them personally. We have had the dispensation of the Hypostatic Union and we will have the Millennium, and we know that there were people who listened to Jesus, the God-man, and rejected Him; and there are indications that some people will reject the gospel in the Millennium.

Originally presented in 2Samuel 7; the proper link is...

http://kukis.org/Samuel/2Sam_07.htm#Summary:%20All%20that%20God%20Told%20David%E2%80%94the%20Davidic%20Covenant

C. I. Scofield was a master of brevity, stating the greatest spiritual truths with the least amount of words.

Scofield Analyses the Davidic Covenant

This covenant, upon which the glorious kingdom of Christ "of the seed of David according to the flesh" is to be founded, secures the following:

(1) A Davidic "house"; that is, Posterity, family

(2) A "throne"; that is, Royal authority

(3) A kingdom; that is, Sphere of rule

(4) In perpetuity; "forever"

(5) And this fourfold covenant has but one condition: disobedience in the Davidic family is to be visited with chastisement; but not to the abrogation of the covenant (2Sam. 7:15 Psalm 89:20-37 Isa. 24:5 54:3). The chastisement fell; first in the division of the kingdom under Rehoboam, and, finally, in the captivities. (2Kings 25:1–7). Since that time but one King of the Davidic family has been crowned at Jerusalem and He was crowned with thorns.

The Davidic Covenant confirmed to David by the oath of Jehovah, and renewed to Mary by the angel Gabriel, is immutable (Psalm 89:30–37) and the Lord God will yet give to that thorn–crowned One "the throne of his father David" (Luke 1:31–33 Acts 2:29–32 15:14–17).

C. I. Scofield, Scofield Notes from the Scofield King James’ Bible; from e-Sword, 2Sam. 7:16. Slight editing

Originally presented in 2Samuel 7; the proper link is...

http://kukis.org/Samuel/2Sam_07.htm#Scofield%20Analyses%20the%20Davidic%20Covenant

Let me give you another set of notes from the Maranatha Church:

Doctrine of the Davidic Covenant

July 10, 1996

I.       Preliminary considerations.

         A.      Scripture: 2Sam.7:12-16; cp. Ps.89:3,4,19-37.

         B.      Historical background.

                  1.      David had established his authority over his enemies (2Sam.7:1).

                  2.      He lived in a house of cedar and desired to build God a house (2Sam.7:2).

                  3.      David was not permitted to build this house, but was promised a "house" that would endure forever (2Sam.7:11).

                  4.      The prophet Nathan was informed of the details by a vision 2Sam.7:4; Ps.89:19).

         C.     Key terms defined.

                  1.      "House" refers to the Davidic royal dynasty (2Sam.7:11,16).

                  2.      "Seed", or "descendant", refers to the male heirs, beginning with Solomon and ending with Jesus Christ (2Sam.7:12; Ps.89:4a,29a,36a)."Covenant" refers to the binding contract between God and His servant, David (Ps.89:3a,28b,34a).

                  3.      "Throne" refers to the right to rule over the kingdom defined by the land grant of the Abrahamic Covenant (2Sam.7:13,16; Ps.89:4b,29b,36b).

         D.     The Abrahamic Covenant is centered in "land" and "seed".

         E.      What the Covenant requires for fulfillment: it demands that a biological descendant of David occupy his throne forever.

II.      Reasons why David was selected.

         A.      He was a member of the chosen people (Ps.89:19c) and of the tribe destined for royalty in Israel (Ps.78:68; cp. Gen.49:8-10; Pss.60:7; 76:1; 108:8).

         B.      He was in the line of Christ (Rom.1:3).

         C.     He was anointed king by the prophet Samuel to replace the renegade Saul (1Sam.16:13; Ps.89:20).

         D.     He was spiritually qualified to inherit such Ph2 blessing (2Sam.7:8,9; Ps.89:26).

         E.      And he was physically endowed to be a warrior-king (Pss.89:19b; 18:32-34).

III.     Promises associated with the Covenant fulfilled in David's lifetime. David was promised:

         A.      An heir who would succeed him and who would build the Temple (2Sam.7:12,13).

         B.      Continued success over his enemies (Ps.89:21-23).

         C.     A great name among the peoples of the earth (2Sam.7:9).

         D.     An expanded kingdom according to the Abrahamic mandate (Psalm 89:25 Ex. 23:31 Deut. 1:7, 8 11:24 1Kings 4:21, 24).

         E.      Elevation to the highest rank of kings (Ps.89:27; cp. 2Sam.7:14).

IV.     The eternal provisions of the Covenant are centered in two spheres: "seed/descendants" and "throne" (Ps.89:3,4,28,29,35-37).

         A.      There is the promise that there will always be a Davidic descendant (Ps.89:4a; 2Sam.7:16).

         B.      There is the promise that the throne of David would last forever (Ps.89:4b; 2Sam.7:13).

V.      The problem associated with the interrupted rule of the house of David.

         A.      The problem stated.

                  1.      An uninterrupted succession of kings ruled over the house of David between 1010BC and 586 b.c.

                  2.      But with the fall of the Southern Kingdom, the throne of David has remained unoccupied to this present day.

                  3.      Furthermore, God placed a curse upon the line of descent through Solomon during the reign of Jehoiakin/Jeconiah/Coniah (Jer.22:30).

                  4.      This curse means that no man in the David/Solomon line of descent could ever prosper as ruler over Israel, no matter how great he was spiritually.

