2 Samuel 11-17

Points discussed

11:14-25
David’s orders to Joab (14-15) are clearly treacherous in their intent as regards Bathsheba's husband Uriah, but then the elaborate spinning of the report of the battle at Rabbah, appears a little confusing on first reading. But it is clear enough that Joab conspires with David in following his orders by ensuring that Uriah is exposed to the fiercest fighting as they lay siege to Rabbah (15-16) so that Uriah dies, along with some other ‘servants of David’ (17). 

Then the report to David of the battle with the Ammonites who came out of the city to fight, is suitably embellished to stress that the hand to hand fight outside the city was necessary although costly in terms of lives (18-21) adding, almost by the way, that ‘Your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead also.’ There is further embellishment of the report as the messenger delivers it to David in Jerusalem (22-24) which he receives with alacrity, reassuring Joab in his response that what happened was a natural consequence of war and that he should continue the campaign. So it seems clear on a close reading that Joab understands David’s agenda very well and so ensures that there is a convincing ‘cover story’ for the conspiracy against Uriah.

12:21-23
When the child to whom Bathsheba gave birth died, David, having fasted and prayed for God to spare the child while he was still alive, washed and anointed himself and ate, even though fasting and refraining from anointing were part of ordinary mourning (1 Sam. 31:13; 2 Sam. 3:35; 14:2). This explains his servants’ confusion and indicates that David trusted God’s faithfulness to lead to his eventual reunion with the child after death (23) which meant that fasting had ceased to serve a meaningful purpose.

13:1-22
This is a helpful piece from the New Bible Commentary on the rape of Tamar:

Tamar was Amnon’s half-sister. Her mother was Maacah (see 3:2–3). Marriage with a half-sister was prohibited under the law of Lv. 18:11 and Dt. 27:22. Perhaps the king had the authority to suspend this law, as Tamar suggested (13), but at any rate Amnon plainly thought marriage was impossible (2 Samuel 13:2). His lust, deceit and brutality make him a very unpleasant character—the eldest son of David, but obviously not a suitable man to rule Israel. However, the purpose of the story is not to moralize about Amnon, but to show how David’s own household produced ‘calamity’ for him, fulfilling 12:11. David was furious (21), but evidently did nothing to punish the wrongdoer. That was a bad mistake because it only increased Absalom’s understandable anger to the point of hatred.

In 20-22, the responses to the rape of Tamar by both David and Absalom can seem strange until we recall that Amnon is David's eldest son and therefore heir to the throne, while Absalom is the second oldest and next in line. David's anger did not lead to any action on his part, and it seems likely that the explanation for the inaction lies in his own guilt for sin (regarding Bathsheba) that had much in common with the sin of Amnon in the rape of Tamar. While Absalom is no doubt disgusted by David's failure to act against Amnon, his casual-sounding counsel to Tamar (20) seems calculated, suggesting that he will take matters into his own hands, as proves to be the case (23-33).

14:25-27
For specified periods of time, devout Israelites would take what was called a 'Nazirite vow' to 'separate themselves to the Lord' (Num 6:2) for personal devotion, especially prayer. For the period of the vow Nazirites would not cut their hair, which contrasts sharply with this description of Absalom who, in the context of these verses appears to let his (undoubtedly impressive) hair grow for reasons of vanity. Indeed we read later that his hair proves to be the means of his death (18:9-15). There is a striking similarity in the way that verse 25 reports Absalom's handsome appearance, with the account of Saul's appearance in 1 Sam 9:2 who proved to be the kind of king that Israel wanted, but who was rejected by God in favour of David.

14:32-33
After the murder of Amnon (13:29), Absalom fled to a place called Geshur (13:37) where he stayed for  three years. Then 14:1 tells us that the king's heart went out to Absalom. This is followed by a strange episode where Joab helps Absalom get an audience with the king, after two years in Jerusalem without being allowed into the presence of the king, no doubt because David is still conflicted about the murder of Amnon. Joab is ultimately successful, however, and Absalom meets David in an encounter which presumably represents some kind of reconciliation (although it soon becomes clear that Absalom has no loyalty to David).

15:12
It is worth noting the indicator in this verse of the ongoing collateral damage of David's sin as recorded in chapter 11. Absalom evidently knows about the family connection that allows him to induce Ahithophel to defect from his position as David's counselor and join his conspiracy to overthrow David as king (Ahithophel is the grandfather of Bathsheba - see 2 Sam 11:3 and 23:34). In the following chapter, Ahithophel's counsel regarding David's concubines (16:20-23) shows that Absalom's assessment was correct, since it was customary for a king's harem to be passed on to his successor. Absalom's laying claim to the harem in a very public way then clearly signifies his intention to take the throne of Israel from David.