Outline of Chapter 4:

         v.       1              Ishbosheth hears about Abner’s Death

         vv.     2–3           The Backstory on Rechab and Baanah

         v.       4              The Backstory on Mephibosheth

         vv.     5–7           Rechab and Baanah Assassinate Ishbosheth

         v.       8              Rechab and Baanah Bring the Head of Ishbosheth to David

         vv.     9–12         David Executes Rechab and Baanah for their Evil Act

Charts, Maps and Short Doctrines:

         Introduction         Matthew Henry’s Outline of 2Samuel 4

         Introduction         My Initial Questions Concerning 2Samuel 4

         v.       2              Ancient World Raiding Parties

         v.       2              The Baanah’s of Scripture

         v.       2              The Rechab’s in Scripture

         v.       2              The Rimmon’s in Scripture

         v.       3              Why the Gibeonites Left Beeroth and Fled to Gittaim

         v.       4              Why is Mephibosheth Mentioned Right Here?

         v.       4              Baal Versus Bosheth

         v.       6              Are Rechab and Baanah Bringing Wheat Stalks in or Taking them out?

         v.       7              A Chronological Reshuffling of 2Samual 4:5–7

         v.      11              Why the Execution of Ishbosheth is a Greater Crime than the Execution of Saul

         v.      12              Behind the Scenes Political Intrigue under David

         Addendum          A Complete Translation of 2Samuel 4

I ntroduction: 2Sam. 4 is a short chapter about the assassination of Ishbosheth. After Abner went over to David’s side, and encouraged the various tribes to back David, the war between Ishbosheth and David appeared to come to a standstill. Two trusted generals of Ishbosheth gain entry into his home in this chapter and they murder Ishbosheth in bed while he is sleeping. Then they behead him and carry his head ot David, expecting a reward of some sort. David, instead, executes them for their evil.

The first 4 verses gives us some background information, without really furthering the action. You will recall that Abner was killed in the previous chapter; and that Ishbosheth never knew that Abner had gone over to David’s side. As far as he knew, Abner delivered Michal to David and then was murdered in some plot. So, when we open up this chapter, Ishbosheth knows about Abner’s death and is afraid. Furthermore, the rest of Israel is disturbed. Their leader does not appear to be leading them; and their lead general, Abner, is suddenly dead (something which would confuse and terrify the few who that Abner had defected and the many who did not know this.

In this chapter, we meet two of Ishbosheth’s top generals—Rechab and Baanah—and we are given a moderately detailed background of these two: their father’s name, where they were from, and why exactly they are Benjamites. There is also one verse which tells us about Mephibosheth (v. 4); about how he is Saul’s grandson through Jonathan and we are told how he became lame as a child.

In vv. 5–7, we have the assassination of Ishbosheth by Rechab and Baanah; they gain entrance into his house on some ruse in the middle of the day, when they know Ishbosheth to be sleeping; and then they murder him in his sleep. They then behead him and take his head to David, expecting some kind of reward (either a top position in David’s military or some sort of monetary reward). In vv. 9–11, David explains to them the error of their thinking. He recounts the Amalekite who came to him, claiming to have killed Saul. Now, Saul was, in Saul’s mind, David’s enemy; and David was living outside of Judah because Saul continually pursued him. However, David was not going to kill Saul, as Saul is God’s anointed. Therefore, when a man comes to David bragging that he had killed Saul, David put this man to death. After informing these men of this, David then has these two men executed for their evil.

Ishbosheth hears about Abner's Death

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:                       Note: I compare the Hebrew text to English translations of the Latin, Syriac and Greek texts (using the Douay-Rheims translation; George Lamsa’s translation, and Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton’s translation, respectively). When there are serious disparities between my translation and Brenton’s, I look at the Greek text of the Septuagint (the LXX) to see if a substantive difference actually exists (and I reflect these changes in the English rendering of the Greek text). Now and again, I update these texts with non-substantive changes (e.g., you for thou, etc.).

Latin Vulgate                          And Isboseth the son of Saul heard that Abner was slain in Hebron: and his hands were weakened, and all Israel was troubled.

Masoretic Text                       And so hears son of Saul that died Abner in Hebron; and so drops down his hands. And all Israel was confounded [or, terrified].

Septuagint                              And when Saul’s son heard that Abner was dead in Hebron, his hands were feeble, and all the Israelites were troubled.

Significant differences:           Although this is a fairly easy thing, context-wise to get, the proper name here is confounded. It is Ashbashul in the Syriac; 4QSam^a has Mephibosheth; and it is likely that the MT never had a proper name here. As you study the text, it is clear that this should be Ishbosheth (Mephibosheth is Jonathan’s son, not Saul’s son); furthermore, most of this narrative, apart from v. 4, is about the assassination of Ishbosheth. Apart from the confounding of this name, the ancient texts are in close agreement—here, and throughout most of the chapter.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Ishbosheth felt like giving up after he heard that Abner had died in Hebron. Everyone in Israel was terrified.

The Message                         Saul's son, Ish-Bosheth, heard that Abner had died in Hebron. His heart sank. The whole country was shaken.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         When Saul's son Ishbosheth heard that Abner had died in Hebron, he lost his courage, and all Israel was alarmed.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       When Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, heard that Abner had died at Hebron, his courage failed, and all Israel was dismayed.

Young’s Updated LT             And the son of Saul hears that Abner is dead in Hebron, and his hands are feeble, and all Israel have been troubled.

The gist of this verse?          Of course, the rest of Israel, including Ishbosheth, hear about Abner’s death. They are both afraid and confused; and Ishbosheth loses his nerve.

