1. I Samuel 31 and II Samuel 1. How does the historian in I Samuel know the outcome of the story here, if both men died? Does the Amalekite (II Samuel 1) help finish Saul’s suicide? Or is he lying to impress David?

Saul kills himself. His armor bearer sees that Saul is dead, and dies with him by a self-afflicted wound. I believe that. But why? The two actors in the scene are dead. How does the story get passed on?

The Amalekite in the second story is lying. How do I know? Because of the first story that speaks with authority. The Amalekite is speaking deceitfully in hopes of finding favor with David. That didn’t work too well for him.

Who wrote the history of Israel? Samuel and Kings were written by prophets of God. Prophet is no mean title or office. A prophet speaks for God, from God. These men were filled with God’s Spirit and knew exactly what was going on.

That is why the account in 1 Samuel is authoritative. A man of God wrote it. This is exactly what happened, though no one was there to see it.

There is no book like the Bible.

2. I Samuel 31:12. Why is partial cremation used here?

I say partial, because the bones were preserved to be buried. I ask the question because burning was not the normal way of the Jew.

Here is Barnes’ explanation: “Burning was not the usual mode of sepulture among the Hebrews. But in this case from a pious desire to disguise the mutilation of the headless corpses, and exempt them from any possible future insult, the men of Jabesh burned the bodies, yet so as to preserve the bones.”

II SAMUEL

1. II Samuel 1:19 ff. How do you explain David’s praise of his late enemy?

He calls Saul beautiful, mighty, beloved, pleasant. Yes, Jonathan is included in his thinking, but there is no question that he means to praise the King as well. How can it be? Saul deceived him, pursued him, harassed him, betrayed him.

David remembers the man who first brought him into the employ of the Kingdom. He sees the man who did indeed fight Israel’s battles valiantly. This Saul was his father-in-law, as well as the father of his best friend. Something beautiful was in the man and David discovered it in at least two of Saul’s offspring.

He then remembers the broken Saul, who ostensibly at least surrendered to David at last.

The rest, David was willing to forgive and forget. It is common at funerals to speak so. We would not expect one to speak derogatory comments when reviewing a man’s life.

And we must add that herein is an example for all of God’s people. David pictures Christ in a number of ways, not the least of which is his compassionate ways. He spared Saul’s life when Saul was in the land of the living. He shall spare it no less now that he is dead.

2. II Samuel 2:4. How did Judah know to make David its king?

David’s life was no secret to his own tribe of Judah. They were well aware of his prowess as a soldier, his killing of Goliath, his life as an exile from the pursuing Saul. Even Jonathan, the king’s son, was aware of the anointing of God on David, his place in the Kingdom. This had been noised abroad throughout Judah, and it seemed only natural that when Saul died, David would take his place.

All of Israel would follow one day, but all of Israel was not as aware of the son of Jesse as his own tribe. Many truly loved Saul and hoped for his own descendants to stay on the throne, as was the custom of the pagan nations around them.

3. II Samuel 3:15-16. Why did David call Michal back to his life?

Truly this was David’s lawful wife. Phaltiel, who presently lived with Michal, was living in adultery, and though we want to sympathize with him for the great loss he now suffers, we must remember that he never had a right to the King’s daughter, who had first been given to David.

David still loved her, though he had other wives by now. But perhaps more important was the symbolism involved. Michal belonged to Saul. Saul was still the political power in many people’s minds. To be reunited to the family of Saul would send the message throughout Israel that the rule of Saul would continue in this indirect way.

Abner and Saul’s son were reaching out to David for an agreement, a way to walk together and to proceed with the Kingdom’s life. David wanted to work with them, but made it clear he was not about to compromise or be humiliated by having his wife stripped from him and given to another. David was the son of the King also.

4. 2 Samuel 8:2. Explain what David is doing here, and why.

Not an easy question. Moab and Edom were both related to Israel via Lot and his daughters. It was a Moabite girl that was David’s own great-grandmother. Indeed, it was probably this latter that encouraged David to feel free to house his parents in Moab until his troubles passed.

Nevertheless, there was animosity between the two nations. Begun in the flesh, Moab could not be a most favored people of God. It was Balaam who spoke under God’s anointing to promise defeat of Moab at the hands of Israel one day. Here it comes to pass.

We are not told what triggered David’s response. Perhaps his parents had been treated poorly or even killed. Whatever it was, the Lord offers no rebuke of David’s actions. When a nation’s cup is full, it is full, and judgment must come.

Though some commentators want to make the passage easy and nice, I believe the literal interpretation is most always the best.

In town after town, he forced the inhabitants to lay down. Placing ropes over them to mark boundaries, he condemned to death 2/3 of the population.

An awful, awful scene. But not to be swept under the rug. We must always rejoice in God’s perfect judgment, and remember that the Son of David will one day return and place goats on his left, and condemn them to everlasting punishment.

At that moment the angels of Heaven will rejoice, and those who know God will similarly rejoice. God is righteous and holy. We must hate what He hates.

5. 2 Samuel 8:4. What does it mean to “hamstring” a horse? Why would David do this?

“The hamstrings are a group of three muscles that go from the very top back of [the leg] to the stifle [The joint at the junction of the hind leg and the body that corresponds anatomically to the knee in man]. The hamstrings’ primary action is to extend the hip. They also aid in lateral movement and kicking.” (From dailywritingtips.com)

To sever these muscles is to cripple the horse. David did not want these horses to be used in war against Israel. We think cruelty here, but the warrior thinks of protecting human lives. And these lives, in David’s case, are the lives of God’s chosen people.