                  5.      Yet the promise to David was that the throne of his son Solomon would remain forever (2Sam.7:13,16).

                  6.      Clearly, the promise does not require an uninterrupted succession of rulers, but it does require the throne to be established forever.

         B.      The solution.

                  1.      The line of unbroken male descendants continued from the time of the Babylonian captivity to the birth of Christ (cp. Mt.1:12ff).

                  2.      Because of the "Jeconiah curse", the individuals of this line could never occupy the throne of David.

                  3.      So God established another unbroken line of descent from David through his son Nathan; this line links Jesus to David biologically; this line is Mary's genealogy (Lk.3:23ff).

                  4.      The virgin birth enabled Jesus to side-step the Coniah curse and still retain the legal right to the throne since Joseph was His legal link to the throne, while Mary was His biological link to David.

                  5.      Jesus Christ is, in every way, the legal heir to the throne of David.

                  6.      He will re-establish David's throne in connection with His Second Coming (Act.15:16).

         C.     Conclusion: The Covenant did not guarantee uninterrupted rule by David's descendants, but did require that the right to rule would always remain with David's dynasty.

VI.     In the person of Jesus Christ, God established the Covenant.

         A.      The virgin birth enabled Jesus to be the physical descendant of David and not come under the "Jeconiah curse".

         B.      The resurrection of Christ eliminated the need for a continuation of the genealogy (since Jesus died childless), and provided the Covenant with an indestructible heir.

         C.     The doctrine of the Second Advent establishes the promise of an eternal throne for David occupied by his greater son, Jesus Christ (Lk.1:32,33).

VII.    The security of the Covenant.

         A.      It was not affected by the sins of the Davidic kings (2Sam.7:14,15; Ps.89:30-37).

         B.      It is seen in the repeated use of the term "forever" or its equivalent (Ps.89:4,28,29,36).

         C.     It was confirmed by a divine oath, thus giving the strongest possible assurance to its fulfillment (Pss.89:3,4,33; 132:11; 2Sam.7:13,16).

VIII.   The Covenant demands literal fulfillment.

         A.      Portions of the Covenant fulfilled literally.

                  1.      David had a son, who built the Temple, and who was disciplined for his sins (2Sam.7:12-15).

                  2.      There is an unbroken line of descendants from David to Christ, thus fulfilling the "seed" promise (Matthew 1 and Luke 3).

                  3.      Jesus Christ is a descendant of David according to the flesh (Act.2:29,30; Rom.1:3; 2Tim.2:8).

         B.      The Jews of Jesus' day expected literal fulfillment (cp. Mk.11:10; Jn.7:42).

         C.     David so understood that the Covenant was being fulfilled literally (2Sam.23:5).

         D.     Solomon, likewise, held this conviction (2Chr.6:14-17).

         E.      The unfulfilled portion has to do with the "throne" promise (2Sam.7:16).

                  1.      Amillennialism (denial of the doctrine of the literal 1,000-year reign of Christ on earth) teaches that the throne in heaven is David's throne.

                  2.      It is true that Jesus Christ is seated on His Father's throne in heaven in session (Heb.12:2); however, the throne of God in heaven and the throne of David are not one and the same.

                  3.      God has promised through the prophets that the throne (political rule) of David would be restored after long centuries of non-existence at the Second coming of Christ (Lk.1:31-33; Act.15:14-17; cp. LXX of Amos.9:11,12).

                  4.      The centuries since the fall of the kingdom of Judah and the dispersions of Israel have not rendered the promise void, even though it may appear to be the case (cp. Ps.89:38-49).

                  5.      Whatever the changing form, temporary interruptions, or chastisements, the line of David will always retain the right to rule over Israel and will, in fact, exercise this privilege.

                  6.      The right to rule will never be transferred to another family, and the Covenant's blessings are designed for eternal perpetuity (cp. Ps.89:34-36 "My covenant I will not violate, Nor will I alter the utterance of My lips. Once I have sworn by My holiness/integrity; I will not lie to David. His descendants shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before Me").

                  7.      It is confirmed in such passages as Isa.9:6,7; Jer.23:5,6; 30:8,9; 33:14-17,20,21; Ezek.37:24,25; Dan.7:13,14; Hos.3:4,5; Amos.9:11; Zech.14:4-9.

                  8.      David's throne was temporarily vacated due to the disobedience of his descendants, but the promise to rule forever stands because of the faithfulness of his greater Son, Jesus Christ.

                  9.      Again, the only necessary feature of the Covenant is that the lineage is unbroken, not that the throne be occupied continuously.

                  10.    The kingdom on earth to be established by Christ be an eternal kingdom, since the "throne/house/kingdom" were all promised to David in perpetuity.

                  11.    According to the established rules of interpretation (hermeneutics), the unfulfilled "throne" promise must be fulfilled literally, as were the fulfilled portions (as is the case with the "seed" promise).

Isa. 55:3 "Incline your ear and come to Me. Listen, that you may live; and I will make an everlasting covenant (New Covenant with Israel) with you, According to the faithful mercies shown to David."

Rev. 3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: He who is holy, who is true, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, and who shuts and no one opens, says this:"

Rev. 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright and morning star."

c Copyright 1998, Maranatha Church, Inc.