Translation: When [Ishbosheth], the son of Saul, heard that Abner had died in Hebron,... Abner’s death was not something that could be kept secret. His is traveling with a band of 20 men. These men are going to be somewhat confused, as they have a treaty with David, and this treaty appears to be broken (they are, at first, confused about Joab’s killing of Abner).

Now, after David’s memorial to Abner, it becomes clear to these men—and perhaps clear after a period of a few days or weeks—that David had nothing to do with Abner’s death. However, there is no doubt going to be a period of a few days or more, where these men are unsure of what to do. These are Abner’s most trusted men; and it is probable that they are all aware of Abner’s alliance with David. To observe the killing of Abner no doubt initially confused them and some of them (if not all of them) possibly fled for their lives.

Bear in mind that, the word will eventually get out of David’s sincere grief over Abner’s death. Could one of these men understood what was going on and attended the funeral? We have no idea as to what they did as individuals. Some may have fled to Ishbosheth; some to northern Israel; and some may have stayed in Hebron. My guess is, these men were scattered when Abner was unjustly murdered (does this sound at all familiar to you?).

We know that, in some way, Ishbosheth finds out that this happened. My guess is, some of the men who were with Abner went back to Ishbosheth and told him the basic details: Joab murdered Abner at the gate of Hebron. Since cell phone usage appears to have been quite spotty in that part of the ancient world, and because newspapers do not appear to have existed, if something happens in Hebron, no one east of the Jordan will know about it unless a person from Hebron physically travels across the Jordan and tells them. What makes the most sense is, one (or more) of these 20 went straight to Ishbosheth.

As we have seen, Abner will be given an honorable burial; and David will genuinely mourn his death. At that point, it will be clear to all observers that this was not some clever political plot by David to remove Abner from this life. We do not really know how fast or exactly what information went to Ishbosheth. He may know about David’s mourning and he may not. All we know for certain is, Ishbosheth knows that Abner has been killed in Hebron.

If you were among these 20 men, what would you have done? Your general is assassinated by one of David’s top generals, even after an alliance is forged between Abner and David. Some will stick around to gain more information; but my thinking is, most would quickly leave the area, as they might be next.

Translation: ...his courage failed [him] [lit., his hands dropped]... We have no previous connection between Abner and the army which Saul originally led. There is no indication that Ishbosheth is a brave warrior. In fact, there is no indication that he has any military experience whatsoever. It is very likely that he spent little or no time in the military, and that was fine by him.

What just happened requires Ishbosheth to take a leadership position—yes, I realize that he is the king of northern and central and eastern Israel, but he is not really much of a leader. He needs to step up to the plate at this time, and he is unable to do so. The strength of Ishbosheth is Abner, and Abner is dead. This reaction by Ishbosheth—wherein his courage fails him—indicates to me that he does not really know that Abner aligned himself with David; that Ishbosheth thinks that the blow up between him and Abner has blown over; and that he still has (until Abner’s death) a faithful, albeit pissed off, general under him. Ishbosheth was supported completely by Abner; without Abner, Ishbosheth is nothing. Most importantly, Ishbosheth knows this. Abner brought Ishbosheth to a safe place after the Philistine victory and his father’s death (1Sam. 31). Abner organized an army and gained support for Ishbosheth as king, a feat which required several years. Ishbosheth does not know how to do any of this; he is king by virtue of birth, but he has no natural leadership abilities; so with Abner dead, Ishbosheth does not know what to do—his hands drop.

Gill makes a very accurate observation of this portion of v. 1: his hands were feeble: not only in a natural sense, being quite dispirited at hearing such news; but in a civil sense, having lost his main support and strength, he being president of his council, and commander of his forces, and in whom he placed all his confidence: and if he knew nothing of his being at Hebron, it must surprise him to hear of his dying there; from whence he might conclude, that since he was there without his knowledge, it could not be in his favour, some plot was forming, and schemes laying with his rival to dethrone him; or if he knew of it, and understood it in this light, that he was endeavouring to make peace between him and David, and upon advantageous terms to him, of which now he might entertain no hopes; he was dispirited, and might conclude that Joab was against any terms at peace, and therefore had dispatched him.

Translation: ...and all [the rest] of Israel was confused [and terrified]. We have a verb which means several different things, and several of the meanings are applicable here. All of Israel is overwhelmed, confused, confounded and terrified that Abner has been killed. Abner was just there or he had sent messages, indicating that he felt they should realign themselves with David, and now, David’s top general, Joab, has killed Abner. It is going to take a little time before Israel understands that this was political intrigue and not David’s doing (see 2Sam. 3:37).

The reference to all Israel refers to the northern, central and eastern tribes of Israel (pretty much, everyone except for Judah and Simeon). A few of these elders knew of Abner’s defection, as they had recently met with his representatives and had been encouraged to support David. Beyond this, they know that Abner went to Judah, and that he was killed there. This would be quite confusing for David’s supporter to be murdered in David’s territory.

There would be the soldiers of Israel, who, up until this time, were in a civil war against David; and now, their lead general has been assassinated; so they do not know what their future holds and they are troubled over these events. Furthermore, some may have heard rumors of Abner’s defection; they were aware of the sudden slowdown of the war effort; and this confused them. It is a classic case of, who do you really believe and what is really going on?

There are also going to be others—the majority of Israel—many of whom support a Sauline dynasty, and many of whom recognize that Ishbosheth’s power is in Abner; all of whom recognize Abner’s importance to their military. Many of these would be afraid, as they worry that the army of Judah will overrun them.

Clarke aptly notes: Abner was their great support; and on him they depended; for it appears that Ish-bosheth was a feeble prince, and had few of those qualities requisite for a sovereign.

