So do God to Abner, and more also, if, as Jehovah has sworn to David, I do not so to him;
Ishbosheth has just accused Abner, the commander of Saul's army, of taking Saul's concubine, and Abner answers with an oath to hand the whole kingdom to David. The words are true — the Lord had sworn it — but will God take a throne from a man moved only by wounded pride?
The oath is built on something Abner had known for years: that the Lord had sworn the kingdom to David. That knowledge did not restrain him from propping up Saul's house.
It is no surprise that Abner knowingly and willingly resists the Lord by supporting Ishbosheth. Abner knows that David is the Lord's anointed... Abner knows he is not on God's side. But the Lord is not the aim of his plans and his work, so he hardly cares that his opinions and his conduct contradict each other. Abner is only pretending to defend a political and religious line of succession.
Nothing in the verse suggests repentance. The trigger was an insult he could not answer, and the new loyalty came with an eye on what David could give him.
He will show Ish-bosheth who is in charge. He will pull him off the throne as fast as he put him on it. He would move the kingdom from the house of Saul to the house of David. That would fulfil the word God had sworn to David: that David would be king of all Israel (vv. 9-10). Abner had known God's expressed oath in this matter, but until this time had brazenly defied it. Even now he was not changing because of any real regard for the word of God, but because Ish-bosheth had questioned his character. In changing he was of course counting on David's favour toward him.
Abner could quote God's oath, so his years of resistance were not ignorance. One writer names who was really driving the opposition to David, and where half-hearted dependence on God ends.
The weak son of Saul is only a tool in the hands of Abner, who is all the way through the real heart and soul of the opposition to David... God will not be content to be one force among other forces. A half-way dependence on Him is more than half independence, and it quickly turns, sadly, into real hostility. So Abner and Ishbosheth were now openly at odds with God. He had shown His purpose in David very plainly, as Abner himself admits here (ch. 3:9).
The same writer measures Abner's course against Israel's true king.
The Lord was the Supreme king over Israel. So once His mind was clearly known, only obedience could make for any proper unity. The course Abner and the other tribes took was simply rebellion.
Abner offered to deliver the kingdom. He was dead before he could.
But God stands against this. He does not want David to receive the kingdom from any hand but 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 wrongs to fulfil His designs.
David took the offer without asking God. One writer presses him on it.
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 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.
The throne came anyway — but by waiting, not by bargaining.
For now, though, he was king only in Hebron, accepted only by the tribe of Judah. He had to wait for God's time until all Israel would accept him... all efforts to thwart God's counsels proved useless. One by one, every hindrance to David's receiving the homage of all Israel was removed... Throughout this time of expectancy, how did David act? He waited, for the most part, for God to act on his behalf. He left this, his only right path, once — when he gave in to Abner's proposal.
- God swore. The oath Abner repeats is not his own idea — the Lord had already sworn the kingdom to David, and Abner knew it all along.
- Abner knew. Knowing God's mind and refusing it is not neutrality. Propping up Saul's house was rebellion.
- Pride moved. The change of side came from a wounded reputation and an eye on David's favour, not from regard for the word he quotes.
- God refused. The kingdom would not reach David through a proud schemer's hand. No one was to boast of putting the Lord's anointed on the throne.
- David waited. He took Abner's deal once without asking God. Yet every hindrance fell anyway, and the throne came as God's gift.
to translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beer-sheba!
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And he could not answer Abner a word again, because he feared him.
Abner has just threatened to hand the whole kingdom over to David. The king says nothing back, and the reason is fear. How does a king end up afraid of his own commander?
Ish-bosheth gives no reply at all. One commentator traces that silence back to an earlier choice: Ish-bosheth took a throne he knew he was not fit to hold.
This crushing outburst was too much for Ish-bosheth. Fear of Abner silenced him completely (v.11). If he had been a wise man, he would have refused earlier to listen to Abner or to take any part in ruling Israel, for he knew he was not qualified for it. He loses everything.
The name in this verse was not the one he was born with. The man behind it had no anointing and no gift of his own.
He was not anointed, not gifted, a mere tool in the hands of Abner for his purpose, and eventually murdered by two of his captains. His real name, Esh-Baal, had been dropped, and people commonly called him Ish-bosheth, which means "man of shame."
Ish-bosheth's whole position rested on Abner, and he knew it. One writer shows what happened when that support was removed, and what it asks of every believer.
Ish-bosheth could not do without human support. When Abner was murdered, "his courage failed, and all Israel was dismayed" (4:1). Saul's son had "a great man" to hold up his throne, and everything collapsed when that support failed. It was not so with David. Experience had taught him the value of man and the value of God. This experience, it is true, is often repeated in a believer's life. Sometimes every natural support fails, even one God Himself gave. Then we find ourselves in complete weakness. This is a lesson we must learn, for as Christians we often place our confidence in foundations that can be shaken. Then our faith is tested. The question becomes whether God is enough for us.
