|
|
2Samuel 8:1–18 |
The Wars of David |
vv. 1–2 David Defeats the Philistines and the Moabites
vv. 3–8 David Defeats Hadadezer and the Syrians
vv. 9–12 Toi, King of Hamath, Congratulates David
vv. 13–14 David’s Defeat of the Edomites
vv. 15–18 David’s Royal Cabinet
Charts, Maps and Short Doctrines:
Introduction An Alternate Outline from Matthew Henry
Introduction An Alternate Outline from Warren Wiersbe
Introduction Some Points on War
Introduction What is a Righteous War?
v. 1 Israel and the Philistines
v. 1 Israel and the Philistines Continued
v. 1 Translations of 2Samuel 8:1d
v. 1 Interpretations of Metheg-ʾAmmâh
v. 2 Israel and her Enemies; the Divine Perspective
v. 2 What Does this Mean: “Two lots to kill and a complete lot to keep alive”?
v. 4 The Textual Problems of 2Samuel 8:4
v. 4 Charioteers, Chariots or Horses?
v. 4 “Do not multiply horses to yourself.”
v. 5 Fausset on Damascus
v. 5 Easton on Damascus
v. 9 A Map Showing Hamath
v. 10 The Joram’s of Scripture
v. 12 What is the Problem with 2Samuel 8:12–14?
v. 12 What Shows up Where?
v. 12 Why is this Edom instead of Aram?
v. 12 The Keil and Delitzsch Solution
v. 12 The Abbreviated Doctrine of Moab and Ammon
v. 12 Map of the Countries around Israel
v. 12 Summary of the Doctrine of the Amalekites
v. 13 Why Edom and not Aram in 2Samuel 8:13?
v. 13 David Versus the Edomites
v. 13 The Valley of Salt
v. 13 The Problems with 2Samuel 8:13 and its Parallel Passages
v. 13 Gill Reconciles these Passages
v. 13 Keil and Delitzsch Reconcile these Passages
v. 14 2Samuel 8:6 Compared to 2Samuel 8:14
v. 16 A Condensed View of Joab
v. 17 Some Background on Zadok the Priest
v. 17 The Doctrine of Abiathar—Part I
v. 17 What is the Problem with Ahimelech, Abiathar and Zadok?
v. 17 Theories as to Why is Ahimelech Listed as the Priest Here?
v. 17 What Exactly is Seraiah’s Position?
v. 18 The Benaiah’s of Scripture
v. 18 Who are the Cherethites and the Pelethites?
Addendum A Complete Translation of 2Samuel 8
Doctrines Covered |
Doctrines Alluded To |
||
|
|||
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Psalms Appropriately Exegeted with this Chapter |
|||
|
|
||
Other Chapters of the Bible Appropriately Exegeted with this Chapter |
|||
|
|
|
|
I was raised up in a church were a technical vocabulary was the order of the day. However, I recognize that not every person is familiar with many spiritual terms, and particularly not those of the church I attend. |
Definition of Terms |
|
Client-Nation, is a national entity in which a certain number of spiritually mature Christians (the salt of the earth) have formed a pivot sufficient to sustain the nation and through which God specifically protects this nation so that believers can fulfill the divine mandates of evangelism, communication and custodianship of Bible doctrine, providing a haven for Jews, and sending missionaries abroad. The United States is a client-nation to God. A client nation must have freedom: Freedom to seek God, freedom to use one’s own volition and self-determination to succeed or fail, freedom from anarchy and tyranny, freedom for evangelism, freedom for believers to hear Bible teaching without government interference and, therefore, to grow spiritually, and freedom to send missionaries to other nations. |
|
This is the good which we produce in this world while empowered by God the Holy Spirit. This is not confined to certain spiritual activities like giving, going to church, doing missionary activity, etc. (in fact, apart from the filling of the Holy Spirit, those activities would be human good, making them temporary and burned at the Judgment Seat of Christ). When we are filled with the Spirit, certain works become permanent divine good, which are rewardable. As we increase the doctrinal content of our souls, the quality and quantity of divine good that we produce becomes greater. |
|
God has ordained certain laws for the survival and freedom of the human race during the course of human history. Anarchy exists when segments of nations ignore these laws. The laws of divine establishment provide the freedom to fulfill the divine plan as ordained in the divine decrees under many types of government. The laws of divine establishment are designed and directed toward both believer and unbeliever. They operate from the fall of man to the second advent, as well as in the Millennium with some modification in compatibility with perfect environment. These laws can be ascertained by a study of certain passages, like Rom. 13; from the assumptions behind many of the parables which Jesus gave; and from an examination of Israel as a client nation to God. |
|
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/_files/pdf/Doctrine_of_The_Divine_Decree.pdf |
I ntroduction: 2Sam. 8 deals with the wars of David, 2Sam. 9 with David’s kindness to Mephibosheth, and 2Sam. 10 with David’s war against Ammon and Syria. It is an interesting set of narratives and certainly calls into question the exact order of events. At first, 2Sam. 8 sounds like a summation of the wars of David and that subsequent chapters may give us more details; however, so far, I have found nothing in subsequent chapters which seems to be an expansion of what is found in this chapter. We have a few things said about Ammon in this chapter, and a war against Ammon 2 chapters hence. The natural thing for me to want to place all of these events in a specific chronological order, and the Hebrew tends to suggest such an order. This chapter begins with the phrase And it happened afterward,... 2Sam. 10:1 begins with the phrase: And it happened after this,... There is similar phrasing in 2Sam. 13:1 15:1 and everything seems to run in a general chronological order all the way to 2Sam. 21. Assuming this, which is a reasonable assumption, we will have to reconcile David receiving monies from Ammon in this chapter and his war in Ammon in 2Sam. 10.
Let’s first get the big picture. In the previous chapter, David focused on the spiritual. Remember that Jesus urged
us to “First seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness, then all things will be added to you.” (Matt. 6:33
Luke 12:31). The first thing on David’s mind was the Ark of God and that it was in storage. This required David
to read and study the Law of Moses (in order to figure out how to move the Ark successfully (2Sam. 6 1Chron. 13,
15–16) which in turn led to great spiritual blessing from God (the Davidic Covenant in 2Sam. 7 and 1Chron. 17).
Or, as Bob Thieme Jr. would put it, spiritual prosperity comes first and professional prosperity follows.
In the
Church Age, we are to focus first upon the Word of God, and then on our daily lives.
As a result of David’s focus, God promised David that He had been with David everywhere that he went and that God would make David a great name (he is one of the only kings prior to, say, 400 b.c. that anyone can name). God made this promise to David in 2Sam. 7:9—which reasonably looked forward as well as backward—and God fulfills His promises to David in 2Sam. 8, 10 (see specifically 2Sam. 8:6b, 13).
So that you can see how someone else organizes this chapter. |
David having sought first the kingdom of God and the righteousness thereof, settling the ark as soon as he was himself well settled, we are here told how all other things were added to him. Here is an account,... |
I. Of his conquests. He triumphed, 1. Over the Philistines (2Sam. 8:1). 2. Over the Moabites (2Sam. 8:2). 3. Over the king of Zobah (2Sam. 8:3, 2Sam. 8:4). 4. Over the Syrians (2Sam. 8:5–8, 2Sam. 8:13). 5. Over the Edomites (2Sam. 8:14). II. Of the presents that were brought him and the wealth he got from the nations he subdued, which he dedicated to God (2Sam. 8:9–12). III. Of his court, the administration of his government (2Sam. 8:15), and his chief officers (2Sam. 8:16–18). This gives us a general idea of the prosperity of David's reign. |
I must admit that I do prefer the way that Henry has divided this chapter up. However, you will note that he cheated just a little bit by putting in vv. 13–14 in under section I. Had these verses followed vv. 1–8, then this chapter would have seemed more organized. |
I should make two comments here: the Syrians found in v. 13 are actually Edomites (that will be explained when we get there); and there is probably an explanation for vv. 13–14 being where they are. I don’t know what that explanation is, but that is odd that they are there and do no follow vv. 1–8. At this point, this seems more like an oh, yeah moment in the writing of Samuel, as in, oh, yeah, David also defeated the Edomites. |
From Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible; from e-Sword, 2Sam. 8. |
One of the most logical outlines comes from Wiersbe’s commentary |
I. David’s wars with those around Israel: 1. The Philistines to the west (2Sam. 8:1). 2. The Moabites to the east (2Sam. 8:2). 3. The king of Zobah and the Syrians to the north (2Sam. 8:3–13). 4. The Edomites to the south (2Sam. 8:12–14). II. David’s administration in Jerusalem (2Sam. 8:9–12). |
Although Wiersbe does not have this set up in an outline form, I adopted it from his section headings. |
Part of what I like to be able to do is to peer into the thinking of the writer of Scripture, and understand his reasons for writing what he writes in the order that he writes it. Often, this is the key to understanding a psalm, so that, once one understands the outline and organization of the psalm, everything else falls into place. Unfortunately, what follows in the next 3 chapters seems to be a hodge-podge of events—wars covered in 2Sam. 8 and 10 and something else entirely different in 2Sam. 9. At first, we seem to have a summation verse, where David is receiving tribute from Edom, Moab, Ammon, Philistia and Amalek (2Sam. 8:11–12); and there are brief mentions of Moab, Philistia, Zobah and Aram in vv. 1–6; a brief mention of Edom in vv. 13–14; and then Ammon and Aram wars are covered in 2Sam. 10. My problem is, I do not see an over-arching theme or organization here. Obviously, David is dealing with war in chapter 8, but then he shows mercy to one of Saul’s grandsons in 2Sam. 9. It is as if these chapters are written years later, where a few events are recalled, but usually with one or two details. In 2Sam. 10, there will be more details given on one conflict, with both Aram and Ammon. However, in this chapter, a piece of this or that war is recalled; tribute is being paid by certain nations to David, and some of these conflicts are mentioned and others are not.