Taken from: http://www.versebyverse.org/doctrine/davidicov.html

And since brevity is the soul of wit:

The Essence of the Davidic Covenant

1.      God has given a particular land grant to Israel. 1Chron. 17:9

2.      God will build a dynasty for David specifically, indicating that this dynasty will come from David. 1Chron. 17:10–11a

3.      This dynasty will culminate with David’s Greater Son, Jesus Christ, on the throne of David forever. 1Chron. 17:11b–12, 14

So there are 3 things for David to trust God for: the land grant given in previous covenants still stands; David will have a dynasty (i.e., only David’s sons would sit on the throne of positive volition Israel); and at some point, a man from David’s own loins would sit on this throne forever.

1Chronicles 18:1b = 2Samuel 8:1b

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

nâkâh (נָכָה) [pronounced naw-KAWH]

to smite, to assault, to hit, to strike, to strike [something or someone] down, to defeat, to conquer, to subjugate

3^rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect

Strong #5221 BDB #645

Dâvid (דָּוִד); also Dâvîyd (דָּוִיד) [pronounced daw-VEED]

beloved and is transliterated David

masculine proper noun

Strong’s #1732 BDB #187

ʾêth (אֶח) [pronounced ayth]

generally untranslated; occasionally to, toward

indicates that the following substantive is a direct object

Strong's #853 BDB #84

P^elish^etîy (פְּלִשְתִּי) [pronounced p^e-lish-TEE]

transliterated Philistines

masculine plural gentilic adjective (acts like a proper noun)

Strong’s #6430 BDB #814

Here, this is spelled P^elish^etîym (פְּלִשְתִּים) [pronounced p^e-lish-TEEM].

This doctrine was taken from our study in 2Sam. 8, the parallel chapter from Samuel.

Israel and the Philistines

1.      Israel and Philistia have been traditional enemies for many centuries.

2.      During the time of the Judges, the Philistines oppressed Israel for 40 years and Samson delivered them (Judges 13–16).

3.      Under the final judge, Eli, Israel fought with the Philistines and the Philistines took the Ark of God from them (which the Israelites brought into battle as a good luck charm—1Sam. 4).

4.      The Ark caused the Philistines so many problems that they eventually returned it to Israel. All of these problems substantially weakened the Philistines for some time. 1Sam. 5–6

5.      Israel was then able to decisively defeat the Philistines in battle under Samuel’s guidance. 1Sam. 7

6.      The hatred for Israel among many Philistines was strong, and they continued to attack Israel, attempting to divide Israel by attacking central Israel while Saul was king (Saul governed Israel from central Israel). 1Sam. 13

7.      Jonathan enjoyed a tremendous victory over the Philistines in 1Sam. 14:1–23.

8.      However, despite their many setbacks, the Philistines continued to war with King Saul. 1Sam. 14:52

9.      The Philistines arrayed themselves against Israel with Goliath as their front man. David defeats Goliath and the Philistines flee. 1Sam. 17

10.    David becomes one of Saul’s main generals, defeating many enemies (which possibly includes additional skirmishes with the Philistines). However, Saul became jealous of David and began to focus his anger and jealousy against David, causing David to flee. 1Sam. 18–24

11.    Because of this rift, David goes to the Philistines to find a place to live, and he and his small army are placed in southeastern Palestine, becoming somewhat of a buffer between Israel and the Philistines. 1Sam. 27

12.    The Philistines decide to war against Saul, and David, because he is living on their land, is expected to join with them. However, Philistines who know David and know of him decide that going to war with David and his men among them was a potential threat to them, so David was let off the hook and sent back to his campsite. 1Sam. 29

13.    The Philistines wage war against Saul and his sons and are victorious, killing them, routing the Israeli soldiers, and taking over their cities in central Israel (primarily in Benjamin). 1Sam. 31:1–7

14.    After this time, Saul’s son, Ishbosheth is ruling over northern and eastern Israel and David has control of southern Israel. Central Israel is probably still under the control of the Philistines. 2Sam. 2

15.    When David solidifies his control over all Israel, the Philistines attack. This is somewhat confusing. Approximately 7 years before, the Philistines took the cities of central Israel. Whether they are still in these cities or not is unclear. However, in any case, David defeats them twice, sending them back to their traditional land in southwestern Palestine. 1Sam. 7

16.    Time passes: David moves the Ark to Jerusalem, he thinks about building a permanent structure to God, and God gives David the Davidic Covenant (2Sam. 6–7). David is again at war with the Philistines, although we are given few details here, apart from him taking Gath, which is one of the primary cities of the Philistines, being almost due east of Jerusalem. This suggests that we are speaking of new conflicts with the Philistines, rather than rehashing David’s battles with them from 2Sam. 5.

17.    Because of this recent and continuous history that Israel has with the Philistines, it is no wonder that they are mentioned first.

18.    Israel has another war with Gath, one of the chief cities of the Philistines, in 1Chron. 20:6–8 which involves some of the giants. This appears to have taken place during the Bathsheba incident.

19.    Somehow, in all of this, David appears to have acquired a large number of Gittites (men of Gath).

20.    Much later in David’s life, after the Absalom revolt, the Philistines will come back to war against the Israelites. It appears as though there were several battles and perhaps several wars. David and his armies would be victorious on every occasion. 2Sam. 21:15–22

21.    The references in 2Sam. 23 to the Philistines are simply recounting the heroic exploits of some of David’s soldiers.