In war, people are generally apprehensive—particularly when the war may spill out onto their own streets. They look to their political and military leaders for strength and direction, and this was not forthcoming from Ishbosheth; and now, their only true natural leader was dead. This is going to severely increase their apprehension. And even though the war had come to a halt, for many, it felt like the calm before the storm. So, yes, all Israel was confounded, overwhelmed and terrified.

Application: When you are on the right side of history; when you understand historical trends; when you have your faith in Jesus Christ and in His Word, you are less likely to be confused and apprehensive about historical events as they unfold. Ishbosheth has been promoted far over his abilities; he has no doctrine; he has no clear faith in Jehovah, the God of Israel and no clear connection to the God of Israel; so, he is without courage. The people from northern Israel who backed him are confused and/or terrified at the death of Abner.

Okay, what should they know? It is clear, by God’s revealed revelation, that David is the next king of Israel, and that he will supplant Saul. Even Saul knew this and so testified in a loud voice before his army (1Sam. 24:20). So, that David would rule in place of Saul was not a secret; it was not a doctrine which only a few knew about. The people of Israel and Ishbosheth should all know that David would become king, and that the events of history would lead him to this point. They could decide, do they want to back God’s choice for king, or someone else? Therefore, as these events of history unfold which lead to David ruling over all Israel, none of these people should be upset or terrified or confused.

Application: The more doctrine that you know, the more you understand the trends of history; and the less likely historical events will shatter your faith.

You may be concerned here of the injustice of Abner’s death. Abner is finally coming around to God’s plan, and, suddenly, God allows him to be removed from this life. What is that all about? That, my friend, is a warning to both you and I. Abner knows what’s up; and he has known that David would supplant Saul for a long time. For whatever reason, Abner spent most of his life outside God’s directive will. He is Saul’s uncle; therefore, he is going to be around Saul’s age or older (you are aware, I assume, that your uncle can be younger than you?). His choice to back David has come rather late in life. He will be unable to enjoy fulfilling God’s plan for his life, as his life is over.

Application: How old will you be before you realize that you have a relationship to God and that God has a definite plan for your life? How many years do you want to spend outside the Land of Promise, serving Ishbosheth, a worthless king? Are you going to finally get your life in order when it is almost over? Make no mistake—we only have so many years on this earth. At what point do you get with the plan of God? The only thing that should concern you more than the death of Abner is the death of Ishbosheth. Abner, at least for a few months, was on the right side of history. However, Ishbosheth was never on the right side of history; and it is his death we will witness next.

I should stop to explain that verse. 2Sam. 3:37 reads: So all the people and all Israel understood that day that it had not been the king’s [will] to murder Abner ben Ner. That day does not literally mean within a 24 hour period of time. For those who attended Abner’s funeral, it was clear that David mourned his passing; they knew that by the pomp and ceremony and by what David said concerning Abner. However, realize that there are shock waves going out from Hebron. Some of Abner’s men no doubt ran for their lives and scattered all over Israel (some would not return to Ishbosheth, because they think he may know of their alliance with David). So, this first trickle of information is, Joab, David’s top general, kills Abner. Some of these men may not have understood what was going on, and when they relayed this message, the people of Israel will be confused as well, if not terrified. If David puts Abner to death after making an alliance with him, then what will David do to northern Israel? Now, later, within a few weeks, it becomes clear to all that David did not order the execution of Abner. This is acceptable for our understanding of in that day, as such a phrase could refer to a period of time. At the funeral, at that time, those in attendance recognized that David truly mourned Abner’s passing; however, it would have taken time for that information to have gone out to all Israel.

When I examine verses like this (this is my first pass through the material; I work and rework the material several times), I often wonder, how will the other commentators treat this? Will they recognize that 2Sam. 3:37 and 4:1 require some explanation? Will they recognize that a contradiction could be perceived here? I must admit to being surprised that Clarke, Darby, Gill, Henry, Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Keil and Delitzsch, Scofield and Wesley all let this get by them without making a comment, observation, or explanation.

The Backstory on Rechab and Baanah

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Latin Vulgate                          Now the son of Saul had two men captains of his bands, the name of the one was Baana, and the name of the other Rechab, the sons of Remmon a Berothite of the children of Benjamin: for Beroth also was reckoned in Benjamin.

Masoretic Text                       And a pair of men—captains of troops—were a son of Saul. A name of the one Baanah and a name of to the second, Rechab; sons of Rimmon the Beerothite from sons of Benjamin (for also Betroth is reckoned upon Benjamin;...)

Peshitta                                  And Saul’s son had two men who were captains of raiding bands; the name of the one was Baana, and the name of the other Rechab, the sons of Rimmon a Beerothite of the children of Benjamin (for Beeroth also is reckoned to the Benjamites;..

Septuagint                              And Saul’s son had two men that were captains of bands: the name of the one was Baanah, and the name of the other Rechab, the sons of Rimmon a Beerothite, of the children of Benjamin: (for Beeroth also was reckoned to Benjamin;...

Significant differences:           Now and again, the absolute status quo verb to be can be rendered had, belongs to, is to; so the difference in rendering in the LXX is just a matter of translation in the first sentence. Likewise, other is a reasonable rendering for second. The final preposition is a pisser to render literally in this verse; and the LXX chose not to. I have included the Latin to show you that Jerome essentially did the same thing.

Both the Syriac and Latin call these troops raiding bands. Although this may be accurate, we do not know for certain.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Ishbosheth had put the two brothers Baanah and Rechab in charge of the soldiers who raided enemy villages. Rimmon was their father, and they were from the town of Beeroth, which belonged to the tribe of Benjamin.