However, there is some continuity here. Jesus said, “First seek the kingdom of heaven and all things will be added to you.” (Matt. 6:33). So this is what David did. He established his kingship over all Israel, and then pondered his spiritual responsibilities as King of Israel. Therefore, he brought the Ark into Jerusalem (2Sam. 6), he considered building the Temple in an established and powerful Israel (2Sam. 7:1–3), and God, instead of allowing David to build the Temple, gave him the Davidic Covenant, reminding David that He has been with David everywhere that David went (2Sam. 7:4–17). So essentially, God begins to fulfill the Davidic Covenant and to continue to be with David in all that he does (2Sam. 8). That is, God is with David everywhere that he goes and God gives David victory over enemy armies (2Sam. 8:6b, 14b).
Bear in mind, some writers of Scripture are not really writers at all. Take John and Peter, for example. These are fishermen by trade. John, in the Greek, has one of the simplest vocabularies of any writer of Scripture, revealing either a lack of education or that Greek is John’s 2nd language. Peter is hard to figure. Mark writes his gospel based upon his association with Peter; and Peter, being a man of action, recalls events more than he does conversations and relationships. However, Mark may have some background in writing or some training in writing, so we are not dependent upon Peter’s lack of skill in this area in the gospel of Mark. However, Peter writes two letters, and they are quite different in the Greek. Does the second letter mark Peter’s later days as a growing scholar or what accounts for the stylistic differences between these two epistles? I digress; my point is, many of the authors of Scripture are not professional authors. However, they are moved by God the Holy Spirit to write when God wants to be written, without laying aside their personal feelings, personality, vocabulary or style of writing (or, lack of style and organization). So, what we may have in these 3 chapters are a series of recollections, inserted into the book of Samuel or simply placed together, but without much thought to their complete lack of organization.
In the previous paragraph, I had a point to make, then began to wander off in another direction; and then stopped and brought myself back to the point. That’s not really good writing; it is more recording a disorganized stream of consciousness (if you only knew). That could be what we have here. David, after becoming king of Israel, may have had a lot going on. Remember that Satan hates God and God’s plan; and David is obviously a part of this. And Satan is going to be out there influencing every nation that he can to turn against Israel to go to war against David. This could mark a period of intense conflict which may last as long as a decade, where David is constantly at war with his neighbors. During this time, there is little thought given to recording Scripture. Some history might be chronicled in a different place; and the recording of Scripture may have been done as an afterthought, more or less to bring us up to date to take us to the Bathsheba incident, which will be organized carefully and chronologically.
When I first began to study this chapter, it seemed disorganized and confusing for several reasons. One of the chief reasons was, David is spoken of as killing 18,000 Syrians down at the Valley of Salt. Then, without taking a breath, we begin talking about David putting in garrisons in Edom. The problem here is, Syria (actually, Aram) is not the word which we should find here; it ought to be Edom. This restores some organization to this chapter. Furthermore, this is the only section (that about Edom) which seems a bit out of place. The author is speaking of the nations which David conquered and is collecting tribute (taxes) from, mentions Edom, and then has an oh, yeah moment, as in, oh, yeah, let me tell you a little about David defeating Edom.
Keil and Delitzsch suggest
that we are seeing in this chapter a summation of all of the wars which David
participated in throughout his entire reign.
Some assert that this chapter actually precedes 2Sam. 7 in time. This is because God gives David rest from all his enemies at every side (2Sam. 7:1). At the time this statement is made, David’s primary enemies appear to be the Philistines (they are the only ones name after David becomes king over all Israel). Although I believe that Samuel is roughly in chronological order, the idea that some of these conflicts may have occurred prior to 2Sam. 7 is not preposterous. This obviously appears to be a chapter which summarizes David’s principle conflicts (or, perhaps the principle conflicts of his first decade as king). There is certainly no way that these all took place over a year or two period of time. The lack of detail suggests that this chapter was recorded after the fact, with only a few details noted of most conflicts. Therefore, it does not seem to be out of the question for there to be some overlap between the giving of the Davidic Covenant and the conflicts herein noted.
In the past several decades, there has been an emergence of a very idealized view of life. There is a very significant portion of our population who believe that world peace can be achieved, and all we have to do is stop going to war. If we can reduce the size of our military and our cache of weapons, even better. Although so-called peace movements go back as far as time itself (they say, “Peace, peace” when there is no peace—Jer. 6:14), we had a resurgence of the peace movement in the 1960's. Although its size was over-exaggerated at the time and now as well, it was still a significant portion of our population—which, in the 1970's, caused Congress to stop funding the war in Vietnam, which caused our hasty retreat, which caused the horrendous deaths of 2,000,000–3,000,000 men, women and children in the region over the following few years (far more than were killed during the entirety of this 20 year war). Some of these were our allies, some were anti-Communists, and some simply were just in the way of the revolution. These peace activists in America have grown up and represent a significant portion of our population. They have also managed to infiltrate our schools so the what little U.S. history is taught is significantly slanted. So, these same people who put flowers in the barrels of the guns of national guardsmen sincerely believe, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that peace can be achieved in our time. They have forgotten our Lord’s promise that we would hear of wars and rumors of war until He returns (Matt. 24:6).
When I first began listening to R. B. Thieme Jr., it was the 70's, and I was a peace-loving hippy from the 60's who had believed in Jesus Christ. I had marched in one peace march, was against the Vietnam War, and had long hair. So, as you may well imagine, Bob ruffled a few of my feathers when I began to listen to his teaching. Quite obviously, there were a whole lot of things which I disagreed with, and this was, in part, because I had been brainwashed to believe that Jesus was some sort of a religious hippy. I did not quite go so far as to believe Him to be some sort of a Che-type revolutionary figure; but, my vision of Jesus was of this meek, quiet hippy who wandered about teaching people to love each other. In no way, could I square this with war.
On the other hand, I had decided that the Bible was probably authoritative (although I did not know to what degree) and Bob was one of the very few men who was teaching the Bible verse by verse, which I had a hunger for. I had listened to a number of other teachers at the same time, and read lots of free and cheap literature, and finally settled upon focusing more on Bob and J. Vernon McGee because (1) they seemed to agree on most things; (2) they taught directly from the Bible, verse by verse, whole books at a time; (3) these were very different men in personality; (4) and their materials were free (which is what I could afford at the time). Although they apparently knew one another (as I found out years later), their ministries were independent, and yet, they seemed to come up with many of the same conclusions.
It took a long time and a lot of persuading, but I eventually came around to a much more conservative approach to life. Like many people, I began as a Christian thinking that the views which I held were, for the most part, compatible with Christianity, and that I just needed to merge the Bible with my own thinking and point-of-view. However, I came to find out that many of my views were in diametric opposition to the Bible. I did not like that, but I had to come to accept it.
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. |
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. Back to war: 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, 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].” 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 2nd 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 (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. |
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? |
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 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 go 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 is not a democracy, and its leader is this tiny crazy person who denies the holocaust. 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 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 long 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) 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. 6) 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. 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) God uses certain nations to defeat and sometimes to destroy nations which have become dangerous cancers in this world. 3) 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). 4) 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. 5) 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. 6) Going to peace marches is more of an expression of self-righteousness than anything else. 7) Nations which serve Satan will be anti-God, anti-Semitic and/or anti-freedom. 8) 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. 9) Such a nation needs to be, at minimum, contained; and, at maximum, destroyed. 10) When do such nations need to be destroyed? When their iniquity is full. 11) 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. 12) 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. 13) 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. 14) 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. 15) 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. 16) 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. 17) 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. |
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. |
When you first become a Christian by believing in Jesus Christ, your values, your norms and standards, and your thinking has been shaped and formed by this world. Just because you are a believer in Jesus Christ does not mean that you will hear the truth and automatically believe it.
This is a very important point. When you first become a Christian by believing in Jesus Christ, your values, your norms and standards, and your thinking has been shaped and formed by this world—by the cosmic system. Just because you are a believer in Jesus Christ does not mean that you will hear the truth and automatically believe it. It takes awhile to overcome all of the false things that you believe. Even though you begin the Christian life without scar tissue, you often return to your old habits and your old way of thinking. Therefore, it is normal for the new believer to listen to the teaching of the Word of God and reject portions of what he hears. There are many places where you may find yourself butting heads with the truth: evolution versus creationism; war being a normal human activity which will never disappear from the human experience, eternal security, the correct understanding of the gift of tongues (speaking in a real foreign language that someone else in your periphery understands; a gift which died out in the 1st century a.d.), or salvation by faith alone in Christ alone (even though you were saved that way). You simply have to give it time. You cannot go out there and find some pastor who agrees with all of the stuff that you believed in before you believed in Jesus Christ and figure that you have done good in tracking down your right pastor. Guaranteed that, for awhile at least (maybe for years), you are going to disagree with your pastor. As long as this is based upon your norms and standards from being an unbeliever, that is okay. Ideally speaking, he will teach you out of your false norms and standards.