22.    From 2Sam. 21 until the end of Solomon’s life, the Philistines brought tribute to the Israelites. 1Kings 4:21 reads: Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life.

23.    The next time that we hear about the Philistines, it is almost incidental. The Kingdom of Israel was divided after Solomon. The northern kingdom, under its 2^nd king (Nadab) was warring against the Philistines, and Baasha killed Nadab when he was laying siege against the Philistines. Baasha became the 3^rd king over the Northern Kingdom of Israel. This is 909 b.c. 1Kings 15:27

24.    24 years later, we hear about the Philistines again in an incidental way, when Omri was apparently at war against the Philistines. However, the battle with the Philistines is presented as incidental to Omri being made king over the Northern Kingdom (Omri is the 6^th king of Israel). This is 885 b.c. 1Kings 16:15

25.    The Philistines are mentioned again incidentally in 2Kings 8 (circa 840 b.c.); in a passage which indicates that a woman was able to go from Israel into Philistia and live for 7 years.

26.    Hezekiah, circa 720 b.c., king of Judah, hands a crushing defeat to the Philistines in 2Kings 18:8.

27.    We do not find the Philistines mentioned in any subsequent history (Kings or Chronicles), but they are mentioned by later prophets: Jer. 25:20 47:1, 4 Ezek. 16:27, 57 25:15–16 Obad. 1:19

Quite obviously, there is a long and bloody history between Israel and the Philistines.

1Chronicles 18:1c = 2Samuel 8:1c

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

kânaʿ (כָּנַע) [pronounced kaw-NAHĢ]

to bow down, to bring anyone low, to humble, to subdue

3^rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect; with the 3^rd person masculine plural suffix

Strong’s #3665 BDB #488

1Chronicles 18:1d = 2Samuel 8:1d

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

lâqach (לָקַח) [pronounced law-KAHKH]

to take, to take away, to take in marriage; to seize

3^rd person masculine singular, Qal imperfect

Strong’s #3947 BDB #542

The BDB gives the following meanings: to take, take in the hand; to take and carry along; to take from, take out of, take, carry away, take away; to take to or for a person, procure, get, take possession of, select, choose, take in marriage, receive, accept; to take up or upon, put upon; to fetch; to take, lead, conduct; to take, capture, seize; to take, carry off; to take (vengeance).

Dâvid (דָּוִד); also Dâvîyd (דָּוִיד) [pronounced daw-VEED]

beloved and is transliterated David

masculine proper noun

Strong’s #1732 BDB #187

ʾêth (אֶח) [pronounced ayth]

generally untranslated; occasionally to, toward

indicates that the following substantive is a direct object

Strong's #853 BDB #84

Gath (גַּת) [pronounced gahth]

wine-press and is transliterated Gath

masculine proper noun

Strong’s #1661 BDB #387

w^e (or v^e) (וְ or וּ) [pronounced weh]

and, even, then; namely; when; since, that; though

simple wâw conjunction

No Strong’s # BDB #251

bath (בַּת) [pronounced bahth]

daughter; village

feminine singular noun with the 3^rd person feminine singular suffix

Strong's #1323 BDB #123

Instead of Gath and its villages, the text in Samuel has:

Metheg (מֶתֶג) [pronounced MEH-theg]

a bridle; control, authority

masculine singular noun with the definite article

Strong’s #4964 BDB #607

ʾAmmâh (אַמָּה) [pronounced ahm-MAW]

foundation; beginning; metropolis; transliterated Ammah

proper feminine singular noun/location with the definite article

Strong’s #520 BDB #52

This is the same noun which is used to mean cubit.

There is the problem, can this be seen as one place or as the control of Ammah. In the latter case, this would be a construct state, and a noun in the construct state cannot have a definite article. Since both of these nouns have definite articles, we cannot understand this to be in the construct state.

min (מִן) [pronounced mihn]

from, off, out from, out of, away from, on account of, since, than, more than

preposition of separation

Strong's #4480 BDB #577

yâd (יָד) [pronounced yawd]

generally translated hand

feminine singular construct

Strong's #3027 BDB #388

Yâd as a construct and the min preposition are literally rendered from a hand of; together, they can also mean out of the hand of; out of the power of; from the power of.

P^elish^etîy (פְּלִשְתִּי) [pronounced p^e-lish-TEE]

transliterated Philistines

masculine plural gentilic adjective (acts like a proper noun)

Strong’s #6430 BDB #814

Here, this is spelled P^elish^etîym (פְּלִשְתִּים) [pronounced p^e-lish-TEEM].

David has enjoyed a unique relationship with the king of Gath, which might be worth reviewing here.

David and the King of Gath

1.      Prior to this, David had a fairly reasonable relationship with the Achish, King of Gath. You may recall that, the first time David found himself in Gath, he realized what a mistake he had made, so he started acting crazy. When brought to the royal palace, Achish, the king, said, “Don’t I already have enough madmen in my palace? Did you think I needed another one?” And, with that, dismissed David. 1Sam. 21:10–15

2.      David wrote Psalm 34 about this time, as the inscription mentions the situation described in point #1. However, he is called Abimelech here rather than Achish (Abimelech means son of a king, which Achish probably was).