The Message                         Ish-Bosheth had two men who were captains of raiding bands--one was named Baanah, the other Recab. They were sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, a Benjaminite. (The people of Beeroth had been assigned to Benjamin...

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Saul's son had two men who were captains of raiding parties. One was named Baanah, and the other was named Rechab. They were the sons of Rimmon from Beeroth from the tribe of Benjamin. (Beeroth was considered a part of Benjamin,...

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       Now Saul's son had two men who were captains of raiding bands; the name of the one was Baanah, and the name of the other Rechab, sons of Rimmon a man of Benjamin from Beeroth (for Beeroth also is counted part of Benjamin;...

LTHB                                     And Saul's son had two men, troop commanders, one's name being Baanah, and the other's name Rechab, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, of the sons of Benjamin (for Beeroth also is counted to Benjamin.

Young's Updated LT              And two men, heads of troops, have been to the son of Saul, the name of the one is Baanah, and the name of the second Rechab, sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, of the sons of Benjamin (for also Beeroth is reckoned to Benjamin...

The gist of this verse?          There are two men who head up military divisions under Ishbosheth: Baanah and Rechab, who are both sons of Rimmon, who was from Beeroth, a city which belonged to Benjamin. This verse just gives us ancestral information on these two men.

Translation: [There] were two men—raiding party leaders—[who] were [under the command of] Saul’s son [Ishbosheth]. This is a difficult verse to translate; however, the absolute status quo verb to be can sometimes be rendered to have. It is interesting that Ishbosheth is now called the son of Saul over and over again by the author.

Although the word translated raiding party can simply refer to a division of soldiers (see the Hebrew exegesis above), the heartlessness of these men makes this assumption reasonable (the Latin and Syriac both render this word in this way in this verse). Clarke comments: Whether Ish-bosheth kept bands of marauders, whose business it was to make sudden incursions into the country places, and carry off grain, provisions, cattle, etc., we know not; but such persons would be well qualified for the bloody work in which these two men were afterwards employed. In other words, by virtue of that kind of work that these men did for Ishbosheth, they were well qualified to be cold-blooded killers.

Translation: One’s name [was] Baanah... Although there are several men with this same name in Scripture; this man is the most well known, as this chapter will carry with it a narrative about him.

Translation: ...and the other’s name [was] Rechab. Baanah’s brother is Rechab.

Like his brother, this is the Rechab who receives the most airplay in Scripture.

It is interesting that Baanah is named first here, and second throughout the remainder of this chapter. I would guess that he is named first as the eldest; however, Rechab is named first, as their plot was probably his idea and he, no doubt, convinced Baanah to participate.

Translation:[They were] sons of Rimmon the Beerothite... This man, Rimmon, is named only in this chapter, and only in conjunction with Rechab and Baanah.

Rimmon is called a Beerothite, which simply means that he lived in the city of Beeroth.

Translation: ...from the tribe [lit., sons] of Benjamin... Baanah and Rechab are both Benjamites. So that there is no confusion, this statement will be qualified to some degree in the next phrase.

Translation:...(for Beeroth [is] also considered an addition to Benjamin;... Being a Beerothite simply means that Rimmon was from Beeroth (and probably his sons as well). However, someone reading this passage from near that time frame would think, isn’t Beeroth a city which belongs to the Gibeonites? The author of this book will point out that the Gibeonites who lived in Beeroth actually fled the city at one time in Israel’s recent past.

We have a lot of different writers of Scripture. This particular writer (David?) seems to be rather meticulous about the history and background. He calls these men Benjamites from Beeroth; but, apparently, there would have been some people from this time period or near to this time period who would question this association. Now, is there anything that we should get out of this? My thinking is, this passage indicates that some writers like to present many of the background details; and, many writers do not. Throughout the book of 1Samuel, we have had to stop and explain this or that passage; explain how it coincides with previous passages; or offer up hypotheses as to what the background might have been (in order to make the passage more plausible, logical, or whatever). This is simply a quirk of this particular writer. Maybe this is information which David gleaned from his conversation with these men. We already know that the Bible does not record the entirety of some conversations. In this chapter, it seems as though these men say one thing, and then David goes off on them. However, there is likely to be some introduction, or some personal information offered and/or asked for.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic text                        ...and so flee the Beerothites Gittaim-ward and so they are there as far as the day the this).

Septuagint                              ...and the Beerothites fled to Gittaim, and were sojourners there until this day.).

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       The people who used to live in Beeroth had run away to Gittaim, and they still live there.

The Message                         ...ever since they escaped to Gittaim. They still live there as resident aliens.)

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         ...even though the people of Beeroth had fled to Gittaim. They still live there today.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

ESV                                       ...the Beerothites fled to Gittaim and have been sojourners there to this day).

WEB                             ...and the Beerothites fled to Gittaim, and have lived as foreigners there until this day).

Young's Updated LT              ...and the Beerothites flee to Gittaim, and are there sojourners unto this day).

The gist of this verse?          The Gibeonites, called Beerothites here, fled to Gittaim and have lived there as aliens to this day.

Translation: ...because the Beerothites fled to Gittaim... When Joshua began to conquer the Land of Promise, he came across a people who deceived him: the Gibeonites. They sent representatives to meet with Joshua, to make a treaty with him; however, they represented themselves as a people from a far distance away, and not as from one of the next territories Joshua was about to conquer. By deceit, they convinced Joshua to make a treaty with them, which is the story of Joshua 9. They lived in 4 cities primarily: Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth and Kiriath-jearim (Joshua 9:17). This people lived in peace with Israel.