You may recall that David has been reading the Bible (he had to do this in order to correctly move the Ark). He knows a lot of doctrine. He did this because the first time he tried to move the Ark of God, he failed. Because of this reading and studying, David knows that amount of territory which God has given to Israel. Therefore, it is quite reasonable that David, in this chapter, is simply taking the land given to Israel from God. For this reason, we do not need to have God coming to David every few months and saying, “These Arabs over here are a bunch of sadistic idolaters; go wipe them out, David.” David, based upon his reading of the Word of God, did what he knew had to be done, which expanded the territory controlled by Israel considerably (see the Map of Israel under David).
Before we begin, allow me to summarize what we are about to study. After all that as occurred in the previous chapters (the moving of the Ark, the desire to build the Temple, the Davidic Covenant), David finds himself at war again. First he deals with the Philistines to the west (v. 1) and then Moab to the east (v. 2). Far northeast of Israel is Aram (Syria) and Zobah, and the King of Zobah—Hadadezer—begins to act quite aggressively, attempting to expand his kingdom. David brings his army to stop this expansion effort, and the King of Zobah brings in the Syrians to help him (vv. 3, 5). David defeats the army of the King of Zobah, and when the Syrians are brought in to help, they are defeated simultaneously (vv. 4–5). David sets up military garrisons in Syria, and Syrian brought tribute (i.e., paid taxes) to David (v. 6). David also took spoils from Hadadezer (vv. 7–8). A king from this area, Toi of Hamath, had been at war with the King of Zobah, so Toi brought tribute and presents to David (vv. 9–10). David continued to put these presents and spoils aside for the Temple—the spoil taken from Hadadezer, Edom, Moab, Ammon, the Philistines, and Amalek (vv. 11–12). Speaking of Edom, David made a name for himself by defeating Edom, killing 18,000 of their soldiers, and setting up garrisons in Edom as well (vv. 13–14). God is responsible for all of David’s victories (v. 15). This chapter concludes with a list of the members of David’s cabinet (vv. 16–18).
You will notice a number of changes with this exegetical study of 2Sam. 8: the various English translations are now broken down into 4 groups, and 4 or 5 new translations have been added. I have also added, on occasion, the translation of R. B. Thieme Jr., taken from Bible Doctrine Study Guides @ http://www.geocities.com/gracechurchofcalf/ii_samuel_08.html
David Defeats the Philistines and the Moabites
Slavishly literal: |
|
Moderately literal: |
And so he is after so, and so strikes David Philistines and so he humbles them and so takes David Metheg-ʾAmmâh from a hand of Philistines. |
2Samuel 8:1 |
And so it is, after these things, that [lit., and so] David strikes down the Philistines and subdues them. Therefore, David takes Metheg-ʾAmmâh from the control [lit., hand] of the Philistines. |
After all of these things occurred, David struck down the Philistines and subdued them. Because of this, he wrested control of Metheg-ʾAmmâh from the control of the Philistines. |
||
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). Halfway through the exegesis of this chapter, I discovered a more accurate English translation of the Peshitta (http://www.peshitta.org/) so some of the discussion (or lack thereof, when the actual texts are identical) reflects this discovery. I often update these texts with non-substantive changes (e.g., you for thou, etc.).
The Masoretic text is the Hebrew text with all of the vowels (vowel points) inserted (the original Hebrew text lacked vowels). We take the Masoretic text to be the text closest to the original. However, differences between the Masoretic text and the Greek, Latin and Syriac are worth noting and, once in a great while, represent a more accurate text possessed by those other ancient translators.
In general, the Latin text is an outstanding translation from the Hebrew text into Latin and very trustworthy (I say this as a non-Catholic). Unfortunately, I do not read Latin—apart from some very obvious words—so I am dependent upon the English translation of the Latin (principally, the Douay-Rheims translation).
The Septuagint was the earliest translation of a book ever made (circa 200 b.c.),and, since this was before the textual criticism had been developed into a science and because different books appear to be translated by different men, the Greek translation can sometimes be very uneven. I often use the Complete Apostles’ Bible, which is an update of Brenton’s English translation of the LXX, although I will often refer back to the Greek itself (there is a Greek LXX with Strong’s numbers and morphology available for e-sword).
Underlined words indicate differences in the text.
Latin Vulgate And it came to pass after this that David defeated the Philistines, and brought them down, and David took the bridle of tribute out of the hand of the Philistines.
Masoretic Text (Hebrew) And so he is after so, and so strikes David Philistines and so he humbles them and so takes David Metheg-ʾAmmâh from a hand of Philistines.
Peshitta (Syriac) AND it came to pass after this that David smote the Philistines and defeated them; and David took Ramath-gema from the Philistines.
Septuagint (Greek) And it came to pass after this, that David struck the Philistines, and put them to flight, and David took the tribute from out of the hand of the Philistines.
Significant differences: The second conjunction in the Hebrew (and so) can be legitimately rendered that. The second verb in the Greek is one which I am unfamiliar with. Therefore, it is unclear whether it is a reasonable translation of the 2nd Hebrew verb. The same thing is true of the 3rd Greek verb. The Latin and the Syriac appear to confirm the Hebrew words which we have here (what David actually takes—Metheg-ʾAmmâh—is up for discussion).
Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:
CEV Later, David attacked and badly defeated the Philistines. Israel was now free from their control.
Easy-to-Read Version Later, David defeated the Philistines. The Philistine capital city had controlled a large area of land. David took control of that land.
Good News Bible (TEV) Some time later King David attacked the Philistines again, defeated them, and ended their control over the land.
The Message In the days that followed, David struck hard at the Philistines--brought them to their knees and took control of the countryside.
New Century Version Later, David defeated the Philistines, conquered them, and took the city of Metheg Ammah.
New Life Bible After this David won the battle against the Philistines. And he took the most important city from the Philistines.
New Living Translation After this, David defeated and subdued the Philistines by conquering Gath, their largest town.
New Simplified Bible King David attacked the Philistines again. He defeated them and ended their control over Methegammah.
Partially literal and partially paraphrased translations:
American English Version Thereafter, David attacked the Philistines and routed them, and he took back everything that [Israel] had lost to them.
God’s Word™ After this, David defeated and crushed the Philistines. He took control of the main Philistine city from them.
New American Bible After this David attacked the Philistines and conquered them, wresting. . . from the Philistines.
NIRV While David was king of Israel, he won many battles over the Philistines. He brought them under his control. He took Metheg Ammah away from them.
New Jerusalem Bible After this, David defeated the Philistines and subdued them. From the grip of the Philistines he wrested...
Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):
Bible in Basic English And it came about after this that David made an attack on the Philistines and overcame them; and David took the authority of the mother-town from the hands of the Philistines.
Complete Apostles’ Bible And it came to pass after this, that David attacked the Philistines, and put them to flight, and David took the tribute from out of the hand of the Philistines.
JPS (Tanakh) Some time afterward, David attacked the Philistines and subdued them; and David took Metheg-ammah [If not a place name, the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain] from the Philistines.
NET Bible® David Subjugates Nearby Nations
Later David defeated the Philistines and subdued them. David took Metheg Ammah1 from the Philistines. When it comes to making an actual material change to the text, the NET Bible® is pretty good about indicating this. Since most of these corrections will be clear in the more literal translations below and within the Hebrew exegesis itself, I will not continue to list every NET Bible® footnote.
New International Version In the course of time, David defeated the Philistines and subdued them, and he took Metheg Ammah from the control of the Philistines.
Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:
English Standard Version After this David defeated the Philistines and subdued them, and David took Metheg-ammah out of the hand of the Philistines.
exeGeses companion Bible THE TRIUMPHS OF DAVID
And so be it, afterward,
David smites the Peleshethiy and subdues them:
and David takes Metheg Ha Ammah
from the hand of the Peleshethiy:...
Green’s Literal Translation And it happened afterward, David struck the Philistines, and humbled them. And David took the Bridle of the Metropolis out of the hand of the Philistines....
LTHB And it happened afterward, David struck the Philistines, and humbled them. And David took the Bridle of the Metropolis out of the hand of the Philistines.
NASB Now after this it came about that David defeated the Philistines and subdued them; and David took control of the chief city from the hand of the Philistines.
WEB After this it happened that David struck the Philistines, and subdued them: and David took the bridle of the mother city out of the hand of the Philistines.
Young’s Updated LT And it comes to pass afterwards that David strikes the Philistines, and humbles them, and David takes the bridle of the metropolis out of the hand of the Philistines.
The gist of this verse: David, after the previous chapters, defeats the Philistines and takes what is, apparently, one of their chief cities from them.
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 |
3rd 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. |
|||
Translation: And so it is, after these things,... The verbiage found here seems to indicate that these things found in this chapter occur after what has occurred in previous chapters. What has occurred in the previous chapters is, David moved the Ark into Jerusalem, and then began to think about building a permanent structure wherein God could be worshiped (the Temple). God told David that he would not do this, but delivered to David the Davidic Covenant. So, after these things all occurred, David found himself at war with many of the surrounding nations.
