Was the killing of Saul's descendants a just response to Saul's killing of the Gibeonites?

It would be an unfair practice to put children to death for the guilt of their fathers, or to put the father to death because of the guilt of his children. David made a sad blunder in this matter when he allowed the Gibeonites to hang seven of the sons or grandsons of Saul because of Saul's previous sin against the Gibeonites (2 Sam.21:1-9). Saul's house could have been punished in a different way than this, but this was opposed to God's Word. David did not enquire of the Lord before he made this mistake.

David then called the Gibeonites to inquire of them what ought to be done to make amends for this wrong treatment. it is most regrettable that David did not instead inquire of God as to this serious matter. A victim of a crime cannot be depended On to decide what punishment the criminal should suffer. This should certainly have been referred to the righteous Judge. This is another case of failure on David's part, of which there are too many in this later history of his kingdom.

At least the Gibeonites were not greedy of gain, like many present day lawyers who sue for millions of dollars over matters like this, but neither did they ask for the death of those who had actually killed the men of Gibeon. David promised to do whatever they asked before he knew what it would be. They ask that seven men of the descendants of Saul Should be given to them in order that they might hang them, as they say, "before the Lord." They consider this righteous retribution on the house of Saul, and David immediately agrees.

Was this right? David did not stop to think of two matters that should have stopped him cold. First, Deuteronomy 24: 6 plainly declared that the children were not to be put to death for the sins of their fathers. Secondly, David himself had sworn to Saul that he would not cut off Saul's descendants (1 Samuel 24:21-22). Had he completely forgotten this? He did spare Mephibosheth because of his oath to Jonathan, but was his oath to Saul not just as binding?

However, David chose two sons of Saul borne to him by Rizpah, Saul's concubine, and five grandsons, borne to Saul's daughter Merab when she had been give to Adriel, though the children had been brought up by Michal for David. Merab must have died before she was able to bring her children up. One may wonder, if Michal had borne sons to David, would he have been so willing to have them put to death? The seven men were however delivered to the Gibeonites, who hanged them as they had desired. But all this was simply to ingratiate the Gibeonites on account of their hurt pride. If David had sought the guidance of God there would certainly had been a different solution.

The fourth section of the second book of Samuel is an appendix to the history of David. When the great famine happened in the days of David we do not know. After the famine had returned year after year, for three years, David inquired of the Lord. Why did he not inquire in the first year? It is an evidence of the low spiritual state which prevailed at that time. The answer which David received revealed the cause of the judgment which rested upon the land. It was Saul and the blood-guilt in having slain the Gibeonites. The story of the Gibeonites is recorded in Joshua 9. They got in among Israel through deception and Joshua had made peace and a league with them. Though they belonged to the nations doomed to death they were permitted to live and became the hewers of wood and the drawers of water (josh. 9:26-27). Jehovah's name and an oath assured them of their safety. Saul had violated this covenant and slain some of them. This wrong is now to be righted--David did not inquire again of the Lord what he should do but consulted the Gibeonites instead. And the Gibeonites demand not silver nor gold of Saul and of his house, "neither for us shalt thou kill any man in Israel."

After that they asked that seven men of his sons be delivered unto them and they would hang them up unto the Lord in Gibeah. And again in haste the king promised to do so. Their demand, though piously worded, was not according to the law of God. Children were not to be put to death for the sins of their fathers (Deut. 24:16). Saul was the guilty one and he had died. How atonement for the broken covenant and the blood guilt was to be made remained for the Lord to say. David, not asking direction from Him, but turning to the Gibeonites, had failed again. And still the Gibeonites in their awful demand shared the bloodthirsty cruel character of the Canaanites. David carried out the awful request. He spared Mephibosheth. Two sons of Rizpah, a concubine of Saul, and five sons of Merab (Michal in the Authorized Version is incorrect), Saul's eldest daughter, are the victims. They were hanged by the Gibeonites and then left hanging. Sad it is to think that the horrible deed might have been averted if but David had again turned to the Lord and inquired of Him. And another law is broken, when these bodies were kept hanging for months. "And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day."

