2 Samuel 6:1–23

6:2 Baale-judah is one of a number of alternative names for Kiriath-jearim, a town west of Jerusalem (1 Sam. 6:21).¹ David and the representatives of the whole nation gather in the town before moving to the nearby location where the ark has been deposited.

“The ark of God” (cf. comment on 1 Sam. 3:3) occurs seven times in this account, as does “the ark of the Lord.” This may well be a deliberate use of “seven” to symbolize completion or perfection. The ark’s significance is further emphasized by the elaborate designation “which is called by the name of the Lord of hosts” (lit., “which is called by the name, the [very] name of the Lord of hosts”; cf. comment on 1 Sam. 1:3), with “the name” repeated for emphasis. This use of “the name” is a precursor to the later Jewish indirect designation of God (cf. Lev. 24:16). However, the Lord and the ark are not equated; he possesses the ark as his footstool, and the cherubim above it form a divine throne (cf. comment on 1 Sam. 4:4).

6:3 The phrase “they carried” (lit., “they made to ride”) along with the mention of a “new cart” signals how the first attempt to bring the ark to Jerusalem is flawed from the start. Though intended as a mark of respect, using a new cart is actually the Philistine mode of transporting the ark (1 Sam. 6:7), whereas the Lord had specifically directed the ark to be carried by Kohathites from the tribe of Levi, using poles inserted through rings incorporated into its sides (Ex. 25:13–15; Num. 4:4–6, 15, 17–20).

Three generations earlier, the ark had been left in the “house of Abinadab,” in the custody of Eleazar (1 Sam. 7:1). He has died in the interim, and Uzzah and Ahio, his descendants, are now its custodians. Though “Ahio” may mean “his brother” (ESV mg.), it is probably a personal name (as in 1 Chron. 8:31; 9:37). The two brothers “were driving the new cart,” not seated on it but walking in front of it and beside it as they guide it.

6:4 At the end of verse 3 and the beginning of verse 4 in the Masoretic Text, the words “new, and brought it out of the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill” are included. As the same words occur in the middle of verse 3 and are not present in 4QSam^a, the Septuagint, or the parallel passage in Chronicles, it is presumed that they have been accidentally repeated. “Ahio went before the ark” accounts in advance for his not acting as his brother will.

6:5 David and all the Israelites with him “were celebrating before the Lord.” The verb “celebrate” (found also in v. 21 and in 1 Sam. 18:7, and as “compete” in 2 Sam. 2:14) indicates joyful exuberance, probably involving dancing. “Songs” is provided from the parallel text in 1 Chronicles 13:8 instead of “with all [kinds of] woods of cypresses [or firs]” (MT). While this might indicate “with all kinds of instruments made from cypress wood,” it is a strange mode of expression, and the reading of the Septuagint and 4QSam^a is generally adopted here. The organization of the musicians is set out in much greater detail in 1 Chronicles 15.

6:6 There is no indication of how far the joyful procession has progressed when it comes to a sudden end at the “threshing floor of Nacon.” The name is given as Chidon in 1 Chronicles 13:9; Nacon may be not a proper name but a term meaning “striking” or “stroke” (from the same root as the verb “struck down” in 2 Sam. 6:7). Here the oxen lose their footing, and in an attempt to prevent damage to the ark, Uzzah stretches out “his hand” (added from 1 Chron. 13:9) and grasps the ark. Although not motivated by irreverence, his action is still sacrilegious, violating the holiness of God. Of course, Uzzah would not have been put in such a position had the ark been transported correctly in the first place.

6:7 What happens next is similar to the outbreak against the men of Beth-shemesh (1 Sam. 6:19). “The anger of the Lord” is not some power inherent in the ark but the personal response of God to the contravention of his requirements. “God struck him down,” that is, killed him, “there,” on the spot where the offense was committed, so that there would be no doubt about the connection between offense and penalty. “Because of his error” involves a somewhat obscure term, but 1 Chronicles 13:10 makes it clear that Uzzah’s error was his unthinking irreverence in touching the ark. Uzzah’s death does not imply anything regarding his eternal destiny.

6:8 “David was angry” (lit., “it became hot to David”) employs the same verb as “kindled,” used of the Lord in the previous verse (cf. also 1 Sam. 15:11). The reason for David’s anger is “because the Lord had broken out [lit., “broken a breaking”] against Uzzah.” He perhaps considers it unfair that this has happened to such a man as Uzzah, who had looked after the ark for so long. David also feels keenly his loss of face in that such a grand event to honor the Lord and give prestige to his new capital has turned into a fiasco. But David has forgotten that God is not honored by failure to comply with his commands.