Application: This should not come as a shock to you. Israel occupies a tiny chunk of land which is approximately 0.2% of all the Middle East, and yet many countries and leaders throughout the Middle East are all worked up about this. Israel has little or no real affect on these other middle eastern countries. If the Palestinians wanted to integrate into Israel’s society or if they wanted to live peacefully side-by-side Israel, Israel would gladly accept either approach. However, the Jews are God’s people, and Satan will, until the end of time, be at war with God’s people. For this reason, we should expect very little by way of peace around Israel. As long as the Arabs are strongly driven by a Satanic religion, we should expect conflict. Whether we look at Israel today or historically, there are going to be problems between Israel and its neighbors. No president of the United States is going to be able to establish some lengthy peace between Israel and the surrounding Arabs, no matter how charismatic the president is. The more enthusiastically a president supports Israel defending herself against any and all enemies, no matter how disproportionately the response, the more likely there would be peace in the Middle East.
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 |
3rd 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 |
Pelishetîy (פְּלִשְתִּי) [pronounced pe-lish-TEE] |
transliterated Philistines |
masculine plural gentilic adjective (acts like a proper noun) |
Strong’s #6430 BDB #814 |
Here, this is spelled Pelishetîym (פְּלִשְתִּים) [pronounced pe-lish-TEEM]. |
|||
Translation: ...that [lit., and so] David strikes down the Philistines... This chapter begins in such a way as to sharply contrast 2Sam. 7:1 (And it came about when the king lived in his house and Jehovah had given him rest on every side from all his enemies). David’s life is filled with a myriad of experiences. In 2Sam. 7, we see what David is like when there is no pressure—he thinks about his relationship with God and Israel’s relationship to God. Here, we have David under a great deal of pressure; he faces a myriad of enemies and defeats them. Off in the future, we will see David when he neglects his duties and hooks up with Bathsheba. His life is like our life—certainly not in the exact same experiences, but we have times of low stress and times of high stress; we have time off and we have time when we are at work and under pressure. God provides for David the resources for all of these experiences.
Quite obviously, David is a metonym for Israel’s entire army. In fact, in any of these wars, David not need even be there for the war in order for his name to be used. David is the head of state, so when the army of Israel conquers this or that city, this or that country, it can be spoken of using David’s name. Given that he was a great general under Saul and given David’s willingness to be involved, it is quite likely that he is involved in most or all of these conflicts. However, in at least one instance, David sends out Joab, and he remains at home in his palace (2Sam. 11:1).
The Philistines and David have had several run-ins in the past. Since David became king over Israel, the Philistines have arrayed themselves against David and David defeated them (2Sam. 5:17–25). This appears to be another conflict, because this verse begins with after these things. What seems likely is, a few years after David defeated them, the Philistines regrouped and returned to war against David once again.
The verb which is found here does not indicate whether David or the Philistines were the aggressors. However, earlier, the Philistines had attacked David as soon as he became king over Israel (2Sam. 5:17). And previous to this,, the Philistines had defeated Saul and his sons in battle, then caused the people of Israel to flee their cities, which the Philistines then lived in (1Sam. 31:1–7). I suspect that David was the aggressor this time.
Let’s review the history of 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 southeastern 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. |
Quite obviously, there is a long and bloody history between Israel and the Philistines. |
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 |
3rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect; with the 3rd person masculine plural suffix |
Strong’s #3665 BDB #488 |
Translation: ...and subdues them. David completely defeats the Philistines. This victory will be so complete that we will not hear from the Philistines until we get to 2Sam. 21 where they will once more war against Israel (when David is much older). Because of this final defeat of the Philistines, they will bring Solomon, David’s son, tribute for many years to come (1Kings 4:21).
Allow me to continue with a few more points on the Philistines. |
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) in his own army (there are 600 Cherethites, Pelethites and Gittites). 2Sam. 15:18 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 2nd king (Nadab) was warring against the Philistines, and Baasha killed Nadab when he was laying siege against the Philistines. Baasha became the 3rd 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 6th 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 |
There are additional passages from the prophets which are coterminous with the history cited: Isa. 2:6 9:12 11:14 Amos 1:8 6:2 9:7 Zeph. 2:5. |
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 |
3rd 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 |
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. |
|||
Pelishetîy (פְּלִשְתִּי) [pronounced pe-lish-TEE] |
transliterated Philistines |
masculine plural gentilic adjective (acts like a proper noun) |
Strong’s #6430 BDB #814 |
Here, this is spelled Pelishetîym (פְּלִשְתִּים) [pronounced pe-lish-TEEM]. |
|||
Translation: Therefore, David takes Metheg-ʾAmmâh from the control [lit., hand] of the Philistines. David took control of Metheg-Ammâh, and it is unclear what exactly David took.
To remind you, the final portion of this verse was translated in many ways (as you will see, I tried to stay with fairly conservative translations): |
|
Translation |
Text/Commentary |
A Conservative Version |
And David took the bridle of the mother city out of the hand of the Philistines. This is a translation of the two words in question. The problem with a translation is, this appears to be in the construct state, but first noun in the construct state (which is actually the only noun in the construct) will not have a definite article, as this one does. I do not know if there are exceptions to this or not. |
American King James Version |
...and David took Methegammah out of the hand of the Philistines. Here, the two words are translated as one, to refer to a city not named elsewhere. |
The Bible in Basic English |
...and David took the authority of the mother-town from the hands of the Philistines. This is a translation of the two words in question. |
Concordant Literal Version |
...and David takes the bridle of the metropolis out of the hand of the Philistines. This is a translation of the two words in question. |
Complete Apostles Bible |
...and David took the tribute from out of the hand of the Philistines. The Complete Apostles Bible is based upon the Greek text. I am unfamiliar with the verb used here, but this is how this translation translates it. This would simply indicate that the Philistines were subservient to David. This would also indicate that there are troubles with the Hebrew of this verse. |
Exegesis Companion Bible |
...and David takes Metheg Ha Ammah from the hand of the Peleshethiy:... The words here are transliterated as a proper noun. |
Updated Bible Version 2.11 |
...and David took the bridle of the mother city out of the hand of the Philistines. |
Since the construct form of a noun should not have a definite article, and since Metheg has a definite article, we will reasonably assume that it should not be translated as a noun in the construct state (as did many of these translations, including A Conservative Version and the Concordant Literal Version). |
There seem to be two basic options here: (1) either the text is corrupted here; or (2) this is a figurative term for Gath (see the very complex explanation of Keil and Delitzsch above). Given the parallel text in 1Chron. 18:1 and the paying tribute spoken of in the LXX, it is most reasonable that we are speaking of Gath here and her daughters (i.e., the outlying towns) paying tribute to David. |
It is possible and even reasonable that the editor of Chronicles read what was in the Samuel text, found it to be moderately obscure, and simplified the text for his day and age. 1Sam. 18:1: After this David defeated the Philistines and subdued them, and he took Gath and its villages out of the hand of the Philistines. The mother city being spoken of is Gath. Whether Metheg-Ammah is a Philistine name or title given to Gath or some kind of corrupted text, the parallel passage referring to Gath is probably correct (recall that, in general, the Chronicles text is probably more accurate than the Samuel text). |
This is an interesting turn of events. If you will recall, David had a reasonable relationship with the Achish King of Gath back in 1Sam. 27 and 29 (in fact, because of David’s deception in 1Sam. 27, one might even view the King of Gath as showing a little more integrity). However, bear in mind that at least 10 years have passed, and possibly as many as 20. The Philistines had conquered Israel (they defeated Saul and his sons, killing all of them on the battlefield save one), and occupied Israelite territory until David came along and handed them some serious defeats (see 1Sam. 31 and 2Sam. 5:17–25). We do not know what exactly transpired. The King of Gath trusted David, but the other soldiers did not. Providing that the Philistines remove themselves from Israelite property, there could have been an alliance between Israel and the Philistines, given David’s relationship with the king. However, apparently, that was not to be, and we have no details on the interpersonal relationship. Was the Achish King of Gath replaced? Did the other kings influence him and turn him against David? We just do not know any of these things. However, we can be certain that either he or his people turned against Israel, despite David being in power.
Application: This actually has a direct application to this day and time. We have recently elected a president (President Barrack Obama) who many people will be the man to turn the page on our foreign relationships. Even though Obama had no real experience in these matters, many believed that his propensity to talk would reduce the chances of ill feelings and even war. Here we have the illustration of David replacing Saul, and David could not be in more stark contrast to Saul. Furthermore, David had a relationship established between himself and the King of Gath from several years back. However, this does not make any difference. Not only do Israel and Philistia go to war against one another, but in this verse, David has moved against the Philistines, taking their chief city. Now, if David, who is a marked improvement over Saul and has previously established international relationships, cannot maintain peaceful relations with Philistia, it should stand to reason that our new president, who, although being dramatically different in some ways from the previous president, and yet has no experience in foreign affairs and has no real established relationships; is, therefore, far less able to maintain peaceful relations between ourselves and many of the nations with which we are at odds.
Application: Nations are what they are, and we learn a great deal about a nation by its internal practices and by its allies. Even the greatest of leaders is unable to avoid conflicts because that is just who some people are. in the age in which we live, the most intelligent rhetoric in the world is not going to dissuade North Korea or Iran from developing nuclear weapons and then building missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead. We either let them or we don’t, but no amount of talk is going to slow them down.
This particular altercation with the Philistines does not appear to be the same as that found back in 2Sam. 5:17–25 (where there are two offensive moves against David made by the Philistines). The 2Sam. 5 account sounds like simply a defensive reaction on David’s part where he finally pursues them back to their own territory. 2Sam. 8:1 sounds as though David captures and controls their great city of Gath.