In any case, this fleeing may have recently taken place, and it may have occurred several hundred years previously. If I was a betting man, I would put my money on Saul being the one who caused them to move. Since Beeroth is in the territory of Benjamin, then Benjamites would have moved in as Gibeonites moved out. Since the Gibeonites were taken in as allies, albeit under deception; Benjamites probably occupied Beeroth even before the Gibeonites left in droves.

We do not know exactly where Gittaim is. My Macmillan Bible Atlas places Gittaim in the original territory of Dan; probably because Gittaim seems to be associated with Lod and Ono in Neh. 11:33–35. Personally, I would place it inside the territory of Judah, which is closer, and is in agreement with Neh. 11:33, which suggests (but does not require) that Ramah and Gittaim are relatively close. Clarke suggests the Gittaim is equivalent to Gath (just as Ramathaim is equivalent to Ramah). Since we have a separate city named Gittaim in Neh. 11:33, which appears to be in the correct general area, I believe that Clarke is wrong on this one. In any case, the exact location of Gittaim is not that big of a deal; it just has to be somewhere the Beerothites would reasonably flee to if under attack (and any of these possible locations fit that bill).

It is actually kind of interesting that this author is so particular here, giving us a great many details that we may skim through and think, well, what is this all about? I don’t need to know any of this. Let me see if I can help you to understand—there are times when some dispute the historical facts of Scripture, and they are quick to point out either apparent internal contradictions or contradictions with archeology. If this one sentence was not here, someone could later say, and here is another contradiction; this city was controlled by the Gibeonites, who are not Israelites, but a part of the original heathen from this area; therefore, it is a contradiction to say that Benjamites came from the city of Beeroth. This author goes to great pains to explain just exactly what happened here, and why we have Benjamites living in a city which was formerly inhabited by Gibeonites. We obviously do not find this sort of detail in every narrative. Most authors do not stop and say, oh, by the way, here is a little background on this particular city. However, there are probably a large number of alleged historical inaccuracies in the Bible that could have been explained, had the author of that narrative portion stopped and explained some of the history behind his narrative. My point is, we don’t find this detail very often; however, that does not mean that we have some sort of a contradiction or inaccuracy; we just don’t have every piece of information from time to time that would completely explain this passage or that. For this reason, we must occasionally develop an hypothesis to explain more thoroughly this or that difficult passage. This detailed passage indicates to us that, there is a back story, there is some history, which would help to flesh out some details. We may be privy to this history (as we are here) and we may not be privy to it.

Translation: ...and they have been there until this day). That the Gibeonites escaped to Gittaim in the past (when specifically is not told to us) and that they are still there to this day, is the point of this verse—meaning the time when the author of Samuel recorded this history.

This verse completes that parenthetical explanation.

The Backstory on Mephibosheth

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And to Jonathan a son of Saul a son stricken of [two] feet. A son of five years he was in a coming in of a message of Saul and Jonathan from Jezreel. And so lifts him up his nurse and so she flees and he is in her fleeing [in haste and/or fright] to flee, and so he falls and so he is made lame. And his name, Mephibosheth.

Septuagint                              And Jonathan, Saul’s son, had a son that was lame of his feet. He was five years old when the tidings came of Saul and Jonathan out of Jezreel, and his nurse took him up, and fled: and it came to pass, as she made haste to flee, that he fell, and became lame. And his name was Mephibosheth.

Significant differences:           In the Hebrew, five years old is expressed as a son of 5 years.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       Saul's son Jonathan had a son named Mephibosheth, who had not been able to walk since he was five years old. It happened when someone from Jezreel told his nurse that Saul and Jonathan had died. She hurried off with the boy in her arms, but he fell and injured his legs.

The Message                         It so happened that Saul's son, Jonathan, had a son who was maimed in both feet. When he was five years old, the report on Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel. His nurse picked him up and ran, but in her hurry to get away she fell, and the boy was maimed. His name was Mephibosheth.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         In addition, Saul's son Jonathan had a son who was crippled. When the boy was five years old, the news about the death of Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel. His nurse picked him up and fled to Gittaim. She was in a hurry when she left, and he fell from her arms and became disabled. His name was Mephibosheth.)

HCSB                                     Saul's son Jonathan had a son whose feet were crippled. He was five years old when the report about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel. His nurse picked him up and fled, but as she was hurrying to flee, he fell and became lame. His name was Mephibosheth.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

LTHB                                     And Jonathan the son of Saul had a lame son, he was a son of five years when the news of Saul and Jonathan came out of Jezreel; and his nurse lifted him up and fled; and it happened as she hurried to flee, that he fell and became lame; and his name was Mephibosheth.

NKJV                                     Jonathan, Saul’s son, had a son who was lame in his feet. He was five years old when the news about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel; and his nurse took him up and fled. And it happened, as she made haste to flee, that he fell and became lame. His name was Mephibosheth.

Young’s Updated LT             And to Jonathan son of Saul is a son—lame; he was a son of five years at the coming in of the rumour of the death of Saul and Jonathan, out of Jezreel, and his nurse lifts him up, and flees, and it comes to pass in her having to flee, that he falleth, and becomes lame, and his name is Mephibosheth.

The gist of this verse?         The author gives a bit of a back story on Jonathan and his son, Mephibosheth. Mephibosheth, when his nanny heard that Saul and Jonathan had been killed, was taken in haste away from his place (probably in Gibeon?), and that he was seriously injured when being whisked away.

Translation: And Jonathan, Saul’s son, [had] a son crippled in [his] feet. There is one remaining person in the house of Saul, and that is Mephibosheth, Jonathan’s son, Saul’s grandson. This young man is crippled. He would be about 10–12 years old when the historical events of this chapter take place.