3.      David returned years later as a refugee from Saul and Israel and this king gave David a plot of land on which to dwell, in a southern portion of Philistia. 1Sam. 27:1–6

4.      While living in this land, David often lied to the King of Gath about what he was actually doing there. He was making money by plundering Israel’s enemies, but he did not reveal this to the King of Gath. Recall that David was out of God’s geographical will, and therefore, was probably out of fellowship much of the time. 1Sam. 27:8–12

5.      Given these situations, one might want to conclude that Achish was an overly-trusting buffoon; however, it is difficult to be the leader of a country, a military hero, and yet to simultaneously be a buffoon. We have, in our country, made out several presidents—incorrectly might I add—to be buffoons. I think the psychology here is, Achish did not personally fear David and that he may have known more about David’s comings and goings than he let on. The bottom line is, he appeared to believe that, if he treated David kindly, that David would not turn on him. I take this from my sense of the dynamic between David and Achish; I could not point to specific Scriptures to back this up.

6.      David, as a man living on Philistine territory, was responsible to help defend it against its enemies. Therefore, when the Philistines were to march against Israel, David joined them, at the request of Achish. David’s bad decisions had placed him in a morally untenable situation and there was no way for him to get out of it. However, the other kings of Philistia balked at David’s presence, so he did not have to war against his own people. 1Sam. 28:1–21 29:1–11

7.      The fact that David was willing to join with the Philistines because Achish requested him to do so, indicates to me that David was not simply taking advantage of the kindness Achish (although, that may have been his original relationship with Achish). David could have told Achish, “I am a Jew and most of those with me are Jews; and even though we are estranged from Israel, we cannot fight against our own brothers.” However, because he was living on Philistine land, David recognized that he had a responsibility to Achish, who allowed him to reside in Philistine territory.

8.      After the death of Saul, David takes control of southern Israel and then, 7 years later, northern Israel. When David takes Jerusalem, then the Philistines move against him. At this point, we do not know whether the King of Gath with whom David has been associated was still in charge. Since there are 5 kings in all, it is not clear whether all 5 of them moved against David at this time. Given the past relationship of David and Achish, I would theorize that (1) Achish was dead, deposed or retired; or (2) Gath did not participate in this attack (which is less likely). 2Sam. 5:17–25

9.      My assumption here is, David’s former ally, Achish, is out of the picture in 2Sam. 5. If I have correctly assessed their relationship, then Achish would not have feared to have David next door to him as king of Israel. However, a new king—even the son of Achish—could have been unduly influenced by the other 4 kings of the Philistines, and caused to move against David.

10.    In this chapter, it is anywhere between 10 to 20 years later. David takes control of Gath. Again, nothing is said specifically about his former ally (2Sam. 8:1, 12). And, again, my assumption would be that Achish is no longer in the picture (that is, he is dead), so that David’s dynamic with Gath has changed.

11.    There is another Achish, King of Gath mentioned in 1Kings 2:39–40 whose father has a similar name to the Achish associated with David (compare 1Sam. 27:2 where it is called Achish ben Maoch, king of Gath; and 1Kings 2:39 where he is called Achish ben Maacah, king of Gath). Whether or not this is the same man is debatable (I would think not). If these are different fathers, then these men could have been uncle and nephew or grandfather and grandson.* A reasonable theory was, Achish, David’s ally, had died many years ago and his son was in charge. When David defeated Gath, he may have set up his own king in Israel, Achish ben Maacah, the grandson of his friend. In 1Kings 2, a man named Shimei travels from Israel to and from Gath without any problems. This further supports my theory.

Being that there were primarily 5 kings and 5 city-states, Achish may have fallen out of favor at the end of 1Samuel, but come back into favor in 1Kings 2. Or, more likely, during the 7 years that it took for David to combine his kingdom, Achish may have died during that time period. We really do not know. In any case, it was an unusual relationship.

* Under the subject heading, Achish, Easton and Fausset treat these as two different men; ISBE sees Achish as only one man.

1Chronicles 18:2a = 2Samuel 8:2a

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

nâkâh (נָכָה) [pronounced naw-KAWH]

to smite, to assault, to hit, to strike, to strike [something or someone] down, to defeat, to conquer, to subjugate

3^rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect

Strong #5221 BDB #645

The Greek inserts the proper noun David here (in both the Samuel and Chronicles passage), which may simply be a literary choice on the part of the Greek translator.

ʾêth (אֶח) [pronounced ayth]

generally untranslated; occasionally to, toward

indicates that the following substantive is a direct object

Strong's #853 BDB #84

Môwʾâb (מוֹאָב) [pronounced moh-AW^BV]

of his father; transliterated Moab

masculine singular, proper noun

Strong’s #4124 BDB #555

2Samuel 8:2b–2c (text not found in 1Chornicles 18)

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

The following text is in 2Sam. 8, but not in 1Chron. 18.