When David heard of Rispah's action he went and brought the bones of Saul and of Jonathan from Jabesh Gilead, then gathered the bones of the seven men who had been hanged. They then buried the bones of Saul and Jonathan in Zelah of Benjamin, in the tomb of Saul's father Kish. In this way David publicly identified himself with Saul and his house, acknowledging that his kingdom was really an extension of Saul's kingdom and therefore taking responsibility for Saul's previous wrong actions. This would no doubt ease some of Rizpah's distress, but more than that, it caused God to answer prayer in ending the drought. The slaughter of the seven men had not only been useless, but was disobedience to God's word. This following action of David was of more real value in the eyes of God.

But here again David seems sadly to forget the privilege of which he has just availed himself; and having turned to the Lord for the cause of the judgment, he turns to the Gibeonites to learn the method of atonement. "David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of Jehovah?" Surely that was not, after all, the first consideration; and to put himself into the hands of those who had been wronged was not in reality the way of righting it. Was there then no law in Israel which would apply to such a case? And if there were none, how much more had they need to seek from the highest Wisdom for help in a matter so exceptional as this?

Instead of which he makes an absolute promise, "What ye shall say, that will I do for you," and then on hearing their demand for seven of Saul's sons to be hung up to Jehovah in Gibeah of Saul, he still answers, "I will give them." There is no sign of any fresh appeal to God in the matter; and indeed there is no need of it to refuse the Gibeonite request. It had been already distinctly announced in Israel's statute-book: "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin." (Deut. 24:16.) In Ezekiel 18, long after this, when the children of Israel were perverting similarly the utterances of the law itself, God solemnly reasserts the principle of Deuteronomy, in vindication of the righteousness of His ways: "As I live, saith the Lord God: ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine: as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

It is impossible, therefore, to quote Numbers 35:33 against this, — a passage which in itself is as plain as need be. True, "the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it"; but "the blood of him that shed it" means the very opposite of the blood of his descendants. The word of God does not so contradict itself; and the Spirit of God emphatically disowns the principle.

Some have thought that the first verse of the chapter here shows us Saul's "bloody house" as being really involved with him in the guilt of the Gibeonite slaughter. In a certain way this, no doubt, was true. As the blood-stain rested upon the whole nation until cleansed away, so especially did it rest upon the house of Saul. Upon them it rested specially to do what might be done in reparation, and by unmistakable manifestation of sorrow and humiliation for the crime before God. Individuals of Saul's house might have been really accessories to it; but then their guilt as that would be specific and individual: and we find no such charges brought. It is not likely that the children of Merab were such; it seems very certain that Mephibosheth was not; and yet he is spared, not in virtue of his innocence, but because of David's sworn covenant with Jonathan his friend. This shows that, as to the others, it was not a question of personal guilt. The Gibeonite requisition was "seven of Saul's sons," — no matter who. David looks round and selects out of those so indicated. The specification of number, like all else, shows what is in their mind. They all, and David most, follow their own thoughts, and neither go to God nor are governed by His word. As we must surely read it, it is again the failure of human government, even where recognizing the divine one, — blindness in the things of God, for which the causes are spiritual, and alas, deep as they are wide.

Again, in the reign of David there was a famine in the land three years, year after year. God was dealing with them for some sin, that was clear; so what it was, and how to turn aside God's hand from them, were questions of the deepest importance. For if God restrained the fruitfulness of the earth, man could only wait till He was pleased to bless its increase. On this occasion then, as on the others, God was their only resource. But it was sufficient; for on David inquiring of the Lord he learnt the reason of the famine, and speedily discovered the way to stop it. The execution of children and grandchildren of Saul by the Gibeonites atoned for that king's breaking faith with, and slaughtering the Hivites, and God was entreated for the land. (2 Sam. 21.) This was a special case, though in perfect keeping with that provision in the law for cleansing the land from blood where the murderer was known. Under such circumstances there could be no atonement for the land, except by the blood of him that shed it. (Num. 35:33.)