Translation: He was 5 years old, when a report about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel. We are going to get some information about one of Saul’s remaining family, his grandson Mephibosheth through Jonathan. Jezreel is where the Israelites were camping prior to facing off with the Philistines. As you will recall, the Philistines attacked, the Israelites retreated; and Saul and his sons were killed in battle.

I suggested at that time that a runner, who was set there to observe the battle, saw that Saul and Jonathan had died, and ran to his appointed city or cities to report this and to warn the people.

Translation: His nanny lifted him up and she fled,... As we might expect, Jonathan would have had a servant involved in the raising of his child. As is often the case, a very strong bond is forged between the nanny and child. She is looking to protect and to save this child just as a mother would. Speaking of which, Jonathan’s wife is not mentioned in this context. Primarily what the author is telling us is, Jonathan’s son became lame, and this is the back story. Where his mother was or what she was doing is not part of this story.

What is commonplace in the ancient world is, everyone in the line of the king is killed, so prevent a leader from leading the people in a revolt.

Translation: ...but it came about in her haste to flee,... The Philistines have just beaten the Israelites and they have killed Saul and Jonathan, so this woman is in a panic. Saul has never lost a battle with the Philistines before, so the people there were not expecting this to happen. Getting everything together to escape was hurried. The escape route was probably not going to be a road or a place where they would be easily discovered.

You may recall that I spoke of runners back in this chapter; this verse is another verse which supports that someone from the battlefield, or who observed the battle from afar, ran to this town to tell what had happened.

Translation: ...he fell and became lame. In the rush to get out of there, somehow Mephibosheth fell and became lame. Perhaps he stepped on something, fell down something. I recall jogging once, and it was night, and I was running next to a drainage ditch, and I saw this dark spot that I stepped into, and there was a drop of about 5 feet; luckily, I was not hurt, but breaking a leg under those circumstances would have been easy to do. In the ancient world, breaking a bone could deform you or disable you for life.

What Josephus tells us is that his nurse carried him on her shoulders, which was the custom of those days (as is the custom today), and that he fell from her shoulders, while she was running.

Translation: His name [is] Mephibosheth [also known as Merib-baal]. There seems to be a very different approach with respect to this narrative in contrast to others. This author is giving us a lot of background information. In this phrase, we learn the name Mephibosheth, Jonathan’s 5 year old son. You may recall that in many Hebrew names, we find bosheth (= shame) replacing the name Baal, which only means lord; however, apparently, at some point in time, it became a very common name for a heathen deity. I am thinking that the second notion, that this refers to a heathen deity, became more and more common, until the other usage was much more rare. One problem with that approach is, throughout the book of Judges, we have mentions of Baal worship (Judges 2:13 3:3, 7 6:25, 28 etc.). My Dead Sea Scrolls Bible suggests that someone went into the Hebrew text and actually made these changes in some books around the Second Temple period.

The NIV Study Bible comments on this: [His] name was originally Merib-Baal (apparently meaning “opponent of Baal”; see 1Chron. 8:34), perhaps to be spelled “Meri-Baal” (meaning “loved by Baal”), but was changed by the author of Samuel to Mephibosheth (meaning “From the mouth of the shameful thing”). Although we are certain of these names standing for the same person, and that there is some relationship between baal (lord) and bosheth (shame); we do not really know exactly who made the change or why.

Rechab and Baanah Assassinate Ishbosheth

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so go sons of Rimmon—Rechab and Baanah—and so they come in as a heat of the day unto a house of Ishbosheth and he is lying down [in] a bed [in] the noonday.

Septuagint                              And the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, went, and came about the heat of the day to the house of Ishbosheth, who lay on a bed at noon.

Significant differences:           None.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       One day about noon, Rechab and Baanah went to Ishbosheth's house. It was a hot day, and he was resting...

The Message                         One day Baanah and Recab, the two sons of Rimmon, headed out for the house of Ish-Bosheth. They arrived at the hottest time of the day, just as he was taking his afternoon nap.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         Rechab and Baanah, the sons of Rimmon from Beeroth, came to Ishbosheth's home at the hottest time of the day. Ishbosheth was taking his midday nap...

HCSB                                     Rechab and Baanah, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, set out and arrived at Ish-bosheth's house during the heat of the day while the king was taking his midday nap.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Amplified Bible                Now the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, went about the heat of the day to the house of Ishbosheth, who lay resting on his bed at noon.

ESV                                       Now the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, set out, and about the heat of the day they came to the house of Ish-bosheth as he was taking his noonday rest.

Young’s Updated LT             And the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, go, and come in at the heat of the day unto the house of Ish-Bosheth, and he is lying down—the lying down of noon.

The gist of this verse?          Rechab and Baanah, the troop commanders, decide to go to the home of Ishbosheth in the middle of the day; Ishbosheth is asleep at this time.

Translation: Rechab and Baanah, the sons of Rimmon, go... These are the top troop commanders mentioned earlier, who are from the tribe of Benjamin. We are not given any info yet as to why they are going to Ishbosheth or who else might be involved here.

Translation: ...and they come to the house of Ishbosheth about the heat of the day;... I don’t think these two men just got up around noon and decided to mosey on over the Ishbosheth’s house. I think that they had a definite plan, and that plan included the time that they would go there.

Translation: ...and Ishbosheth [lit., he] is lying down in bed in the afternoon. It is likely that Rechab and Baanah were aware of Ishbosheth’s schedule; that they knew, in coming at this time, that he would be asleep. Their actions are well-planned out. They know exactly what they are going to do; they know exactly where this or that person is.

That Ishbosheth is taking a nap seems to be a custom of many countries with warm climates (Spain and Mexico are examples of this). You work early in the morning, you work in the evening; and you sleep when it is too hot to work.