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

mâdad (מָדַד) [pronounced maw-DAHD]

to measure

3^rd person masculine singular, Piel imperfect, with the 3^rd person masculine plural suffix

Strong’s #4058 BDB #551

I don’t know that I accept this definition entirely. Perhaps there is within these definitions, the idea of to evaluate, to take the measure of a man.

b^e (בְּ) [pronounced b^eh]

in, into, through; at, by, near, on, upon; with, before, against; by means of; among; within

a preposition of proximity

Strong’s# none BDB #88

chebel (חֶבֶל) [pronounced KHE^B-vel]

rope, cord, bands; a measuring rope; a territory, lot, portion; a group [of things]

masculine singular noun with the definite article

Strong’s #2256 BDB #286

shâkab (שָכַב) [pronounced shaw-KAH^BV]

to make [anyone] lie down, to prostrate; to lay down; to cause to rest; to pour out a vessel

Hiphil infinitive absolute

Strong’s #7901 BDB #1011

ʾêth (אֶח) [pronounced ayth]

generally untranslated; occasionally to, toward

indicates that the following substantive is a direct object affixed to the 3^rd person masculine plural suffix

Strong's #853 BDB #84

ʾerets (אֶרֶץ) [pronounced EH-rets]

earth (all or a portion thereof), land, territory, country, continent; ground, soil; under the ground [Sheol]

feminine singular noun with the directional hê

Strong's #776 BDB #75

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

mâdad (מָדַד) [pronounced maw-DAHD]

to measure

3^rd person masculine singular, Piel imperfect

Strong’s #4058 BDB #551

sh^enêy (שְנֵי) [pronounced sh^en-Ā]

two, two of, a pair of, a duo of

dual numeral construct

Strong’s #8147 BDB #1040

chebel (חֶבֶל) [pronounced KHE^B-vel]

rope, cord, bands; a measuring rope; a territory, lot, portion; a group [of things]

masculine plural noun

Strong’s #2256 BDB #286

lâmed (לְ) [pronounced l^e]

to, for, towards, in regards to, with reference to, as to, with regards to, belonging to

directional/relational preposition

No Strong’s # BDB #510

mûwth (מוּת) [pronounced mooth]

to kill, to cause to die, to put to death, to execute

3^rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect

Strong's #4191 BDB #559

w^e (or v^e) (וְ or וּ) [pronounced weh]

and, even, then; namely; when; since, that; though

simple wâw conjunction

No Strong’s # BDB #251

m^elôʾ (מְלֹא) [pronounced m^elow]

fulness, that which fills, that which is full; multitude, crowd [i.e., those which fill a city]

masculine singular construct

Strong’s #4393 BDB #571

chebel (חֶבֶל) [pronounced KHE^B-vel]

rope, cord, bands; a measuring rope; a territory, lot, portion; a group [of things]

masculine singular noun with the definite article

Strong’s #2256 BDB #286

lâmed (לְ) [pronounced l^e]

to, for, towards, in regards to, with reference to, as to, with regards to, belonging to

directional/relational preposition

No Strong’s # BDB #510

châyâh (חָיָה) [pronounced khaw-YAW]

to keep alive, to deliver from death, to grant life

Hiphil infinitive construct

Strong's #2421 & #2425 BDB #310

1Chronicles 18:2b = 2Samuel 8:2d

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

hâyâh (הָיָה) [pronounced haw-YAW]

to be, is, was, are; to become, to come into being; to come to pass

3^rd person masculine plural, Qal imperfect

Strong's #1961 BDB #224

In 2Sam. 8:2, this is a feminine singular.

Môwʾâb (מוֹאָב) [pronounced moh-AW^BV]

of his father; transliterated Moab

masculine singular, proper noun

Strong’s #4124 BDB #555

The noun is unchanged. I don’t know if the translation ought to read differently, or whether Moab, as a noun, could be seen as a country (feminine singular) as well as a people (masculine plural). I suspect that the key is the predicate nominative in this case, which lacks the lâmed preposition in the Chronicles text. .

ʿôbêd (עֹבֵד) [pronounced ģoh-BADE]

a slave, a servant

masculine plural noun

Strong’s #5660 BDB #713

lâmed (לְ) [pronounced l^e]

to, for, towards, in regards to, with reference to, as to, with regards to, belonging to

directional/relational preposition

No Strong’s # BDB #510

Dâvid (דָּוִד); also Dâvîyd (דָּוִיד) [pronounced daw-VEED]

beloved and is transliterated David

masculine proper noun

Strong’s #1732 BDB #187

In the Samuel text, we have the lâmed preposition followed by the masculine plural noun servants, slaves.

lâmed (לְ) [pronounced l^e]

to, for, towards, in regards to, with reference to, as to, with regards to, belonging to

directional/relational preposition

No Strong’s # BDB #510

ʿôbêd (עֹבֵד) [pronounced ģoh-BADE]

a slave, a servant

masculine plural noun

Strong’s #5660 BDB #713

The Samuel text reads, literally: And so is Moab to David for slaves those bringing tribute. The Chronicles text reads, literally: And so is Moab slaves to David those bringing tribute. There does not appear to be any difference in meaning.

nâsâʾ (נָשָׂא) [pronounced naw-SAW]

those lifting up, bearers, those carrying; the ones exalting; those taking away

masculine plural construct, Qal active participle

Strong’s #5375 (and #4984) BDB #669

min^echâh (מִנְחָה) [pronounced min-HAWH]

tribute offering, gift, present; sacrifice, bloodless offering; [a general term for] offering

feminine singular noun

Strong’s #4503 BDB #585

1Chronciles 18:3a = 2Samuel 8:3a

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

wa (or va) (וַ) [pronounced wah]

and so, and then, then, and; so, that, yet, therefore; because

wâw consecutive

No Strong’s # BDB #253

nâkâh (נָכָה) [pronounced naw-KAWH]

to smite, to assault, to hit, to strike, to strike [something or someone] down, to defeat, to conquer, to subjugate