Ish-bosheth owed his crown to Abner. One writer shows how a debt like that closes into a trap.
If I put myself under obligation to a man, the fear of man will influence me to that same degree, and my own fear traps me. How dreadful, that through fear of offending a mere man I may end up offending God! The only safety from such snares is a dependent, genuine trust in the Lord. This means no confidence in the flesh, for it is choosing the Lord as the soul's confidence rather than anything or anyone else.
Another writer applies the same principle to a ruler who excused himself by his fear of the people:
He pleads his fear of the people. If that was true, it showed he was unfit for any true rule. For "the one who rules over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God," and the fear of man does not go together with the fear of God. It brings a snare.
One king trembles before his general. The other, the rightful king, does nothing to force the issue. William Kelly contrasts the touchiness of people in the wrong with the calm of those sure of God.
Now Ish-bosheth had no title whatsoever. Yet David showed great tenderness toward him, all the more because he knew his own title could not be questioned. When people are in the wrong, do not be surprised if they are touchy. When they have the confidence that the truth of God gives, they can afford to leave things alone, without anxiety or bluster.
Abner offers to deliver the whole nation to David. God refuses the offer, and will not let the crown come through such a hand.
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… God is able to turn man's very worst sins to accomplish His purposes.
- Prop. Ish-bosheth's throne rested on one man, Abner, and everything collapsed when that support failed.
- Debt. Putting yourself under obligation to a man gives him power over you, and your own fear traps you.
- Silence. The fear of man is inconsistent with the fear of God, and it left the king unable to answer a word.
- Contrast. David, sure of his title, could afford to leave the matter without anxiety or bluster.
- Providence. God would not let David receive the kingdom from any hand but His own — no man was to boast of putting His anointed on the throne.
And Abner sent messengers to David on his behalf, saying, Whose is the land? saying [also], Make thy covenant with me, and behold, my hand shall be with thee, to turn all Israel to thee.
Abner had put Saul's weak son Ish-bosheth on the throne and kept him there; now the two have quarrelled, and Abner offers David the whole nation. Two uncomfortable questions follow: what was driving Abner, and should David have accepted?
Abner's change of side looks like submission to God's word, but the timing tells another story. He had known for years what God had sworn about David and had fought against it anyway.
He would transfer the kingdom from the house of Saul to the house of David. That would fulfil the word God had sworn to David: David would be king of all Israel. Abner had known God's expressed oath in this matter, but until now had brazenly defied it. Even now he was not changing because of any real regard for the word of God, but because Ish-bosheth had questioned his character. In changing he was of course counting on David's favour toward him.
He was not ignorant of where he stood.
Abner is aware that he is not on God's side. But the Lord is not the object of his plans and activity, so he hardly cares that his opinions and his conduct contradict each other.
Here David does not refuse, and he does not ask God.
But what are we to think of David? Why doesn't he consult the Lord when Abner proposes this covenant to him? He had refused the crown from the hand of the Amalekite; 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 like this for the good of his kingdom. This covenant will smooth out difficulties. The war has lasted long enough … All of this is very reasonable to man, but it is not according to the mind of God.
David did not simply say yes. He attached a condition of his own.
David also answered by messengers. They told Abner that a league could be made, but only on one condition: Michal, Saul's daughter, must be given back to David as his wife... In fact, Michal had shown no faithfulness 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 returned when she had proved undependable? Was it only his own rights he was thinking of? ... Deuteronomy 24:1-4 says the first husband was not to take his wife back after she had been defiled by marrying another man. If David had sought wisdom from God, this scripture might have been a protection for him.
The covenant never came into force.
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 acts of wickedness to fulfil His designs. He uses Joab's infamous act to cut off the man in whom David had already placed his confidence.
Across the years of waiting, this was the exception in David's conduct.
One by one, every hindrance to David's receiving the homage of all Israel was removed. Abner was treacherously slain — Ish-bosheth was murdered. At last David was anointed king over all Israel, and all the tribes accepted the man of God's choice. Throughout this time of waiting, how did David act? He waited, for the most part, for God to act on his behalf. Only once did he leave this, his one right path — when he gave in to Abner's proposal to win the kingdom for David by his own personal influence. The Lord would not allow it. David was not to owe Abner the allegiance of all Israel. God would move their hearts to receive him. And He did.
- Hand. The verse turns on whose hand gives the kingdom. Abner offers his; God refuses it.
- Motive. Abner moves not out of regard for God's word but because Ish-bosheth questioned his character, and he counts on David's favour.
- Silence. David answers Abner but never asks the Lord. The deal made sense to men, not to God.
- Price. David's condition brought back Michal, a wife who had already proved undependable. Seeking God's wisdom might have spared him.
- Result. Abner dies before the covenant stands. God turns even that wickedness to His purpose, so no one can boast of having enthroned His anointed.