But in 2 Samuel 21 an instructive scene is introduced to us to which we may turn our attention for a moment. Whatever may be the grace and faithfulness of God, for the very same reason God is jealous of His word, and deals righteously wherever His name is pledged. We are all familiar with the fact that in the days of Joshua the Gibeonites had deceived the heads of Israel. They had palmed themselves off on Joshua as coming from a far country, having for their own ends hidden the truth that they belonged to the accursed races of Canaan. The result was that Joshua and the other leaders of Israel committed the name of Jehovah, through the deceit of the Gibeonites, to sparing their lives, though in consequence of that deceit they were reduced to the condition of hewers of wood and drawers of water for the sanctuary. But Saul in his spurious zeal for God lost sight of what was so solemnly assured to the Gibeonites. Are you surprised that the king who would have taken away the life of his own son because of his rash oath, which Jonathan knew not, should feel lightly the oath that had been sworn by Joshua and the other leaders of Israel in the olden time? Wonder not; for the flesh, which here overstrains, there breaks down altogether.

It was no doubt long ago, and there are those who would ignore what is past for present ease. But time makes no difference, any more than place, in the things of God. What He looks to is His name, and by this are we also bound to keep His word and not deny His name. Saul forgot it. Can we not easily understand this? In him was no living faith whatever. There was only form, and this will sell the Lord when it suits for the price of a slave, though it may at the same time make the greatest show of devotedness. Doubtless Saul could vaunt his own superior zeal for the Lord in this — that he at least was not going to be carried away by a mere name, and an obligation so long ago as to be obsolete. If the Gibeonites were Canaanites, woe be to them from king Saul! And so it was that there was a famine, not immediately after, but now in the days of David for three years. Two things particularly may well arrest attention in this as a great moral truth. It was a long time since the name of Jehovah was pledged; but does God ever forget? Secondly, it was by no means a short time since Saul had done the bloody deed, and yet no chastening had yet come from Jehovah. The chastening did not follow till a considerable time after. Such patience tests souls thoroughly. The chastening fell not in the days of Saul, but in those of David. Why? Because God will have all to enquire of Him; He will exercise His people in their common and continuous responsibility; He will make us feel and judge our forgetfulness of heart, our lack of looking to Himself. The evil might have been dealt with personally on Saul; but the patience of God on the one hand, and the solidarity of the people on the other, was more impressively taught when the blow fell in the days of David. People and king were thus forced to review what had been soon forgotten because taken too lightly when done. He at least is occupied with our ways, and the discipline may tarry a long time. He would have His people learn the reason why His hand was upon them.

If they confide in His righteousness, they will learn why it was the fitting time, and according to the wisdom of God, that the chastening should fall in the days of David rather than in those of Saul. If it had fallen in the days of Saul, the Lord had not been so enquired of. Here was one that felt for the honour of Jehovah. The blow came. If David had felt the sin, if the people had confessed it, if Jehovah's name had been cleared about it, the famine might not have befallen them as it actually did. The evil was done by another who was personally guilty. It is granted that neither David nor they were responsible for his acts, but they were responsible to feel and confess the wrong. It was done publicly by king Saul in Israel. Had they mourned the deed as tarnishing Jehovah's glory? There is no appearance that there was any such confession; and the Lord now will compel them to take up that sin most seriously under the pressure of a famine, repeated till He was glorified in the matter where the wrong was done. In fact the king was guilty, but had the people shown godly horror at his profanation of Jehovah's name? They were careless about it, one cannot doubt; and David wakes up now in answer to the call; and he, chastened of God, does truly feel it, as all Israel had at any rate to smart under the consequences. So then the famine comes, and David enquires of Jehovah. It is very evident that it required a heavy and prolonged dealing from God to make them feel; for it is said, "The famine came in the days of David three years, year after year." It is not that God takes pleasure in inflicting a sore plague on His people; but anything is good that leads us to draw near to God in self-judgment for a dishonour done to His name. It seems plain then that this scourge was required year after year to rouse the conscience of Israel, possibly even of David also. At length he enquires of Jehovah, who distinctly answers, "It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites."

