And he said, Well, I will make a covenant with thee; only I require one thing of thee, that is, Thou shalt not see my face, except thou first bring Michal Saul's daughter, when thou comest to see my face.
David is king in Hebron, Ishbosheth holds the rest of Israel, and Abner — Saul's old general — now offers to hand David the whole kingdom. David agrees to a covenant, but attaches one condition: his first wife must come back first.
David makes the demand twice: first to Abner, then to Ishbosheth.
Abner does not intend to lose out. He contacts David at once by messenger, urging him to make an alliance with Abner, who would for his part bring all Israel under David's rule (v.12). David answered by messengers too. They told Abner that an alliance could be made, but only on one condition: Michal, Saul's daughter, must come back to David as his wife. David confirmed this to Ish-bosheth, insisting that Michal be given back to him — the wife he had paid for by killing 100 Philistines.
David is not just refusing a meeting. The Bible uses the same picture for standing in God's favour, and one writer points back to this verse while explaining it:
Seeing His face means they are always in divine favour. Compare 2 Samuel 3:13; 14:24-33; Esther 1:14; Revelation 22:4.
The same test shows up later in David's own family:
There is a striking, though negative, example with David, when Absalom was not allowed to see his father's face (2 Samuel 14:24). In this way it became clear that Absalom no longer enjoyed his father's favour.
One thing is missing from the whole negotiation: any word of David asking the Lord.
Then we see Abner entering negotiations with David. Had David slipped back again, so that he went along with Abner? We do not hear a word about him asking the Lord. He makes a condition under which Abner is to see his face. Michal, Saul's daughter, his first wife, now married to Phaltiel, must be brought to him... The later story — Michal's mockery — shows that it was a mistake for David to take her back. How different everything would have been if David had asked the Lord.
David had not sent Michal away himself, so he could argue the right was his. But his own rights were not the only thing to weigh.
In fact, Michal had shown no loyalty to David in 1 Samuel 19:17, when she told her father that David had threatened to kill her if she did not let him escape from Saul. Why should he want her returned when she had proven undependable? Was it only his own rights he was thinking of? He could have reasoned too that since he had not taken the initiative in putting her away, Deuteronomy 24:1-4 would not apply. But that passage does say that the first husband was not to take his wife back after she had been defiled by marrying another man (v.4). If David had sought wisdom from God, this scripture might have been a protection for him.
The bargain never takes effect. One writer asks what we are to make of David in it.
But what are we to think of David? Why doesn't he consult the Lord when this covenant is proposed to him? He had refused the crown from the hand of the Amalekite; he will refuse it from the hand of Ishbosheth's murderers; but will he accept it from Abner's hand? Yes, because he feels free to do so, because he has all sorts of reasons to act this way for the good of his kingdom. This covenant will smooth out difficulties; war has lasted long enough... All this is very reasonable according to man, but it is not according to the mind of God.
God is opposed to this; He does not wish David to receive the kingdom from any hand other than His own. No one is to boast of having established the Lord's anointed on the throne. Abner is assassinated. God is able to turn man's very worst sins to accomplish His purposes. He uses Joab's shameful act to cut off the man in whom David had already placed his confidence.
One writer sees a larger picture here: the separated wife brought back to the king.
During this time Michal is given to another; the outward link between Messiah and Israel is broken, but only for a time. When the blessing from Jehovah reaches Jezreel, Michal — the separated wife — will be brought back (Hosea 2:19, etc.).
The same forward look attaches to David's gathering of the tribes as a whole:
As David now begins to do, so will Christ, the King of Judah, bring all around into subjection to Himself after He has taken the throne.
- Condition. David will make a covenant, but on terms: Michal first, then the meeting. He counted her his already — paid for with a hundred Philistines.
- Face. To see the king's face is to stand in his favour. Absalom later learned what being shut out means.
- Silence. Not one word records David asking the Lord. He reasoned the condition out; he did not receive it.
- Protection. Deuteronomy 24 spoke to this very case. Had David sought wisdom from God, it could have protected him.
- Crown. God will not let the throne come by Abner's hand. He cuts off the man David leaned on, so no one can boast of crowning the Lord's anointed.
And David sent messengers to Ishbosheth Saul's son, saying, Deliver me my wife Michal, whom I espoused to me for a hundred foreskins of the Philistines.
Abner offers David a deal that would hand him the whole kingdom. David names one price: give back Michal, Saul's daughter. She was already his wife, won years before at a price Saul himself set. The demand looks like simple justice. Commentators still ask two questions: what did David want, and why is God never consulted?
The bridal price David names was no ordinary wedding gift. Saul meant it as a death trap, and David outran it:
Against all fairness and honour, Saul gives Merab to Adriel. But he is still set on destroying David, so he offers him Michal as a trap. The condition: David must bring as the bridal price "a hundred foreskins of the Philistines." David agreed at once. He did not stop at the limit of the contract. True to the greatness of his nature — for he will be no man's debtor — he went beyond the condition and "struck down two hundred men."
So when David names the bridal price, he points to a debt paid twice over. He sends the demand to Saul's own son, asking only what Saul's terms had already granted. By now, though, Michal was another man's wife.
