2 Samuel 3

2 Samuel 3 1

My Notes Authors Matthew Henry - Commentary on the Whole Bible Here is, I. The struggle that David had with the house of Saul before his settlement in the throne was completed, v. 1. 1. Both sides contested. Saul’s house, though beheaded and diminished, would not fall tamely. It is not strange between them, but one would wonder it should be a long war, when David’s house had right on its side, and therefore God on its side; but, though truth and equity will triumph at last, God made for wise and holy ends prolonged the conflict. The length of this war tried the faith and patience of David, and made his establishment at last the more welcome to him. 2. David’s side got ground. The house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker, lost places, lost men, sunk in its reputation, grew less considerable, and was foiled in every engagement. But the house of David grew stronger and stronger. Many deserted the declining cause of Saul’s house, and prudently came into David’s interest, being convinced that he would certainly win the day. The contest between grace and corruption in the hearts of believers, who are sanctified but in part, may fitly be compared to this recorded here. There is a long war between them, the flesh lusted against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh; but, as the work of sanctification is carried on, corruption, like the house of Saul, grows weaker and weaker; while grace, like the house of David, grows stronger and stronger, till it come to a perfect man, and judgment be brought forth unto victory.

2 Samuel 3 22

My Notes Authors Matthew Henry - Commentary on the Whole Bible We have here an account of the murder of Abner by Joab, and David’s deep resentment of it. I. Joab very insolently fell foul upon David for treating with Abner. He happened to be abroad upon service when Abner was with David, pursuing a troop, either of Philistines or of Saul’s party; but, upon his return, he was informed that Abner was just gone (v. 22, 23), and that a great many kind things had passed between David and him. He had all the reason in the world to be satisfied of David’s prudence and to acquiesce in the measures he took, knowing him to be a wise and good man himself and under a divine conduct in all his affairs; and yet, as if he had the same sway in David’s cause that Abner had in Ish-bosheth’s, he chides David, and reproaches him to his face as impolitic (v. 24, 25): What hast thou done? As if David were accountable to him for what he did: “Why hast thou sent him away, when thou mightest have made him a prisoner? He came as a spy, and will certainly betray thee.” I know not whether to wonder more that Joab had impudence enough to give such an affront to his prince or that David had patience enough to take it. He does, in effect, call David a fool when he tells him he knew Abner came to deceive him and yet he trusted him. We find no answer that David gave him, not because he feared him, as Ish-bosheth did Abner (v. 11), but because he despised him, or because Joab had not so much good manners as to stay for an answer.

— joke —

...