The site of this incident becomes known as Perez-uzzah (“the breaking out against Uzzah”), which incorporates the term used earlier in connection with the Philistines (2 Sam. 5:20), suggesting a connection between the Lord’s opposition and hostility on these two occasions.

6:9 David’s emotional response quickly gives way to fear—not reverential awe but terror as he realizes his guilt in offending God. Overwhelmed by his own inadequacy and sinfulness, he despairs of ever being able to accomplish his project: “How can the ark of the Lord come to me?”

6:10 So David abandons the project of bringing the ark “into the city of David” (cf. 5:7) and instead takes it “aside” away from its intended route “to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite.”

Obed-edom apparently means “servant of Edom,” but if so, it is difficult to explain its prevalence as a Levitical name; it may be that an older interpretation “servant of mankind” is to be preferred. In Chronicles two Levites are identified with this name, one from the family of Merari, a singer and gatekeeper for the ark (1 Chron. 15:18, 21, 24), and the other of the family of Korah, also a gatekeeper (1 Chron. 26:4–5, 8, 15), of whom, at the conclusion of the list of his sons, it is said “God blessed him” (1 Chron. 26:5). Is either of these the Obed-edom found here, especially as he is designated “the Gittite,” that is, “one from Gath”? It is most improbable that even in those dire circumstances the ark would have been entrusted to a Philistine, even one who was a supporter of David. Since there are other sites with names incorporating Gath (“winepress”), “Gittite” may here designate one who came from the Levitical city of Gath-rimmon (Josh. 19:45; 21:24) and who may even be identified with the Obed-edom of 1 Chronicles 26.

6:11 For three months the ark “remained in the house of Obed-edom,” and “the Lord blessed” him and his household. There are no disasters such as that involving Uzzah, and more positive signs of prosperity are visible to all.

6:12 When David is informed of this, it reignites his desire for divine blessing on his regime and the nation. So the king revives his project to bring the ark to Jerusalem, but on this occasion he directs that “no one but the Levites may carry the ark of God” (1 Chron. 15:2), and he takes care to involve “the sons of Aaron and the Levites” in all of the arrangements (1 Chron. 15:4, 13–15).

“So David went and brought up the ark of God” is a summary statement setting out the success of the enterprise, which is achieved “with rejoicing.”

6:13 The authorized Levitical bearers carry the ark in the approved fashion by means of poles (Num. 4:6–15; 1 Chron. 15:15). After the procession “had gone six steps,” David calls a halt to express his gratitude that all is well. “He sacrificed an ox and a fattened animal” need not mean that he performs these sacrificial acts himself; rather he sponsors them as the leader of the nation (cf. comment on 2 Sam. 6:17).

6:14 Elated at the progress being made, David “danced,” a term describing an individual whirling around (found only here and in v. 16). He does so “before the Lord,” physically in front of the ark, the symbol of the Lord’s presence, and spiritually as an act of worship (cf. Pss. 149:3; 150:4), performed “with all his might” through relief and enthusiasm. To commemorate this occasion, David composes the psalm found in 1 Chronicles 16:8–36.

Additional information is supplied: “And David was wearing a linen ephod.” An ephod is a short, sleeveless, close-fitting garment, at this period particularly identified as priestly attire (1 Sam. 22:18). Two issues arise:

(1) In the light of Michal’s allegation made in 2 Samuel 6:20, it is often assumed that this is all that David is wearing, and that in his cavorting he exposes himself. But the description in Chronicles makes clear that David’s ephod is worn in its traditional fashion, as an overgarment (1 Chron. 15:27).

(2) However, the Chronicles account renders inescapable the conclusion that David on this occasion dresses in priestly garb. This is cited as one line of evidence by those who consider that as well as being king, David in some sense acts as a priest. Other arguments for this proposal include the fact that he offers sacrifice (2 Sam. 6:17) and that his sons are priests (8:18). Generally this is also connected with the declaration of Psalm 110:4, “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek,” taken as addressed to David personally. However, each of these passages may be interpreted differently, and neither separately nor cumulatively do they establish the case that David or his successors are viewed as holding priestly office.²

Why, then, does David wear characteristically priestly garments? It must be remembered that, apart from the special ephod of the high priest, Mosaic law does not restrict wearing an ephod exclusively to the priests. David is probably reacting against his high-handed conduct during his earlier attempt, in which he masterminded the return of the ark to Jerusalem—and got it wrong. In divesting himself of his royal robes and assuming a garment unequivocally associated with divine service, he is willingly emphasizing who is truly King of Israel and renouncing any attempt to manipulate him.

6:15 As the ark is carried into the city of David, glad “shouting” acclaims its presence (cf. 1 Sam. 4:5), as does the “sound of the horn” (1 Sam. 13:3; 2 Sam. 2:28). The joyful exuberance of this noisy occasion could not be disregarded by anyone in Jerusalem (cf. Ps. 47:5).