Matthew Henry is pretty tough on Ishbosheth here: [Note the] slothfulness of Ish–bosheth. He lay upon his bed at noon. It does not appear that the country was at any time of the year so hot as to oblige the inhabitants to retire at noon, as we are told they do in Spain in the heat of summer; but Ishbosheth was a sluggish man, loved his ease and hated business: and when he should have been, at this critical juncture, at the head of his forces in the field, or at the head of his counsels in a treaty with David, he was lying upon his bed and sleeping, for his hands were feeble (2Sam. 4:1), and so were his head and heart. When those difficulties dispirit us which should rather invigorate us and sharpen our endeavours we betray both our crowns and lives. Love not sleep, lest thou come to poverty and ruin. The idle soul is an easy prey to the destroyer. However, I include this passage because, he does have a point when it comes to personal sloth. I can testify to having known a number of people who are struck with personal sloth.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And here they came as far as a midst of the house taking wheat stalks. And so they strike him unto the belly. And Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.

Peshitta                                  And behold, they came into the midst of the house; then those sons of wickedness took and smote him in his abdomen; and Rechab and Banna his brother escaped.

Septuagint                              And they came thither into the midst of the house, as though they would have fetched wheat; and they smote him under the fifth rib; and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.

Alexandrian LXX                    And behold, the woman who kept the door of the house was cleaning wheat. She became drowsy and fell asleep. Rechab and his brother slipped by, and entered the house while he was asleep on his bed... [I have included a portion of the following verse for context; this translation is according to the Tanakh; and I am assuming that this is the Alexandrian LXX, as I own another version].

Significant differences:           In the Hebrew, it is unclear whether they are carrying wheat stalks in or going inside to bring them out as a pretense. This accounts for the difference in the second phrase. This is the only difference and it is just an apparent difference; not an actual one.

There is a problem with the second word of this verse, which will be discussed further in the Hebrew exegesis.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       ...in his bedroom. The two brothers went into the house, pretending to get some flour. But once they were inside, they stabbed Ishbosheth in the stomach and killed him. Then they cut off his head and took it with them. Rechab and Baanah walked through the Jordan River valley all night long. [vv. 6–7].

The Message                         They entered the house on a ruse, pretending official business. The maid guarding the bedroom had fallen asleep, so Recab and Baanah slipped by her...

NAB                                       The fortress of the house had dozed off while sifting wheat, and was asleep. So Rechab and his brother Baanah slipped past...

NJB                                        The woman who kept the door had been cleaning wheat and had drowsed off to sleep.

NLT                                        The doorkeeper, who had been sifting wheat, became drowsy and fell asleep. So Recab and Baanah slipped past the doorkeeper, went into Ishbosheth’s bedroom, and stabbed him in the stomach. Then they escaped. [Notice how the NLT never lets on that this doorkeeper is a woman?].

REB                                       The door-keeper had been sifting wheat, but she had grown drowsy and fallen asleep, so Rechab and his brother Baanah slipped past,... [This is the probably reading; compare Greek text; Hebrew: they came right into the house carrying wheat, and they struck him in the belly; Rechab and his brother Baanah were acting stealthily. They...].

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         ...when they came into the house as though they were going to get some flour. Instead, they stabbed him in the belly. Then Rechab and his brother Baanah escaped.

HCSB                                     They entered the interior of the house as if to get wheat and stabbed him in the stomach. Then Rechab and his brother Baanah escaped.

The Tanakh                            So they went inside the house, as though fetching wheat, and struck him in the belly. Rechab and his brother Baanah slipped by,... [Their footnote reads Meaning of Hebrew uncertain, after which they offer the Alexandrian LXX (see above)].

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Amplified Bible                And they came into the interior of the house as though they were delivering wheat; and they smote him in the body; and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.

ESV                                       And they came into the midst of the house as if to get wheat, and they stabbed him in the stomach. Then Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.

LTHB                                     And they came to the middle of the house, bringing wheat. And they struck him in the belly. And Rechab and his brother Baanah escaped.

WEB                                      They came there into the midst of the house, as though they would have fetched wheat; and they struck him in the body: and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.

Young’s Updated LT             And there they have come, unto the midst of the house, taking wheat, and they strike him unto the fifth rib, and Rechab and Baanah his brother have escaped.

The gist of this verse?          The two brothers, Rechab and Baanah, come into the house of Ishbosheth under some pretense, kill him, and then escape.

Translation: They came here as far as the middle of the house carrying wheat stalks. The Hebrew verb can be used for taking some or receiving something. Therefore, it is unclear whether they walked in their with wheat stalks or whether they came in under the pretense of picking some up (which seems less likely). These are troop commanders, and would have been able to gain easy access to the house; they would be recognized and waved through. In any case, they enter into the residence of Ishbosheth on some pretense.

Ishbosheth is asleep at this time. The idea is, they want to enter into the house and assassinate Ishbosheth with the least problem. They don’t want him spouting out, “Hey, I didn’t order any pizza (wheat stalks)” or “Just have them leave the stalks in the kitchen” or words to that effect. They need to get close to Ishbosheth, which means Ishbosheth cannot know they are there.

You will notice with the REB, NAB and the NJB, we have a whole different scenario; there is a woman at the door who falls asleep while (or, after) sifting wheat. This is how the men are able to slip into the house. The REB references the Greek text to back this up, but my Greek text reads: And they came there into the midst of the house, as though they would have fetched wheat... It is possible they are referring to the Alexandrian LXX, which I do not have access to at this time. In my Good News Bible, this rendering is said to be justified by one ancient translation. In any case, this seems like a less likely scenario, as, why would Ishbosheth allow himself to be guarded by a female servant? This is his guard at the door? That seems ridiculous! It also seems ridiculous to follow some unidentified ancient translation, as opposed to the MT, the LXX, the Vulgate and the Peshitta. It seems more likely that these men could gain entrance on a ruse, being high-ranking officers in Ishbosheth’s army, than it does for Ishbosheth to post a female servant guard. .

