← Contents Overview of 2 Samuel 21:1–24:25

Overview of 2 Samuel 21:1–24:25

Retrospect and Prospect

Traditionally 2 Samuel 21–24 have been treated as a miscellaneous compendium added to Samuel as an appendix. This perspective certainly reflects the fact that these chapters are composed in a variety of styles, contain diverse types of literature, and reflect different stages of David’s career. However, this assessment requires significant modification in the light of two further features. First, the sections of material have been incorporated into a carefully structured pattern. Secondly, this pattern is not mere literary artifice but reinforces a theological appraisal of David’s reign.

The framework of these chapters is chiastic, that is, it displays a concentric pattern focused around the central two sections:

  1. A. The Lord’s Anger against Israel—Saul’s Offense (21:1–14)
    1. B. David’s Warriors (21:15–22)
      1. C. David’s Praise of the Lord’s Deliverance (22:1–51)
      2. D(=C'). David’s Last Words concerning His Dynasty (23:1–7)
    2. E(=B'). David’s Warriors (23:8–39)
  2. F(=A'). The Lord’s Anger against Israel—The Offenses of Israel and David (24:1–25)

The various sections correspond both thematically and in terms of literary genre, being historical narrative, a list, and poetry, followed by the same sequence in reverse order. Moreover, each of the three types of material is present in both a long and a short form, arranged as follows:

  1. short
    1. short
      1. long
      2. short
    2. long
  2. long

The central poetic sections are linked to the other two major poetic sections in Samuel: Hannah’s prayer (1 Sam. 2:1–10) and David’s lament (2 Sam. 1:17–27). Whereas the narrative in Samuel incorporates theological reflection only indirectly, the poetic sections do so explicitly and extensively.

How, then, is David’s reign evaluated? In material drawn from throughout David’s career, it is not surprising that Saul figures largely. He is the epitome of the failed covenant king who left a grim legacy to his successors (21:1–14), who did not succeed in subduing his major enemy (21:15–22), and from whom David had to be preserved by the Lord (22:1–51). But by this time the narrator has set out both the high points of David’s rule (chs. 5–9) and the hardly less troubled legacy that he bequeaths on the nation (chs. 10–20). How are these to be combined into one overarching verdict regarding his reign? Why have his heinous failures not led to the same fate as that which befell Saul?

The answer is provided at two levels. Despite his many shortcomings, David has continued to recognize the Lord’s sovereign rule over Israel, and David’s personal accountability to him. He is prepared to confess his sin in a way that Saul was not. In the final scene of chapter 24, David is again presented as acknowledging personal failure and making preparation for the advancement of the Lord’s kingdom through building a temple. He is genuinely committed to the Lord, and so his reign, though flawed, receives divine endorsement.

More importantly, David’s dynasty survives because of the Lord’s covenant commitment to preserve it. From David’s line the Lord resolved to raise the messianic ruler who would not suffer from the faults David has exhibited. This is emphasized by the chiastic structure of this division of Samuel. The outer sections display how easily the monarchy is disrupted by sin when its kings lose sight of their divine mandate and responsibilities and instead indulge their own preferences and follow agendas dictated by political considerations. So in these sections David is presented as solving problems that have beset the nation, including those of his own making.

The intermediate sections make clear that David is no superhero, achieving this all in his own strength. He has required and received the help of the many brave men who gathered around him.

But the central sections present the ultimate key to David’s reign, as he recognizes and celebrates the Lord’s deliverance and empowering. It is from God alone that the rule of the covenant king derives its success. Implicit in this understanding is the expectation of the One to come, who would be the perfect embodiment of covenantal kingship and would be divinely equipped to establish an eternal kingdom.