David had paid for this marriage. Having a right, though, is not the same as being right to press it. One writer asks whether David had a good reason:
David confirmed this to Ish-bosheth. He insisted on getting Michal back, the wife he had purchased by killing 100 Philistines (v.14). The Lord does not comment on whether David should have done this. But the later history (ch. 6:16-23) shows that their relationship was far from satisfactory. In fact, Michal had shown no loyalty to David in 1 Samuel 19:17. She told her father that David had threatened to kill her if she did not let him escape from Saul. Why should he want her back when she had proved undependable? Was it only his own rights he was thinking of?
The same writer points to Deuteronomy 24:4. It forbids a first husband to take back a wife who has since married another man. He adds: "If David had sought wisdom from God, this scripture might have been a protection for him."
One writer weighs two possible motives and settles on neither:
It is difficult to understand his motive for this demand. It may have been regard for Michal, since he owed his life to her. Or it may have been mixed with policy, showing his alliance with Saul. But whatever it was, the act brought honour to neither of them.
Policy is the kind of reason a king counts on. What no one mentions here is God.
The deal runs on good reasons. One writer asks what is missing from them:
Why doesn't he consult the Lord when this covenant is proposed to him? He had refused the crown from the hand of the Amalekite. He will refuse it from the hands of Ish-bosheth's murderers. But will he accept it from Abner's hand? Yes, because he feels free to do so, because he has all sorts of reasons to act this way for the good of his kingdom. This covenant will smooth out difficulties. The war has lasted long enough … All this is very reasonable according to man. But it is not according to the mind of God.
The deal collapses before Abner can deliver anything. One writer sees design in that, not accident:
But God is opposed to this; He does not wish David to receive the kingdom from any hand other than His own. No one is to boast of having established the Lord's anointed on the throne. And what is more, how could He permit the pride of man's heart to carve out the steps by which David rises to power? Abner is assassinated. God is able to turn man's very worst sins to fulfill His purposes. He uses Joab's shameful act to cut off the man David had already trusted.
David calls Michal "my wife" while she is living with another man. The bargain settles that claim, and others pay for it:
At Ish-bosheth's order Michal was taken from her husband, Phaltiel (v.15). She was not his in the first place, but taking her from him and giving her again to David only made the wrong worse. When Phaltiel follows her weeping, Abner abruptly tells him to return home.
- Paid — Saul set the bridal price as a death trap. David paid it twice over. The right he claims is real and bought.
- Pressed — A real right can still be pressed at the wrong moment. Was David thinking of anything beyond his own claim?
- Unasked — Every reason for the demand makes sense to man. David never asked the Lord, so none of it is according to the mind of God.
- Unaccepted — God will not let David take the kingdom from any hand but His own. No one may boast of putting the Lord's anointed on the throne.
- Unhappy — The bargain leaves Phaltiel weeping on the road, and the marriage itself proves far from satisfactory. What policy won, it could not bless.
And Ishbosheth sent, and took her from [her] husband, from Phaltiel the son of Laish.
Abner offers David the whole nation, and David sets one condition: Michal, his first wife, must come back to him. Ish-bosheth takes her from the man she now lived with — but was David right to ask, and what did he gain by it?
Did David's demand put right what Saul had done? One writer says it did the opposite — and notes what Abner stood to gain.
Ish-bosheth ordered Michal taken from her husband, Phaltiel (v.15). She had not been Phaltiel's to begin with, but taking her from him and handing her back to David only made the wrong worse. … Saul had given Michal to Phaltiel, but Abner no longer has to reckon with a living Saul. He wants David's favour.
One writer asks why David wanted this woman at all, then follows his reasoning to the law that answers it.
Michal had shown no loyalty to David in 1 Samuel 19:17, when she told her father that David had threatened to kill her if she did not let him escape from Saul. Why should he want her returned when she had proven undependable? … He could have reasoned too that since he had not taken the initiative in putting her away, Deuteronomy 24:1-4 would not apply. But that passage does say the first husband was not to take his wife back once marriage to another man had defiled her (v.4). If David had sought wisdom from God, this scripture might have been a protection for him.
The same silence runs through the whole deal. One writer contrasts it with two offers David had already refused.
But what are we to think of David? Why doesn't he consult the Lord when Abner proposes this covenant? He had refused the crown from the hand of the Amalekite, and he will refuse it from the hand of Ish-bosheth's murderers. But will he accept it from Abner's hand? Yes, because he feels free to do so, because he has all sorts of reasons to act this way for the good of his kingdom. This covenant will smooth out difficulties; the war has lasted long enough… All this is very reasonable according to man, but it is not according to the mind of God.
Why did David want her back? Commentators differ. One writer weighs gratitude against politics and will not settle on either.
It is difficult to understand his motive for this demand. It may have been that he cared for Michal, since he owed his life to her. Or it may have been mixed with policy, as proof of his alliance with Saul. Whatever it was, the act brought honour to neither of them.
Another writer sets the demand beside David's other marriages and traces what came of them.