——————————
And so he strikes Moab and so he measures them in the cord to make them lie down earthward; and so he measures a pair of cords to kill and a fullness of the cord to keep alive. And so is Moab to David for slaves those bringing tribute. |
2Samuel 8:2 |
[David] also struck Moab. He measured them with a lot, making them lie down on the ground. He determined [lit., measured] two lots to kill [the man] and a complete lot to keep alive. Therefore, Moab became David’s servants, bringing [him] tribute [as he required]. |
David also struck the country of Moab. He then determined their fate by lot. He killed those with two lots and he let those with a full lot live. Therefore, Moab became servile to David, bringing him tribute as he required. |
||
Here is how others have translated this verse:
Ancient texts:
Latin Vulgate And he defeated Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the earth: and he measured with two lines, one to put to death, and one to save alive: and Moab was made to serve David under tribute.
Masoretic Text (Hebrew) And so he strikes Moab and so he measures them in the cord to make them lie down earthward; and so he measures a pair of cords to kill and a fullness of the cord to keep alive. And so is Moab to David for slaves those bringing tribute.
Peshitta (Syriac) And he defeated the Moabites, making them tie down on the ground, and measured them with a line; and he measured two lines to be put to death and one full line to keep alive. And so the Moabites became David's servants and brought tribute.
Septuagint (Greek) And David smote Moab, and measured them out with lines, having laid them down on the ground: and there were two lines for slaying, and two lines he kept alive: and Moab became servants to David, yielding tribute.
Significant differences: Only the Greek has David in the first phrase, which I think helps with the flow (I added it to my nearly literal translation). However, David’s name was probably not in the first phrase of the original text.
In the second phrase, we have the plural of lines in the Greek. It is singular elsewhere. Line is a legitimate translation of the Hebrew word we find here.
The Greek has the additional verb to be in the third phrase. The Hebrew verb is somewhat nebulous in meaning (I don’t know that it simply means to measure in this context), and the Greek translators may have had trouble with it as well.
The verb to keep alive in the Greek is in a different form than what is found in the Hebrew (it is hard to match verbs from one language to another, as the morphology of a verb is so different from language to language). The Greek verb goes one step further than the Hebrew, insofar is it refers to keeping one alive as a prisoner of war, which may be implied in the Hebrew, but is not found directly.
The differences noted in the Greek are fairly trivial and could reflect the flair of the translator more than working from text which is different. The English translations of the Latin and Syriac appear to be in agreement with the Hebrew text.
Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:
CEV David also defeated the Moabites. Then he made their soldiers lie down on the ground, and he measured them off with a rope. He would measure off two lengths of the rope and have those men killed, then he would measure off one length and let those men live. The people of Moab had to accept David as their ruler and pay taxes to him.
Easy English (Pocock) Then David defeated the people from Moab. He made the prisoners lie down on the ground. Then he measured them with a line. David's army killed the prisoners who were lying by the first and second lines. But they allowed the prisoners who were lying by the third line to live. After that, the people of Moab had to serve David. They paid taxes to him.
Easy-to-Read Version David also defeated the people of Moab. At that time he forced them to lie on the ground. Then he used a rope to separate them into rows. Two rows of men were killed, but the whole third row was allowed to live. In that way, the people of Moab became servants of David. They paid tribute [53] to him.
Good News Bible (TEV) Then he defeated the Moabites. He made the prisoners lie down on the ground and put two out of every three of them to death. So the Moabites became his subjects and paid taxes to him.
The Message He also fought and defeated Moab. He chose two-thirds of them randomly and executed them. The other third he spared. So the Moabites fell under David's rule and were forced to bring tribute.
New Century Version He also defeated the people of Moab. He made them lie on the ground, and then he used a rope to measure them. Those who were measured within two rope lengths were killed, but those who were within the next rope length were allowed to live. So the people of Moab became servants of David and gave him the payment he demanded.
New Life Bible He won the battle against Moab, and had them lie down on the ground in straight groups. Two groups were put to death, and one group was kept alive. The Moabites became servants to David and paid taxes to him.
New Living Translation David also conquered the land of Moab. He made the people lie down on the ground in a row, and he measured them off in groups with a length of rope. He measured off two groups to be executed for every one group to be spared. The Moabites who were spared became David's subjects and paid him tribute money.
New Simplified Bible He defeated the Moabites. He made the prisoners lie down on the ground and put two out of every three of them to death. So the Moabites became his subjects and paid taxes to him.
Partially literal and partially paraphrased translations:
American English Bible Then David attacked Moab and divided their army into two lines as they lay on the ground. Half were to be killed and the rest were held captive. Then the Moabites became David's servants and they were required to pay him a tribute.
NIRV David also won the battle over the people of Moab. He made them lie down on the ground. Then he measured them off with a piece of rope. He put two-thirds of them to death. He let the other third remain alive. So the Moabites were brought under David's rule. They gave him the gifts he required them to bring him.
Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):
Bible in Basic English And he overcame the Moabites, and he had them measured with a line when they were stretched out on the earth; marking out two lines for death and one full line for life. So the Moabites became servants to David and gave him offerings.
Context Group Version And he struck Moab, and measured them with the line, making them to lie down on the ground; and he measured two lines to put to death, and one full line to keep alive. And the Moabites became slaves to David, and brought tribute.
HCSB He also defeated the Moabites, and after making them lie down on the ground, he measured them off with a cord. He measured every two cord lengths of those to be put to death and one length of those to be kept alive. So the Moabites became David's subjects and brought tribute.
JPS (Tanakh) He also defeated the Moabites. He made them lie down on the ground and he measured them off with a cord; he measured out two lengths of cord for those who were to be put to death, and one length for those to be spared [I.e., he repeatedly doomed twice the number he spared]. And the Moabites became tributary vassals of David.
NET Bible® He defeated the Moabites. He made them lie on the ground and then used a rope to measure them off. He put two-thirds of them to death and spared the other third [translation; Hebrew "and he measured [with] two [lengths] of rope to put to death and [with] the fullness of the rope to keep alive."]. The Moabites became David's subjects and brought tribute [translation; Hebrew "and the Moabites were servants of David, carriers of tribute."].
Literal, almost word-for-word, renderings:
English Standard Version And he defeated Moab and he measured them with a line, making them lie down on the ground. Two lines he measured to be put to death, and one full line to be spared. And the Moabites became servants to David and brought tribute.
Green’s Literal Translation And he struck Moab, and measured them with a line; making them to lie down on the ground. And he measured two lines to cause them to died, and one full line to keep alive. And the Moabites were slaves to David, bearers of a gift.
Hebrew Names Version He struck Mo'av, and measured them with the line, making them to lie down on the ground; and he measured two lines to put to death, and one full line to keep alive. The Mo`avim became servants to David, and brought tribute.
MKJV And he struck Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground. Even with two lines he measured to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And the Moabites became David's servants, bringing gifts.
New King James Version Then he defeated Moab. Forcing them down to the ground, he measured them off with a line. With two lines he measured off those to be put to death, and with one full line those to be kept alive. So the Moabites became David's servants, and brought tribute.
NRSV He also defeated the Moabites and, making them lie down on the ground, measured them off with a cord; he measured two lengths of cord for those who were to be put to death, and one length* for those who were to be spared. And the Moabites became servants to David and brought tribute.
Thieme Also he {David} defeated Moab,
so he measured them with a line,
making them lie down to the ground
{David made the captives lie down in three straight lines}.
Consequently, he measured two lines to put to death,
and one full line to keep alive.
A Voice in the Wilderness And he struck Moab, made them lie down on the ground, and measured them off with a line. With two lines he measured off those to be put to death, and with one full line those to be kept alive. Thus the Moabites became David's servants, and brought tribute.
Young’s Updated LT And he strikes Moab, and measures them with a line, causing them to lie down on the earth, and he measures two lines to put to death, and the fulness of the line to keep alive, and the Moabites are to David for servants, bearers of a present.
The gist of this verse: David also defeated Moab. He made a determination of which men lived and died, and those who remained alive brought him tribute.
You may notice that, in my nearly literal translation, I make use of many of the alternate meanings of the wâw consecutive.
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 |
3rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect |
Strong #5221 BDB #645 |
The Greek inserts the proper noun David here, 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-AWBV] |
of his father; transliterated Moab |
masculine singular, proper noun |
Strong’s #4124 BDB #555 |
Translation: [David] also struck Moab. Interestingly enough, we do not have anything which indicates that God did or did not tell David to go to war against all of these various countries. Given that David spoke to Nathan about building the Temple for the Ark of God, we may reasonably suppose that David was in contact with Nathan for divine guidance throughout much of his life.
Moab and Ammon are nations on the other side of the Dead Sea from Judah. They are cousins of the Jews. You will recall the Abraham, the father of the Jews, moved into the Land of Promise with his nephew Lot. Abraham and Lot finally went their separate ways. Lot had two daughters who got their father drunk and had sex with him. The children which they bore became the founders of the two nations Moab and Ammon. The borders between Israel and those two nations are quite natural, and it would be logical for these 3 nations to be trading partners. However, what was more often the case was a constant animosity between Moab and Ammon and the Jews. They were never willing to just let things be, so David was required to conquer Moab at this time.
Since Ammon is going to be mentioned in vv. 12–13 and will be central to 2Sam. 10, we will review the Doctrine of Moab and Ammon in v. 12.