6:16 But there is someone not rejoicing—Michal. A window had once been a means of showing her love for David (1 Sam. 19:12), but here “looked out of the window” (lit., “looked down from the window”) seems to convey nothing but cold disdain. She is described not as David’s wife but as “the daughter of Saul” (also in 2 Sam. 6:20, 23), and from that perspective she sees not her husband but “King David leaping and dancing before the Lord” in behavior beneath royal dignity. “And she despised him in her heart.”

6:17 It is not recorded why David had left the tabernacle at Gibeon (1 Chron. 16:39; 21:29). He “set” (the same verb as in 1 Sam. 5:2) the ark in a tent specially prepared for it (1 Chron. 15:3). Perhaps his choice is influenced by the cramped confines of the site, or he may already have plans for a temple.

“And David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the Lord” in renewed homage and fellowship. Peace offerings involve a time of celebration for the worshipers, as most of the animal is returned to the sacrificer for consumption. David would not have offered the animals personally—after all, both Zadok and Abiathar are present, as well as an extensive retinue of priests (1 Chron. 15:4–12). However, as leader of the nation he donates the sacrificial animals.

6:18 Also acting as king, David “blessed the people in the name of the Lord of hosts” (cf. Solomon; 1 Kings 8:14, 55). This blessing would be a prayer that under his rule God would extend to them all the good associated with his covenant favor.

6:19 David extends royal largesse to the whole population, not just with shrewd political calculation but with the generosity characteristic of a true covenant king. “A cake of bread” is probably an ordinary ring-shaped loaf. Instead of “portion of meat,” others translate “cake of dates.” A “cake of raisins” would be dried grapes pressed together, also considered a choice delicacy. Similar lists of gifts are found in 1 Samuel 25:18 and 2 Samuel 16:1.

“The people departed, each to his house” forms a transition to the final episode.

6:20 After the public celebrations, “David returned to bless his household,” probably in some act of worship. Since the Chronicler mentions Saul and his household only in passing, he omits this episode, which our narrator uses to highlight the different standards of judgment employed by David and Saul regarding Michal.

“Michal the daughter of Saul” (v. 16) probably thinks of herself as an advocate for appropriate royal conduct. “Came out to meet” suggests she has reached boiling point during the ceremonies of verses 17–19 and cannot remain quiet any longer. “How the king of Israel honored himself today” drips with sarcasm and pent-up fury. She uses the third person not out of respect but in anger. “Shamelessly” renders an intensified verbal expression derived from “uncover,” which thus occurs three times in the verse and constitutes Michal’s main complaint against David. Her allegation, that when he engaged in such energetic dancing he had exposed himself as “one of the vulgar fellows” without principles or good breeding, is not substantiated in the narrative (cf. comment on 6:14). Her reaction may be sparked by nothing more than the fact that David has neither worn royal robes nor maintained his distance from common folk—especially the domestic servants. Michal had once genuinely loved David (1 Sam. 18:20), but she had been attracted to the dashing hero, the brave warrior of her dreams. Here is the real David, who could lay aside royal regalia and join with the whole nation in acclaiming and celebrating the sovereignty of the Lord. This David she neither understands nor wishes to understand.

6:21 In the marital infighting David shows that he could speak in as cutting a fashion as Michal. He exposes how she has misunderstood the situation: “It was before the Lord.” David then brings up the fate of Saul and his dynasty—probably a sore point between himself and Michal. The Lord has chosen him “above your father and above all his house,” and the Lord has chosen to “appoint” (lit., “command,” as in 1 Sam. 13:14) him to be “prince” (Hb. nagid, “leader”; cf. comment on 1 Sam. 9:16). So David asserts, “I will celebrate,” as in 2 Samuel 6:5. The sentence begins and ends with the same phrase, “before the Lord.” David has been acting in a spirit of religious devotion toward his divine benefactor, and whether or not it accords with Michal’s notions of propriety does not concern him.

6:22 David asserts that, since his aim is to exalt the Lord, he will continue behaving in this fashion even though he makes himself “more contemptible,” considered by Michal to be of lower social status. Though she will be shocked and disapproving, David is certain the female servants of whom Michal has spoken disparagingly will exhibit greater religious perceptivity, recognizing his zeal for the Lord and respecting him for it.

6:23 The concluding verse does not make clear if Michal remains childless because David will no longer sleep with her or because the Lord penalizes her by closing her womb: perhaps both, with the Lord working through the one to effect the other. Michal’s permanent estrangement from David is part of the withdrawal of divine favor from the household of Saul. There will be no son of David who is also a grandson of Saul and could thus unite the two dynasties.