Freeman offers us further reason to believe that these men were taking wheat out: Harmer {Observations, vol. I, p. 433) suggests that the pretense of these men that they went into the house for wheat, was rendered plausible by the fact that is was necessary to obtain the grain in the afternoon in order to have it ready for grinding early the next morning, according to the daily custom. All suspicion of their murderous intention was thus avoided.

In any case, we have no idea as to the guards. I would assume that, on this official business, that Rechab and Baanah went past the guards as a part of this ruse.

Matthew Henry’s final comment: We know not when and where death will meet us. When we lie down to sleep we are not sure but that we may sleep the sleep of death before we awake; nor do we know from what unsuspected hand a fatal stroke may come. Ish-bosheth's own men, who should have protected his life, took it away.

Translation: Then they struck him in the stomach. In this verse, we are not told what weapon they used; simply that Ishbosheth was stabbed in the stomach. There are scriptural references to this above; for some reason, in the book of 2Samuel, we find this essential phrase used several times.

If you will notice, the less literal translations for this portion of the verse (v. 6a–b), do not have any stabbing, but have instead, Ishbosheth being guarded by what appears to be a maid of sorts who has fallen asleep after sifting wheat. By the way, it is only my guess that it is the Alexandrian LXX with this original rendering, which most of the less literal translations pounced upon. I believe the LXX which I use is called the Beta text; and it is in agreement with the Latin, Hebrew and Syriac (this is not available to us in the Dead Sea Scrolls); and for me, the witness of several ancient manuscripts is much more trustworthy than the witness of one manuscript, which I cannot even verify.

I think the problem is, in this verse, the brothers slip in, stab Ishbosheth, and slip out; and in the next verse, we seem to have a replay. Well, this is not some great anomaly in the Hebrew; it is normal for the Hebrew to give us a summation verse, and then to give us more details on the exact same incident afterward. Therefore, even though we do not necessarily write like that, this does not mean that we must freak out when they do. Many times, they put their main verb first, followed by the subject, and then followed by the direct object, something which we generally do not do. This does not mean that we should search out ancient versions which have the subject, noun, direct object order which we are accustomed to.

Edersheim comments: There is no real difficulty about the repetition in the narrative, 2Sam. 4:5, 6—the latter verse taking up and continuing the interrupted narrative in v. 5. Accordingly, there is no need for the addition made in the LXX., which must be regarded not as an emendation of, but as a gloss upon, the text.

Translation: Then Rechab and Baanah, his brother, slipped out. The brothers were able to enter into the house of Ishbosheth under the pretense of bringing wheat. After killing him, they were able to slip out safely without incident (and, as mentioned before, they may have brought wheat stalks in or taken them out).

V. 6 gives us an overall view of what happened; v. 7 will go into a little more detail. To our way of thinking, we’d prefer to simply see this laid out chronologically; the Hebrews do not always approach things chronologically.

Here is how others have translated this verse:

Ancient texts:

Masoretic Text                       And so they come [into] the house and he is laying upon his bed in a private room of his bed, and so they stuck him and so they killed him and so they remove his head and so they take away his head and so they go a way of the Arabah all the night.

Septuagint                              For when they came into the house, he lay on his bed in his bedchamber, and they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head, and they go away through the plain all night.

Significant differences:           No significant differences; plain is a valid translation for the Hebrew noun arabah.

Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:

CEV                                       ...in his bedroom. The two brothers went into the house, pretending to get some flour. But once they were inside, they stabbed Ishbosheth in the stomach and killed him. Then they cut off his head and took it with them. Rechab and Baanah walked through the Jordan River valley all night long. [vv. 6–7]. The CEV gives us a much better Gentile flow than the Hebrew text does.

The Message                         ...and entered the room where Ish-Bosheth was asleep on his bed. They killed him and then cut off his head, carrying it off as a trophy. They traveled all night long, taking the route through the Arabah Valley.

Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):

God’s Word™                         (They had come into the house while Ishbosheth was sleeping on his bed in his bedroom. They stabbed him, killed him, and cut off his head.) They took his head and traveled all night along the road to the plains.

HCSB                                     They had entered the house while Ish-bosheth was lying on his bed in his bedroom and stabbed and killed him. Then they beheaded him, took his head, and traveled by way of the Arabah all night.

Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:

The Amplified Bible                Now when they had come into the house, and he lay on his bed in his bedroom, they [not only] smote and slew him, [but] beheaded him, and took his head and went by the way of the plain all night;...

LTHB                                     And they entered the house, and he was lying on his bed in his bedroom; and they struck him and killed him, and took off his head. And they took his head and went the way of the Arabah all the nigh.

WEB                                      Now when they came into the house, as he lay on his bed in his bedchamber, they struck him, and killed him, and beheaded him, and took his head, and went by the way of the Arabah all night.

Young’s Updated LT             Yea, they come in to the house, and he is lying on his bed, in the inner pare of his bed-chamber, and they strike him, and put him to death, and turn aside his head, and they take his head, and go the way of the plain all the night.

The gist of this verse?          The way that Rechab and Baanah executed Ishbosheth is given here; they enter into his private bedroom and violently kill him there, severing his head and taking it with them on their escape along a common route (the Arabah road).

Translation: When they came [into] the house,... Rechab and Baanah gain entrance into the house, and quickly go to find Ishbosheth. This was no doubt well-planned out.