Apart from Bible doctrine, Israel and Israel’s relationships with her enemies is hard to comprehend. |
1. If one was to ponder the Jew as a race and Israel as a nation, there ought to be a great deal of confusion. 2. How do people from a nation which lost its sovereignty in 586 b.c. still survive? 3. How have these people maintained a separate identify, although they have been scattered throughout the world? 4. How is it possible for a such a nation as Israel to reconstitute itself thousands of years later? 5. Why do the Arabs so passionately hate the Jews? 6. Why haven’t the Arabs crushed the Jews? The Arabs dwarf the Jews in size and population. 7. These questions ought to confuse and mystify the unbeliever. So let’s take these questions one at a time: 8. How do people from a nation which lost its sovereignty in 586 b.c. still survive? God still has a purpose for the Jew; the Dispensation of Israel has not yet been completed (there are 7 years to go), and when the Church Age is completed, the remainder of the Age of Israel will begin. There must be Jews scattered throughout the world and a nation Israel in existence for all of this to come to pass. Therefore, the Jews will exist to the end of human history. 9. How have these people maintained a separate identify, although they have been scattered throughout the world? The Jews are God’s people and God will maintain their separate identity throughout human history. We must always be able to point to the Jews and recognize that God has made these people His. It is by divine design that the Jews will be scattered throughout all of the nations in the end times. 10. How is it possible for a such a nation as Israel to reconstitute itself thousands of years later? In the end times, there will be a nation Israel. Now, we do not know when the end times will come. Despite the world appearing to be in desperate shape at this time, we do not know the day nor the hour of Jesus’ coming; so we do not know when He will return for His church (the rapture) or return to destroy the armies fighting in Israel (the 2nd Advent). This particular nation Israel may continue and it may be wiped out at some point in time. However, before the end times, there will be a nation Israel in the land. 11. Why do the Arabs so passionately hate the Jews? Apart from the Bible, anti-Semitism is difficult to comprehend. Even the conservative movement in the United States up until the time of Ronald Reagan had a very healthy anti-Semitic branch (which was the primary reason the conservative movement would not catch on—God is not going to bless an anti-Semitic movement). The Jews are God’s people, and will remain set apart until the end of time. Those who are against God will naturally be against the Jews. This is why in the neo-liberal movement (the progressives), becoming more secular and seeing the Arabs on an equal footing with the Jews goes hand-in-hand. 12. Why haven’t the Arabs crushed the Jews? This is one of the most amazing questions. In the Six-Day War, Egypt, Jordan and Syria went to war against Israel. Additional troops were offered up by Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria (to right against Israel). Egypt has a population of around 65 million; Jordan has a population of 5 million, Syria has a population of 18 million and Israel has a population of 7 million. These 3 nations alone have populations 12x that of Israel. Furthermore, their hatred for Israel is dramatic and palpable. Therefore, ginning up the population in favor of such a war is not a difficult thing for these countries to do. And 6 other Arab nations wanted to get into the act. Furthermore, the Soviets backed the Arabs with weapons. President Nasser of Egypt had declared, “Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight.” Nasser also proclaimed: “The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel ... to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations.” After 6 days of fighting, Israel tripled its size by the land which it captured. 6 years later, there was another Arab-Israeli war which lasted nearly a month. Again, Egypt and Syria allied themselves against the Jews. Although Israel was dramatically taken aback by a surprise attack on two fronts, Israel within days was showing military superiority over her attackers. What happened? Quite obviously, military preparedness and military might are a factor. Israel had become somewhat complacent by the 1973 Arab Israeli Conflict, but quickly bounced back. However, certainly the overwhelming factor in these (and previous) wars is God. Even though we are in the dispensation of the church, the Jews are still God’s people and still will play a dramatic role in the end of time. One of the reasons the United States has been so greatly blessed is its attitude toward the Jewish people and its support of Israel. 13. It is because of God’s unique relationship to the Jews that all of this is as it is. |
Although it is not impossible for the Arabs to administer a crushing defeat to modern-day Israel, God is still preserving His people. It would be a mistake of any American president to treat Israel and any of her Arab enemies equally. |
In this specific instance, we have no idea why Moab and David are at odds, as David generally had a good relationship with the Moabites, being that he trusted them to take care of his parents when King Saul was after him. Quite obviously, a population is going to be split; there are going to be Moabites who like David and Moabites who are against the Jews. What it depends upon is, what direction the leaders go in. If the ruler has problems with David, develops inordinate competition with him, or if the king of Moab has advisors who are poisoning his opinion; Moab, generally an ally of David’s, can turn against him.
Barnes suggests
that David had some setbacks in fighting with the Syrians, and it is possible that the Moabites
and the Ammonites took advantage of this moment and attempted to cut off his retreat.
Poole sees this quite different, portraying Moab as lifelong enemies of the Jews, which such things
as David entrusting his parents to them as an anomaly. For although the king of Moab, out of hatred
to Saul, pretended some kindness to David, and gave protection to his parents (1Sam. 22:3–4), yet
the Moabites were perpetual and sworn enemies to the Israelites, who therefore were forbidden to
admit them into the congregation of the Lord, and to seek their peace and prosperity (Deut. 23:3–6).
And though God commanded them in their march to Canaan to spare the Moabites (Deut. 2:9,19), yet
afterwards they proved unthankful, and insolent, and fierce enemies to God and his people
(Num. 22:2,24:17–18 Judges 3:14 1Sam. 14:47), and thereby provoked God to alter his course and
carriage towards them.
To be clear on just one thing, God did not prohibit the Moabites from
entering into the congregation of Israel as believers in Jesus Christ and sharing in the worship of
Jehovah Elohim with them; God prohibited the Moabites from Jehovah worship based upon their own
volition. There were notable exceptions to this, e.g., Ruth the Moabite. When we examine the
doctrine of Moab and Ammon, later on in this study, we will go into greater detail on their
relationship to Israel.
2Samuel 8:2b |
|||
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 |
mâdad (מָדַד) [pronounced maw-DAHD] |
to measure |
3rd person masculine singular, Piel imperfect, with the 3rd 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. |
|||
be (בְּ) [pronounced beh] |
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 KHEB-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-KAHBV] |
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 3rd 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 |
Translation: He measured them with a lot, making them lie down on the ground. Exactly what happened here is difficult to determine. Many translators and theologians have David putting the defeated army of Moab into 3 lines, and he killed (ordered the killing) of two lines. This will explain some of the less literal translations.
Other translators suggest that cords or pieces of rope are involved, and somehow, a determination is made to kill or keep men alive based on the number of pieces of rope. I’ll cover this in greater detail below.
2Samuel 8:2c |
|||
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 |
mâdad (מָדַד) [pronounced maw-DAHD] |
to measure |
3rd person masculine singular, Piel imperfect |
Strong’s #4058 BDB #551 |
shenêy (שְנֵי) [pronounced shen-Ā] |
two, two of, a pair of, a duo of |
dual numeral construct |
Strong’s #8147 BDB #1040 |
chebel (חֶבֶל) [pronounced KHEB-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 le] |
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 |
3rd person masculine singular, Hiphil imperfect |
Strong's #4191 BDB #559 |
we (or ve) (וְ or וּ) [pronounced weh] |
and, even, then; namely; when; since, that; though |
simple wâw conjunction |
No Strong’s # BDB #251 |
melôʾ (מְלֹא) [pronounced melow] |
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 KHEB-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 le] |
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 |
Translation: He determined [lit., measured] two lots to kill [the man] and a complete lot to keep alive. We are either dealing with pieces of rope or cord here, or we are dealing with lots. Let me suggest that, possibly, those who needed to be restrained with two pieces of cord were killed and those who were subservient and only required one piece of rope were kept alive. Another reasonable explanation is, David cast lots (or had his men cast lots) and determined who would live or die based upon that. As is the case throughout the Old Testament, when casting lots is mentioned, there is nothing by way of mechanics given so that this would be impossible to duplicate centuries later. That is intentional, as we, in the Church Age, can figure out what to do based upon the doctrine in our souls and not based upon some mumbo-jumbo system from a previous dispensation.
Application: I write this in the year 2009, and one of the recent political topics of discussion is torture and whether or not we have treated our enemies too harshly while they are incarcerated. It is as if we can have a nice, civilized, Queensberry-style rules war, and that these rules will give the United States some sort of imagined moral authority. I must admit to being absolutely dumbfounded and amazed, as we are not talking about the 5 or 10% portion of our country which is disconnected from reality, but we are talking about a significant portion of our country. In a recent Rasmussen poll (I write this in May of 2009), 28% of American voters believe that President Obama’s decision to release memos which reveal in great detail our interrogation methods was a good decision. I must admit to being dumbfounded by this—how is it possible for 28% of Americans to believe that, in the middle of a war (2 of them in fact), that releasing the secrets of what is behind the curtain is a good idea? This simply tells us just how far gone our nation is, when 28% of Americans apparently think there is a nice way to fight a war. It is passages like these which bring us back to reality, where David, whose great grandmother is a Moabite, who entrusted his own parents to the Moabite king, now finds himself at war with the Moabites, and his mercy is, he only kills 2 out of 3 soldiers. A war ought to be fought to win, by whatever means possible.