3^rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect

Strong #5221 BDB #645

Dâvid (דָּוִד); also Dâvîyd (דָּוִיד) [pronounced daw-VEED]

beloved and is transliterated David

masculine proper noun

Strong’s #1732 BDB #187

ʾêth (אֶח) [pronounced ayth]

generally untranslated; occasionally to, toward

indicates that the following substantive is a direct object

Strong's #853 BDB #84

Hădad^eʿezer (הֲדַדְעֶזֶר) [pronounced huhd-ahd-ĢEH-zer]

Hadad is a helper; transliterated Hadadezer

masculine singular proper noun

Strong’s #1909 BDB #212

The proper noun found here is possibly:

Hădar^eʿezer (הֲדַרְעֶזֶר) [pronounced huhd-ahr-ĢEH-zehr]

 Hadar is a help; and is transliterated Hadarezer

masculine singular proper noun

Strong’s #1928 BDB #214

Hadadezer is found in 2Sam. 8:3, 5, 7–10, 12 1Kings 11:23. Hadarezer is found in: 2Sam. 10:16, 19 1Chron. 18:3, 5, 7-10 (the parallel chapter to 2Sam. 8) 19:16, 19. The d and r in Hebrew are often confounded. Many Bibles will have one or the other spellings in all of these passages. Although most Chronicles’ manuscripts have Hadarezer, 2 early printed editions do not, according to Rotherham.

Barnes tells us that Hadadezer, is the true form, as seen in the names Benhadad, Hadad (1Kings 11:14 15:18). Hadad was the chief idol, or sun–god, of the Syrians.

The phrase son of Rechob is not included in the Chronicles text:

bên (בֵּן) [pronounced bane]

son, descendant

masculine singular construct

Strong’s #1121 BDB #119

R^echôwb (רְחוֹב) [pronounced r^ekh-OH^BV]

broad, open place and is transliterated Rechob, Rehob

masculine singular proper noun; location

Strong's #7340 BDB #932

Also spelled R^echôb (רְחֹב) [pronounced r^ekh-OH^BV].

melek^e (מֶלֶך׃) [pronounced MEH-lek]

king, ruler, prince

masculine singular construct

Strong’s #4428 BDB #572

Tsôwbâh (צוֹבָה) [pronounced tzoh^b-VAW]

transliterated Zobah

Proper noun, territory

Strong’s #6678 BDB #844

Chămâth (חֲמָת) [pronounced khuhm-AWTH]

fortress, defense, citadel; sacred enclosure; transliterated Hamath

proper singular noun/location; with the directional hê

Strong’s #2574 BDB #333

Israel During David’s Kingdom

This is an excellent map to refer to with respect to these various wars of David. In the upper right-hand corner is Aram-Zobah (in red letters). Directly above that (and off the map) is Hamath.

For a better view of this map, go to: http://www.bible-history.com/map-davids-kingdom/

Zobah, as a kingdom, was a significant enemy of Israel’s during the monarchy of the unified kingdom. It is located northeast of Israel, although its exact location is disputed (see geography under the ISBE reference).

The Doctrine of Zobah

1.      Zobah appears to have been an independent country northeast of Israel, which eventually allied itself with Aram (Syria) or was conquered by the Syrians. Smith suggests that this was an independent portion of the Syrian kingdom during the reigns of Saul, David and Solomon.

2.      Easton describes it as a Syrian province or kingdom to the south of Coele-Syria, and extending from the eastern slopes of Lebanon north and east toward the Euphrates.

3.      We first hear of Zobah when Saul’s military victories are spoken of in 1Sam. 14:47. These were victories over Moab, Ammon, Edom, Zobah, and Philistia.

4.      Zobah is not mentioned again until our passage (and the parallel passage in 2Sam. 8:3–6) where David defeats Hadadezer, king of Zobah, which expanded Israel’s borders as far as the Euphrates River. David decimated Hadadezer’s army, wiping out its armor division along with 10's of 1000's of soldiers. 1Chron. 18:3–4

5.      Syrians from Damascus joined in the fray, and David defeated them as well. 2Sam. 8:5–6 1Chron. 18:5–6

6.      In this war, David scored big time against Hadadezer, carrying away shields of gold, and other articles of silver, gold and bronze. 2Sam. 8:7–8, 11–12 1Chron. 18:7–8, 10–11

7.      David became allied with Toi, King of Hamath, because David defeated Hadadezer, King of Zobah. 2Sam. 8:9–10 1Chron. 18:9–10

8.      When we get to 2Sam. 10, the writer speaks of the Syrians of Zobah. My first impression was, the Syrians took over this area after David defeated Hadadezer. However, Hadadezer is mentioned by name in 1Kings 11:23. This suggests that Zobah is a region, and that, at some point in time, the Syrians had control over a portion of that region so as to be identified with it. It could be that Zobah was always an Aramæan kingdom, but not specifically identified until 2Sam. 10. In any case, David defeats a large coalition of enemy forces (Aram, Zobah, Ammon, along with enemies from Bethrehob, Ishtob and Maacah). ISBE nicely describes this war: During David's Ammonite war, the enemy was strengthened by alliance with Zobah, Maacah and Beth-rehob, and Israel was attacked from both North and South at the same time. The northern confederation was defeated by Joab, but Hadadezer again gathered an army, including levies from beyond the Euphrates. These, under Shobach the captain of the host, were met by David in person at Helam, and a great slaughter ensued, Shobach himself being among the slain (2Sa_10:6-19, the King James Version “Zoba”; 1 Ch 19:3-19). 2Sam. 10 1Chron. 19

9.      ISBE adds: The kingdom of Zobah in addition to its mineral wealth must have been rich in vineyards and fruitful fields, and its conquest must have added greatly to the wealth and power of Israel's king.

