B. The Consolidation of David’s Kingship (2 Sam. 5:6-10:19)
David’s first act as the Israelite king was to capture Jerusalem, which was foreshadowed earlier (cf. 1Sa 17:54). Though Jerusalem was considered impregnable, David effortlessly took the city, illustrating either that the inhabitants' confident words were sheer bluster or that David’s strength was extraordinary (2Sam 5:6-8). Once in the city, he fortified it. And he got even stronger because God was with him (5:9-10; cf. 1Sa 16:18; 17:37; 18:12, 14, 28; 20:13).
Another king immediately recognized David’s status and built David a palace as a present. This was not the first time foreign rulers saw him as Israel’s potential or actual king (cf. 1Sa 21:10-15). However, though elevated in diplomatic prestige, David regarded his kingship in theological perspective (2Sam 5:11-12).
Acquiring more wives and children underscored David’s increasing strength (vv.13-16; cf. 3:1-5). At the same time, a cautionary note is sounded. David “took” (lqḥ) these women. Samuel had used this word in reference to royal extravagance (cf. 1Sa 8:11, 13-14, 16). Also, David’s precipitate downfall began when he “took” (lqḥ) another woman, the name of whose son was already mentioned (5:14; cf. 11:4).
Unlike Hiram’s peaceful overtures, Philistia initiated hostilities. In response, David inquired (š'l) of the Lord and received reassurance. Consequently, he defeated the Philistines and carried off their idols, thus repaying them in kind, as it were, for their capture of the ark (cf. 1Sa 4-6). A pun emphasizes that the Philistines abandoned ('zb) their idols ('ṣb) because their idols had abandoned them (2Sam 5:20-21)! When the Philistines attacked again, David inquired (š'l) a second time and won a divinely aided victory (vv.22-24).
Later David brought the ark (cf. 1Sa 7:2; 14:18) to Jerusalem with great ceremony. But an attendant touched it, whereupon God struck him dead (2Sam 6:1-7). Both angry and apprehensive, David sent the ark elsewhere. Not even this great king could control God!
When the Lord blessed the ark’s keepers, David retrieved it, apparently to secure a similar blessing. This time he was successful, perhaps because he performed the requisite priestly functions himself (6:8-19).
But the celebration over the ark’s return was marred by Michal’s reaction. She had loved David but later was taken away from him (1Sa 18:20, 28; 25:44). When David negotiated her return, she came back docilely while her husband pitifully followed (2Sam 3:14-16). Had she cooled toward the king? Or had she thought that he wanted her back for political reasons alone? In any case, she detested David for what she regarded as his lewd (in her mind) dancing before the ark. David defended his actions “before God” and reminded her that he had been chosen to replace her father. Henceforth, Michal remained childless, presumably because David never slept with her again. She would produce no children to represent Saul’s line (McCarter, II Samuel, 172).
When David turned to domestic affairs, he expressed misgivings about living in a house (NIV “palace”; cf. 2Sam 5:11) while the ark remained in a tent (6:17). Therefore, with the prophet Nathan’s encouragement (“go,” v.3), he decided to build Yahweh a house (=temple; 7:1-3). However, though Nathan was doubtless correct that God was with David generally (v.3), the Lord had other plans (“go and tell,” v.5).
God had never lived in or asked for a house but had instead chosen David, been with him, planned to make [his] name great (cf. Ge 11:4; 12:2), wanted to make Israel secure, and would construct a house (=dynasty) for the king (2Sam 7:5-16). David’s successor could build the temple; God, not David or Nathan, was in charge of such things (v.13). Certainly the most important feature of this revelation was that David’s dynasty was to be perpetual (“forever”; vv.13, 16). Even when future kings in the Davidic line sinned and incurred punishment, God would never withdraw love as happened with Saul (v.15). God’s posture toward Israel’s kingship had clearly changed: Saul’s kingship was conditional and potentially ephemeral, David’s unconditional and everlasting.
David responded to this word with humility and gratitude, affirmed God’s past and future actions, emphasized his role in carrying out the divine will, implored God to make the divine name great, and asked for continued blessing (vv.18-29). Even in his response David accents “forever” (vv.24, 25-26, 29).
As promised (2Sam 7:10-11), God made David victorious (8:1-14; cf. vv.6, 14). In turn, the king kept Torah (Dt 17:16-17) by refusing to stockpile horses (8:4) or gold (vv.11-12). He also consolidated his government with a “cabinet” (vv.15-18).
Still, as good as everything seemed, there was cause for concern. David was already worried about Joab (2Sam 3:39). Another danger was the possibility of conflict between rival priests: (1) Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech (rather than the other way round [Eli—Phineas—Ahitub—Ahimelech—Abiathar] cf. 1Sa 14:3; 22:9, 20); (2) Zadok, the son of another, non-Elide Ahitub. Tension between rival priesthoods could be complicated by David’s priestly sons (8:18; kôhanîm; NIV “advisers”; RSV “priests”; McCarter, II Samuel, 253-55; Hertzberg, 294).
When David favored Mephibosheth (2Sam 4:4) by giving him Saul’s lands and arranging for their upkeep and by inviting him to the royal table, he repaid Jonathan’s generosity and at the same time strengthened himself (9:1-13). Ironically, David had often referred to himself as Saul’s servant (cf. 1Sa 17:32, 34; 26:18-19); now Saul’s servants and grandson were “David’s servants.”
But David was not always politically wise. He expressed sympathy to Hanun, the new Ammonite king, after the death of his father Nahash. But Nahash had been Israel’s bitter enemy (1Sa 11), contrary to what David believed (2Sam 10:1-2). Perhaps David’s political sensibilities were not sufficiently honed. In any case, after Hanun, who suspected ulterior motives in David’s overture, humiliated Israel’s emissaries, he realized that he had overstepped his bounds (vv.3-6). Hanun allied himself therefore with Aram, but David defeated the coalition handily and made Aram a vassal state (vv.7-19). Notwithstanding David’s carelessness, Joab knew why he landed on his feet: “The Lord will do what is good in his sight” (v.12).