What a solemn lesson that God will not only not suffer unrighteousness to be done to the people that He loves, but even to the enemies that deceived them! "The righteous Jehovah loves righteousness." It would be hard to see or ask a more patent proof of the delicacy and also the tenacity of God's holding to righteousness than His dealing in this very case with Israel for the oath passed to the Gibeonites. Every one can understand how He must feel about Israel or about David; but that God should be jealous for a wrong done under such circumstances, and so long ago, to the Gibeonites, is to my mind a most wholesome lesson of the God with whom we have to do.

Nor this only. "And the king called the Gibeonites, and said to them, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make an atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of Jehovah?" This is another important point: their consciences must be satisfied, their hearts consoled and at rest for the wrong that had been done to them. Yet there is no disguise as to the people in question. Now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel. The Spirit of God expressly calls our attention to their origin and race. They were "of the remnant of the Amorites" — and you know what the Amorites were — "and the children of Israel had sworn to them, and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah." An excellent thing, is it not — zeal for the people of God? But zeal only for God's people, or nominally for God Himself, can never sanctify disrespect to His name, even if through trickery only that name had been pledged to His worst enemies. For in truth it was not a question of those to whom the name was pledged, but of His name that was sworn thus. If Jehovah's name was given as a shield to any, Jehovah would be the unswerving and most righteous guardian of its sanctity.

Then of the Gibeonites when they come, David asks, "What shall I do for you? And wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of Jehovah? And the Gibeonites said to him, We will have no silver nor gold of Saul, nor of his house; neither for us shalt thou kill any man in Israel. And he said, What ye shall say, that will I do for you. And they answered the king, The man that consumed us, and that devised against us that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the coasts of Israel, let seven men of his sons be delivered to us, and we will hang them up to Jehovah in Gibeah of Saul, whom Jehovah did choose. And the king said, I will give them. But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, because of Jehovah's oath that was between them." We must carefully look to this, and we shall always find God with us in it. Never should we sacrifice one duty in doing another. However important it may be for instance to pay God homage outside, we must never let slip God's honour at home in the family. It is a blessed thing to serve Him abroad, but there will be a sorry maintenance of His glory outside the house if He is not honoured within. And if we find therefore the Gibeonite's oath from Jehovah on one side, there was no less the oath to Jonathan, Saul's son and his seed on the other. No doubt a hasty spirit would have sacrificed the one for the other; the wisdom of God enables us to maintain both. This is fairly seen in the conduct of David.

And further, the very execution of divine judgment introduces the deeply pathetic story of Saul's concubine: "And Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it for her upon the rock, from the beginning of harvest until water dropped upon them out of heaven, and suffered neither the birds of the air to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field by night. And it was told David what Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, the concubine of Saul, had done." This was not a slight thing to David. No doubt God's name demanded vindication, and it was right. It was due to the Gibeonites that they should be satisfied. God was compelling them to judge the case that the guilt might be expiated; but it was more than right — it was beautiful and suitable that Rizpah should thus spread the deep sorrow of her heart before God. At this conjuncture David shows too on his part what was lovely and becoming in the king of Israel. Far was he from insulting the memory of the late king; for the very one that had given up his sons to die went and took the bones of Saul: this was the very time that he took them — showing the last honour to the departed king of Israel and his family. "And David went and took the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan his son from the men of Jabesh-gilead, which had stolen them from the street of Beth-shan where the Philistines had hanged them, when the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa: and he brought up from thence the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan his son; and they gathered the bones of them that were hanged. And the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son buried they in the country of Benjamin in Zelah, in the sepulchre of Kish his father: and they performed all that the king commanded. And after that God was intreated for the land."