10.    Psalm 60 appears to have been composed after David defeated Aram-zobah (2Sam. 10) and Edom (2Sam. 8). Psalm 60 inscription

11.    During the time of Solomon, Rezon, a fugitive from Hadadezer, established himself as king of Damascus and was a problem for Solomon, David’s son,. He was a man who loathed Israel. 1Kings 11:23–25

12.    In 2Chron. 8, Solomon goes up ot Hamath-zobah and takes it (this is the only time it is called by this name in the Bible). He also rebuilds cities given to him by Hiram; so, under Solomon, there is a northward expansion; however, it does not appear as though this area was conquered by warfare (except, indirectly by David’s wars). Zobah is never mentioned again after this passage. ISBE suggests that, by the time of the writing of Chronicles, the distinction between Hamath and Zobah had faded, so that this reference simply refers to the northern territory taken in by Solomon. See the map below:

13.    Smith: 2Chron. 8:3...is the last that we hear of Zobah in Scripture. The name however, is found at a later date in the inscriptions of Assyria, where the kingdom of Zobah seems to intervene between Hamath and Damascus

Some additional material culled from:

M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., Illustrated Bible Dictionary; 1897; from e-Sword, topic: Zobah.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia; James Orr, Editor; ©1956 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.; Ⓟ by Hendrickson Publishers; from E-Sword; Topics:  Hamath-zobah, Zobah.

Dr. William Smith, Smith’s Bible Dictionary; 1894; from e-Sword, topic: Zobah.

The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible; Merrill Tenney, ed., Zondervan Publishing House, ©1976; Vol. 5, pp. 1069–1070.

1Chronciles 18:3b = 2Samuel 8:3b

Hebrew/Pronunciation

Common English Meanings

Notes/Morphology

BDB and Strong’s Numbers

b^e (בְּ) [pronounced b^eh]

in, into, through; at, by, near, on, upon; with, before, against; by means of; among; within

a preposition of proximity

Strong’s# none BDB #88

The infinitive construct, when combined with the bêyth preposition, can often take on a temporal meaning and may be rendered when [such and such happens]. It can serve as a temporal marker that denotes an event which occurs simultaneously with the action of the main verb.

hâlak^e (הָלַךְ) [pronounced haw-LAHK^e]

to go, to come, to depart, to walk; to advance

Qal infinitive construct with the 3^rd person masculine singular suffix

Strong’s #1980 (and #3212) BDB #229

lâmed (לְ) [pronounced l^e]

to, for, towards, in regards to, with reference to, as to, with regards to, belonging to

directional/relational preposition

No Strong’s # BDB #510

nâtsab (נָצַב) [pronounced naw-TSAH^BV]

to station oneself, to take one’s stand, to stand up, to set something upright, to erect; to fix, to establish

Hiphil infinitive construct

Strong’s #5324 BDB #662

The Samuel text has the following verb instead:

shûwb (שוּב) [pronounced shoo^bv]

to cause to return, to bring, to be caused to turn back mentally, reminisce, to return something, to restore, to bring [send, turn] back, to regain, to recover, to make restitution, reconsider, think again, to be caused to return

Hiphil infinitive construct

Strong's #7725 BDB #996

The change of verb here is interesting. The writer of Samuel understood what this returning was all about. The writer of Chronicles does not necessarily understand about the return (or, believes that his readers won’t understand it, and so he changes the verb).

yâd (יָד) [pronounced yawd]

hand; strength, power (figuratively); side (of land), part, portion (metaphorically) (figuratively); (various special, technical senses); sign, monument; part, fractional part, share; time, repetition; axle-trees, axle; stays, support (for laver); tenons (in tabernacle); a phallus, a hand (meaning unsure); wrists

feminine singular noun with the 3^rd person masculine singular suffix

Strong's #3027 BDB #388

In case you are wondering where some of the translators came up with translations which involved the word monument, there are an additional handful of specialized uses for this noun: a. a sign, a monument (1Sam. 15:12 2Sam. 18:18); b. a part, a fractional part (Gen. 47:24 2Sam. 19:44 2Kings 11:7 Neh. 11:1); c. time, repetition (Gen. 43:34 Deut. 1:29).

b^e (בְּ) [pronounced b^eh]

in, into, through; at, by, near, on, upon; with, before, against; by means of; among; within

a preposition of proximity

Strong’s# none BDB #88

nâhâr (נָהָר) [pronounced naw-HAWR]

stream, river

masculine singular construct

Strong’s #5104 BDB #625

A marginal note in the Masoretic text adds this word to the text of 2Sam. 8:3: This is how it reads in 1Chron. 18:3.

Ph^erât (פְּרָת) [pronounced f^e-RAWT]

to break forth, rushing; transliterated Euphrates

masculine singular proper noun

Strong’s #6578 BDB #832

This is also found in the Septuagint (LXX), the Syriac Peshitta, and the Latin Vulgate of 2Sam. 8. Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that this word was in the original text of Samuel.

1Chronicles 18:4a = 2Samuel 8:4a