By taking these different women as wives, in this gross indulgence of the flesh, he prepared himself for the great sin of his life. Disorder and much confusion followed. … The later history, Michal's mockery, shows that it was a mistake for David to take her back. How different everything would have been if David had asked the Lord.
Phaltiel is the one person in this scene with nothing to gain. One writer stops to look at him.
David takes this woman from her home instead of leaving her to her new husband. In doing so he breaks this man's heart. He was an honest man after all, deeply devoted to his wife. He follows her weeping, and never once thinks of rebelling against the authority set over him.
So what did David gain? One writer sums up the rest of Michal's story.
She did not share David's zeal for the Lord. When he brought up the ark and danced with joy before it, she not only despised him in her heart but rebuked him for it. Because of this she was barren the rest of her days. … Michal is an example of how far beyond the natural mind the leadings of the Spirit of God are.
The deal Michal was traded for came to nothing. Abner died before he could hand the tribes over.
But God is opposed to this; He does not wish David to receive the kingdom from any hand other than His own. No one is to boast of having established the Lord's anointed on the throne. … Abner is assassinated. God is able to turn man's very worst wrongs to carry out His purposes.
- Shortcut. David wanted the kingdom united and took the fastest road to it. He never asked God about the road.
- Price. Others paid for it. Phaltiel followed his wife in tears, and David's demand doubled Saul's old wrong instead of undoing it.
- Protection. One passage in the law fitted this exact case. David never turned to it, so it could not protect him.
- Prize. David won Michal back, and years later she despised him for his joy before the Lord. The shortcut delivered the prize but not the hope.
- Providence. Abner died before he could deliver the throne. God lets no man claim credit for crowning His anointed.
And her husband went with her along weeping behind her to Bahurim. Then said Abner to him, Go, return. And he returned.
Abner's deal with David turned on one condition: Michal, Saul's daughter, must go back to David. This verse shows the cost — her husband walking behind her in tears — and it asks why David wanted her back at all.
Michal had been David's wife first. Saul then gave her to Phaltiel. Giving her back to David looks like a correction. One writer says it only made the wrong worse, and that nothing now holds Abner back.
At Ish-bosheth's order Michal was taken from her husband, Phaltiel. Though she was not his in the first place, taking her from him and giving her back to David only made the wrong worse. When Phaltiel follows her weeping, Abner orders him straight back home. Saul had given Michal to Phaltiel, but Abner no longer has a living Saul to reckon with. He wants David's favour.
The commentators do not treat the weeping man as a villain. One writer shows what David's new freedom as king costs someone else. He also notes that Phaltiel never once resists.
Not content with these marriages, this man of God demands from Ishbosheth his wife Michal, who became an adulteress by taking another husband. He can do as he pleases — and how dangerous that liberty is!… David takes this adulterous woman from her home, instead of leaving her to her new husband. So he breaks the heart of this man. He is an honest man after all, deeply devoted to his companion. He follows her weeping, and never thinks of rebelling against the authority set over him.
David could argue that he never put Michal away himself. One writer questions his motive, and points to a law that covered this exact case.
The Lord does not say whether David should have done this. But the later history (chapter 6:16-23) shows that their relationship was far from satisfactory. In fact Michal had shown no loyalty to David in 1 Samuel 19:17. She told her father that David had threatened to kill her if she did not let him escape from Saul. Why should he want her back when she had proved undependable? Was he thinking only of his own rights? He could also have reasoned this: he had not taken the first step in putting her away, so Deuteronomy 24:1-4 would not apply. But that passage does say the first husband must not take his wife back once another marriage has defiled her. If David had asked God for wisdom, this scripture might have protected him.
Commentators differ on why David asked for Michal. One weighs two possible reasons and settles on neither.
It is hard to understand his motive for this demand. It may have been affection for Michal, since he owed his life to her. It may also have been mixed with policy, as proof of his link with Saul. But whatever it was, the act brought honour to neither of them. If handing Michal over pleased David's nature, Joab's shameful murder of Abner must have been a bitter reversal.
David can now summon a wife across the country. One writer sees in that power a danger for anyone God puts in authority.
The Spirit of God wants to teach us something here. A believer who receives a position of authority from God soon loses the sense of his dependence. The cause is the flesh that lives in him. As he uses power he starts to trust himself. He stops realising his need of the Lord's help, as he did in the days when he wandered like a hunted partridge on the mountains. Before the crown was on his head he would, apart from rare occasions, inquire of God and take no step without Him. But the moment he receives the crown he forgets his safeguard.
One writer reads Michal's removal and return as a picture of Israel's future.
During this time Michal is given to another. The outward link between Messiah and Israel is broken, but only for a time. When the blessing from the Lord reaches Jezreel, Michal — the separated wife — will be brought back.
- Liberty. David can now do as he pleases. Putting one wrong right created a second wrong.
- Cost. Phaltiel pays. He is an honest man with a broken heart, and he never resists.
- Silence. No one asked God. Deuteronomy 24 stood ready to protect David, unread.
- Cause. Authority wore away the habit of dependence that had kept David safe on the run.
- Hope. The wife taken away and brought back pictures a link broken only for a time.