Application: Some people ought not to even think about war—or, at least not voice their opinions. If you are a believer in Jesus Christ and struggle with the idea of enhanced interrogation during a war as being a bad thing, then it is best not to express your opinions (I exclude unbelievers here, as they will have no clue, in many cases). Whereas, it would not be right to use enhanced interrogation on a common criminal, what we do in wartime is a much different thing. Take the simple example of lying—it is a commandment of God not to bear false witness. However, in wartime, a spy is going to lie—that is his job. Soldiers will lie. John McCain gave the names of the Green Bay Packers offensive line as the names of those in his squadron. As believers, we need some discernment. I cannot just kill some person on my block, even if I think I have good reason to. However, in war, it is our Christian duty to kill as many of the enemy as our Lord allows us to. Behavior has to be adjusted and changed under war. David’s great grandmother was a Moabite; the Moabites guarded his parents when he was on the run from Saul. However, in war, David kills 2 out of 3 Moabite soldiers. The rules change under war.
Application: I watched a debate the other evening with Bill O’Reilly and a liberal, and they were debating torture. The liberal was willing to support President’s Obama use of drones to take out high value targets (which included killing civilians); but he had to draw the line when it came to dunking someone’s head into water to gain important information on possible imminent attacks. How anyone could support the former but not the latter completely boggles my mind. How it is possible to take the life of a noncombatant, calling them collateral damage; but, at the same time, to be absolutely against the harsh treatment of a soldier in order to protect the American people? How can you hold both opinions in the same brain at the same time?
Application: As believers, we have to be cognizant of situations. If you are the man of the house, and someone is breaking into your house, and so threatening your family, you do not turn the other cheek—you shoot to kill (if you have a gun). At one time, this was common sense; but, in the day that I write this, at least 28% of the American population lack common sense.
Keil and Delitzsch suggest that this particular war is also mentioned in 1Chron. 11:22a: And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was a valiant man of Kabzeel, a doer of great deeds. He struck down two heroes of Moab.
We have no idea as to the particulars of this war. David sent his parents to Moab for safekeeping a few decades previous (1Sam. 22:3–4), and a part of the reason for this was, his great grandmother Ruth was a Moabite. However, we have no idea what has transpired since then. Were David’s parents ill-treated? Did a new generation of Moabites rise up who hated Israel? This is the second nation in this chapter where an alliance between David and this nation would have been natural. It is important to recognize that David was not just a warmongering king who sought to destroy every nation around him. He struck an alliance with Hiram, King of Tyre (2Sam. 6:11–12) and will also have an alliance with King Toi of Hamath (2Sam. 8:9–10). So, it is clear that David can get along with his neighbors. However, here, although we are not 100% certain of exactly what David did with these Moabites, it is clear that he killed a whole lot of them after being at war against them.
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 |
3rd person feminine singular, Qal imperfect |
Strong's #1961 BDB #224 |
Môwʾâb (מוֹאָב) [pronounced moh-AWBV] |
of his father; transliterated Moab |
masculine singular, proper noun |
Strong’s #4124 BDB #555 |
lâmed (לְ) [pronounced le] |
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 |
lâmed (לְ) [pronounced le] |
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 |
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 |
minechâh (מִנְחָה) [pronounced min-HAWH] |
tribute offering, gift, present; sacrifice, bloodless offering; [a general term for] offering |
feminine singular noun |
Strong’s #4503 BDB #585 |
Translation: Therefore, Moab became David’s servants, bringing [him] tribute [as he required]. The Moabites would continue to pay a yearly tribute to David, and then later to Solomon and to Rehoboam, until the revolt of the ten tribes, and then they apparently continued to paid it to the kings of Israel, to the times of Ahab. After Ahab’s death, the Moabites rebelled against Israel (2Kings 1:1 3:4–5).
Here is where we must reasonably understand ancient culture. Paying tribute to a stronger, dominant country was common (1Sam. 10:27 2Chron. 26:8 Psalm 72:10 Isa. 36:16). Whether this established or implied some sort of a suzerain–vassal treaty, I don’t know. But understanding this to be a part of ancient culture better helps us to understand David and Nabal back in 1Sam. 25. David sent his men to collect a tribute from Nabal, whose shepherds had been in David’s periphery without incident. Nabal refused, and at least one commentator (Barthel) took this as David requiring protection money. This was simply the way that things were done. It may seem like gangster protectionism, but in that day and age, it was common.
As was customary in war, the loser often paid the winner tribute. One may understand this to be the natural order of things and, in some cases, this might be seen as legitimate protection money. Being conquered does not automatically mean that two nations will remain at odds with one another forever. Many people liked it when Rome conquered their area because this brought law and order to their province and put them under the protection of Rome. Quite obviously, they would be taxes by Rome; but, at the same time, they would enjoy the protection of Rome and great internal orderliness. Many conquered peoples would petition and/or pay for Roman citizenship in order to have the rights of a Roman citizen.
This could be reasonably seen as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Balaam, from Num. 24:17–19: “I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near; a star shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead of Moab and break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom shall be dispossessed; Seir also, his enemies, shall be dispossessed. Israel is doing valiantly. And one from Jacob shall exercise dominion and destroy the survivors of cities!” This refers both to David in the relative near fulfillment (400+ years later); and to Jesus Christ in the 2nd Advent.
In fact, now might be a good time to go back and review the entire set of prophecies given by Baalim: |
|
To set the stage for this, Israel had just come out of Egypt, spent 40 or so years in the desert-wilderness, and now was traveling up along the east side of the Dead Sea to cross over into the Land of Promise from the east. In order to do this, Israel would travel through and/or along the borders of several nations, including Moab and Ammon. Israel’s only interest was in traveling through peacefully. However, these other nations too this as a military offensive and some even came out to do battle against the Jews. |
|
Balak ben Zippor, King of Moab, hired Balaam, a gentile prophet—but a genuine prophet of God—to curse the Israelites. However, instead of cursing the Jews, Balaam blessed them. King Balak kept having Balaam move about, to see Israel from a different angle, hoping that he would curse Israel. However, he continued to bless Israel each time. |
|
New King James Version |
New Living Translation |
“Balak the king of Moab has brought me from Aram, From the mountains of the east. ‘ Come, curse Jacob for me, And come, denounce Israel!’ How shall I curse whom God has not cursed? And how shall I denounce whom the LORD has not denounced? For from the top of the rocks I see him, And from the hills I behold him; There! A people dwelling alone, Not reckoning itself among the nations. Who can count the dust of Jacob, Or number one-fourth of Israel? Let me die the death of the righteous, And let my end be like his!” |
“Balak summoned me to come from Aram; the king of Moab brought me from the eastern hills. ‘Come,’ he said, ‘curse Jacob for me! Come and announce Israel’s doom.’ But how can I curse those whom God has not cursed? How can I condemn those whom the Lord has not condemned? I see them from the cliff tops; I watch them from the hills. I see a people who live by themselves, set apart from other nations. Who can count Jacob’s descendants, as numerous as dust? Who can count even a fourth of Israel’s people? Let me die like the righteous; let my life end like theirs.” |
(Num. 23:7b–10) |
|
Balaam tells how Balak summoned him to curse the Jews, but, as he stands on the mountains overlooking the Jews, he cannot curse them, as God has not denounced them. The Jews are praised for their great numbers and Balaam ask to die as a Jew. |
|
“Rise up, Balak, and hear! Listen to me, son of Zippor! God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? Behold, I have received a command to bless; He has blessed, and I cannot reverse it. |
“Rise up, Balak, and listen! Hear me, son of Zippor. God is not a man, so he does not lie. He is not human, so he does not change his mind. Has he ever spoken and failed to act? Has he ever promised and not carried it through? Listen, I received a command to bless; God has blessed, and I cannot reverse it! |
(Num. 23:18b–20) |
|
God does not change His mind. Balaam warns that he cannot overturn with his words whom God has blessed and whom God has cursed. |
|
He has not observed iniquity in Jacob, Nor has He seen wickedness in Israel. The LORD his God is with him, And the shout of a King is among them. God brings them out of Egypt; He has strength like a wild ox. For there is no sorcery against Jacob, Nor any divination against Israel. It now must be said of Jacob And of Israel, ‘Oh, what God has done!’ Look, a people rises like a lioness, And lifts itself up like a lion; It shall not lie down until it devours the prey, And drinks the blood of the slain.” |
No misfortune is in his plan for Jacob; no trouble is in store for Israel. For the Lord their God is with them; he has been proclaimed their king. God brought them out of Egypt; for them he is as strong as a wild ox. No curse can touch Jacob; no magic has any power against Israel. For now it will be said of Jacob, ‘What wonders God has done for Israel!’ These people rise up like a lioness, like a majestic lion rousing itself. They refuse to rest until they have feasted on prey, drinking the blood of the slaughtered!” |
(Num. 23:21–24) |
|
God is with Israel and God is not going to allow misfortune to befall them. God, their King, leads them out of Egypt. The powers of the various gods cannot harm Israel. Israel will rise up as a great nation, defeating their enemies as a lion killing his prey. |
|
“The utterance of Balaam the son of Beor, The utterance of the man whose eyes are opened, The utterance of him who hears the words of God, Who sees the vision of the Almighty, Who falls down, with eyes wide open: |
“This is the message of Balaam son of Beor, the message of the man whose eyes see clearly, the message of one who hears the words of God, who sees a vision from the Almighty, who bows down with eyes wide open: |
(Num. 24:3b–4) |
|
What Balaam is saying is clearly a vision from God; these are the words of God. |
|
“How lovely are your tents, O Jacob! Your dwellings, O Israel! Like valleys that stretch out, Like gardens by the riverside, Like aloes planted by the LORD, Like cedars beside the waters. He shall pour water from his buckets, And his seed shall be in many waters. “His king shall be higher than Agag, And his kingdom shall be exalted. |
“How beautiful are your tents, O Jacob; how lovely are your homes, O Israel! They spread before me like palm groves, like gardens by the riverside. They are like tall trees planted by the Lord, like cedars beside the waters. Water will flow from their buckets; their offspring have all they need. Their king will be greater than Agag; their kingdom will be exalted. |
(Num. 24:5–7) |
|
While these men tromp through the desert in front of him, Balaam looks into their prophetic future, seeing their wonderful homes, gardens and trees. Agag was the king of the Amalekites (this was either a family name or a title of Amalekite kings). The king of Israel will be greater than Agag, who, at this time, is seen as the greatest king of that area. |
|
“God brings him out of Egypt; He has strength like a wild ox; He shall consume the nations, his enemies; He shall break their bones And pierce them with his arrows. ‘He bows down, he lies down as a lion; And as a lion, who shall rouse him?’ “ Blessed is he who blesses you, And cursed is he who curses you.” |
“God brought them out of Egypt; for them he is as strong as a wild ox. He devours all the nations that oppose him, breaking their bones in pieces, shooting them with arrows. Like a lion, Israel crouches and lies down; like a lioness, who dares to arouse her? Blessed is everyone who blesses you, O Israel, and cursed is everyone who curses you.” |
(Num. 24:8–9) |
|
God brings Israel out of Egypt. Israel has tremendous strength, like an ox. Right now, Israel does not look like much—like a lion crouching down—but the hearer is warned not to disturb her. |
|
“The utterance of Balaam the son of Beor, And the utterance of the man whose eyes are opened; The utterance of him who hears the words of God, And has the knowledge of the Most High, Who sees the vision of the Almighty, Who falls down, with eyes wide open: |
“This is the message of Balaam son of Beor, the message of the man whose eyes see clearly, the message of one who hears the words of God, who has knowledge from the Most High, who sees a vision from the Almighty, who bows down with eyes wide open: |
(Num. 24:15b–16) |
|
Balaam again reiterates that these are the words of God, that his vision is true because it comes from God. His eyes are wide open because he sees this great vision of God. |
|
“I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; A Star shall come out of Jacob; A Scepter shall rise out of Israel, And batter the brow of Moab, And destroy all the sons of tumult. “And Edom shall be a possession; Seir also, his enemies, shall be a possession, While Israel does valiantly. Out of Jacob One shall have dominion, And destroy the remains of the city.” |
“I see him, but not here and now. I perceive him, but far in the distant future. A star will rise from Jacob; a scepter will emerge from Israel. It will crush the foreheads of Moab’s people, cracking the skulls of the people of Sheth. Edom will be taken over, and Seir, its enemy, will be conquered, while Israel marches on in triumph. A ruler will rise in Jacob who will destroy the survivors of Ir.” |
(Num. 24:17–19) |
|
Balaam looks forward to two kings here—to David, who fulfills this prophecy with his defeat of Moab; and to Jesus Christ upon His return, Who will destroy all of the nations around Israel. |
|
Then he looked on Amalek, and he took up his oracle and said: “ Amalek was first among the nations, But shall be last until he perishes.” |
Then Balaam looked over toward the people of Amalek and delivered this message: “Amalek was the greatest of nations, but its destiny is destruction!” |
(Num. 24:20–22) |
|
The Amalekites make up the greatest nation at the time that Israel is making this trek along the eastern side of the Dead Sea. They live in the land between Palestine and Egypt, a portion of which the Jews wandered through. They will be trouble for Israel even to the time of David. |
|
Then he looked on the Kenites, and he took up his oracle and said: “Firm is your dwelling place, And your nest is set in the rock; Nevertheless Kain shall be burned. How long until Asshur carries you away captive?” |
Then he looked over toward the Kenites and delivered this message: “Your home is secure; your nest is set in the rocks. But the Kenites will be destroyed when Assyria takes you captive.” |
(Num. 24:20–22) |
|
The Kenites actually had mostly a good relationship with Israel. However, Assyria would eventually take them captive. |
|
Then he took up his oracle and said: “Alas! Who shall live when God does this? But ships shall come from the coasts of Cyprus, And they shall afflict Asshur and afflict Eber, And so shall Amalek, until he perishes.” |
Balaam concluded his messages by saying: “Alas, who can survive unless God has willed it? Ships will come from the coasts of Cyprus; they will oppress Assyria and afflict Eber, but they, too, will be utterly destroyed.” |
(Num. 24:23–24) |
|
Balaam even looks forward to the destruction of Assyria. |
|
As an aside, this passage tells us that God worked in Gentile nations before Israel became a nation to God (God’s unique client nation). God had Israel compose the Scriptures, but passages like this in Numbers tell us that God worked throughout all nations when there was positive volition. |
We do not know how David determined to go to war against Moab. Was he responding to a threat, following God’s mandates or simply conquering everyone in his periphery? In this context, we are not given any information.
We know that the Palestinians today have a hard-core portion of their population who will never tolerate the Jews under any circumstance. Since the Jews have been God’s people for a long time, it is not unreasonable to suppose that there was strong anti-Semitism during the time of David. We are not told which countries favored and which countries hated this Jews in this context of this chapter. However, it would not be shocking to find that some of these nations just simply hated Israel and perpetrated acts of war against them for that reason. Recall that, when David took Jerusalem, the Philistines almost immediately gathered against him out in the valley outside of Jerusalem (part of the reason for this was, the Philistines had previously controlled some Israeli cities after they defeated Saul and his sons in battle).
——————————
David Defeats Hadadezer and the Syrians
And so strikes David Hadadezer son of Rehob king of Zobah in his going to return his hand in a river of [Euphrates]. |
2Samuel 8:3 |
David also struck down Hadadezer [possibly, Hadarezer], the son of Rehob, the king of Zobah when he went to restore [or, cause to return, regain] his power [lit., his hand] near the River [Euphrates]. |
David also defeated Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, the king of Zobah when he attempted to restore his power out as far as the Euphrates River. |
||
Here is how others have translated this verse:
Ancient texts:
Latin Vulgate David defeated also Adarezer the son of Rohob king of Soba, when he went to extend his dominion over the river Euphrates.
Masoretic Text (Hebrew) And so strikes David Hadadezer son of Rehob king of Zobah in his going to return his hand in a river of [Euphrates].
Peshitta (Syriac) Then David defeated Hadarezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to have dominion at the river Euphrates.
Septuagint (Greek) And David struck Adraazar the son of Raab king of Suba, as he went to extend his power [lit., hand] to the river Euphrates.
Significant differences: The final verb is in question. It is a very common verb in the Hebrew. The verb in the Greek is unknown to me, however the verbs used in the English versions of the Latin, Syriac and Greek texts seem to give the gist of the Hebrew text, although it does not appear to be an exact translation.
The additional word Euphrates is found in the Masorite text as a marginal note, in the ancient versions above and in the parallel passage I n1Chron. 18:3. It is reasonable to suppose that it belongs here in this verse as well.
Thought-for-thought translations; paraphrases:
CEV David set out for the Euphrates River to build a monument there. On his way, he defeated the king of Zobah, whose name was Hadadezer the son of Rehob.
Easy English (Pocock) Hadadezer was the son of Rehob, the king of Zobah. Hadadezer had gone to the river Euphrates. He wanted to rule over the territory round the river again. But David defeated him.
Easy-to-Read Version Hadadezer son of Rehob was king of Zobah. David defeated Hadadezer when David went to take control of the area near the Euphrates River.
Good News Bible (TEV) Then he defeated the king of the Syrian state of Zobah, Hadadezer son of Rehob, as Hadadezer was on his way to restore his control over the territory by the upper Euphrates River.
The Message On his way to restore his sovereignty at the River Euphrates, David next defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob the king of Zobah.
New Century Version David also defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to take control again at the Euphrates River.
New Life Bible Then David won the battle against Hadadezer the son of Rehob king of Zobah, as he went to get his power again at the Euphrates River.
New Living Translation David also destroyed the forces of Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah, when Hadadezer marched out to strengthen his control along the Euphrates River.
New Simplified Bible David defeated the king of the Syrian state of Zobah, Hadadezer son of Rehob. Hadadezer was on his way to restore his control over the territory by the upper Euphrates River.
Partially literal and partially paraphrased translations:
American English Bible Next, David attacked AdraAzar (the son of RaAb, the king of Souba) as he was marching toward the Euphrates River.
God’s Word™ When David went to restore his control over the territory along the Euphrates River, he defeated Zobah's King Hadadezer, son of Rehob.
New American Bible Next David defeated Hadadezer, son of Rehob, king of Zobah, when he went to reestablish his dominion at the Euphrates River.
NIRV David fought against Hadadezer, the son of Rehob. Hadadezer was king of Zobah. He had gone to take back control of the land along the Euphrates River.
New Jerusalem Bible David defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah, when the latter mounted an expedition to extend his power over the River.
Revised English Bible David also defeated Hadadezer the Rehobite, king of Zobah, who was on hi way to restore his monument of victory by the river Euphrates.
Today’s NIV Moreover, David defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah, when he went to restore his monument at [Or his control along] the Euphrates River.
Mostly literal renderings (with some occasional paraphrasing):
Bible in Basic English And David overcame Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, when he went to make his power seen by the River.
JPS (Tanakh) David defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king f Zobah, who as then on his way to restore his monument [On yad in this sense, cf. 18:18; 1Chron. 18:3; 1Sam. 15:12. Others “dominion”] at the Euphrates River.
NET Bible®