2 Samuel 24:1-10; 1 Chronicles 21:1-8
After David had secured his reign over all Israel and greatly expanded his rule over neighboring nations, he commissioned Joab, the commander of his army, to “count the people of Israel and Judah.” Though Scripture does not explicitly state the reason for this order, the report that Joab provided to David nearly ten months later at the conclusion of the census makes his intentions clear: David was seeking a tally of all troops he had at his disposal throughout his kingdom. Joab initially resisted David’s order, and after the census was completed David was stricken with guilt over his actions, and ultimately the Lord punished Israel for David’s census. Yet nowhere in Scripture is the counting of troops clearly condemned. In fact, during the Israelites’ wanderings in the wilderness the Lord commanded two different censuses to be taken of Israel’s troops (Numbers 1; 26), and many of the accounts of Israel’s battles throughout the Old Testament include a careful tally of the troops involved, so it must have been normal practice to take a census such as David commissioned. Most scholars explain this discrepancy by inferring that Joab and others must have discerned that David was wrongly looking to military might instead of the Lord’s promise to fight for his people (Deuteronomy 20:1-4) or that he was disobeying the law by including those under twenty years of age (see Exodus 30:11-16; 1 Chronicles 27:23-24). While this may be true, it does not fully explain what this author has found to be a curious peculiarity about David’s census: The census takers do not appear to have traveled hardly anywhere within the core settlement areas of Israel or Judah. Instead, the census takers followed a route almost entirely along the perimeter of Israel’s core area of initial settlement, as shown on this map. They started out at Aroer and “the town in the middle of the gorge,” probably referring to modern Mudaynet as-Saliya in the Arnon Gorge (see also Deuteronomy 2:36; Joshua 13:9, 16), which were located at the far corner of Israel’s allotted land. Then they headed north to Jazer and Gilead, likely following the King’s Highway, which ran along the outer edge of Israel’s lands. Then they came to Tahtim-hodshi, which this author suspects is referring to the “lowlands of Kedesh.” The Israelite city of Kedesh was situated among the hills of upper Galilee, but just to the east of it lay a valley occupied primarily by the people of Maacah, who fought against and were defeated by David earlier in his reign. Then the census takers traveled to Dan, which is often cited along with Beersheba as marking the distant boundary of Israel (Judges 20:1; 1 Samuel 3:20; 2 Samuel 3:10; 17:11; 1 Chronicles 21:2), and on to Sidon and Tyre. The Bible never indicates that Sidon and Tyre were subdued by David, but he appears to have wielded considerable influence over Tyre (2 Samuel 5:11; 1 Chronicles 14:1; see also 1 Kings 5:2-11) and perhaps over Sidon as well. After this the census takers went to all the cities of the Hivites and Canaanites, likely indicating that they traveled through the coastal lands along the Mediterranean Sea. Lastly, they completed their route at the city of Beersheba in the Negev. This route along the perimeter of Israel’s core settlement areas suggests that, while David’s census takers were no doubt collecting troop information from the tribes of Israel (see 1 Chronicles 21:5-6), their primary focus appears to have been on David’s newly acquired lands, which would have been largely comprised of non-Israelites. This theory may also be supported by 2 Chronicles 2:17, which notes that “Solomon counted all the resident aliens who were in the land of Israel, after the census of them that David his father had taken.” Thus, this author suspects that Joab may have been urging David not to rely on troops from these non-Israelites to protect Israel and instead called upon the Lord to increase the number of “the people” (perhaps meaning the Israelite people) a hundredfold. At the same time, however, the biblical account of the census takers’ route never uses any of the names for the subdued nations (e.g., Moab, Ammon, Aram, Maacah, Philistia, etc.), though it does use vague references to “Canaanites” and “Hivites.” This may reflect a tension that existed at the time between David’s efforts to integrate these new lands into one great empire (thus explaining the aversion to identifying people by their former national affiliation) and the convictions of those like Joab, who may have been opposed to such integration.
⤓ download hi-res file 🔍 see in TimeGlider
David Defeats the Ammonites and the Arameans
2 Samuel 8:1-8; 10:1-19; 12:21-31; 1 Chronicles 18:2-11; 19:1-19; 20:1-3
The accounts of David’s greatest military victories stand like bookends around the record of David’s most grievous sins. Sometime after David brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem and the Lord promised to establish his dynasty over Israel, David achieved a series of victories over virtually all of Israel’s neighboring nations. These began with David’s capture of Metheg-ammah (likely Gath) and all of Philistia and was followed by his victory over Moab. Then Nahash king of Ammon died, and David sent envoys to express his condolences to Nahash’s son Hanun, who had now become king. Hanun, however, intentionally humiliated David’s envoys, shaving off half their beards and cutting off the bottom half of their garments before sending them back to Israel. When David heard of it, he sent word to his envoys to remain at Jericho until their beards grew back. In the meantime, the Ammonites called upon several Aramean nations to help them fight against Israel, which was likely their original intent for humiliating David’s envoys. Warriors came from Beth-rehob and Zobah, which lay between Israel and Hamath farther north, as well as from Maacah (see “Geshur and Maacah” map) and Tob. The writer of 1 Chronicles also notes that soldiers came from Mesopotamia as well. David sent his commander Joab to fight this coalition at Rabbah. The writer of 1 Chronicles consistently speaks of the battle occurring at Medeba, rather than Rabbah, but the town of Medeba south of Heshbon seems an unlikely location for the battle. Perhaps Rabbah was also referred to at times as Medeba. In any case, Joab and his brother Abishai divided their forces into two groups, with Joab leading the fight against the Arameans to the north and Abishai leading the fight against the Ammonites just outside the gates of Rabbah. As Joab advanced, the Arameans fled, which in turn led the Ammonites to retreat behind the walls of Rabbah. After this Joab (and probably his forces) returned home to Israel. But the Arameans regrouped and added more troops from Aramean nations beyond the Euphrates River. David met them in battle at Helam (likely modern Alma) and won a great victory over them, even killing their commander Shobah (or Shophach). After this the Arameans made peace with Israel. Sometime later David also subjugated the Edomites, who lived to the south of Moab. It was likely sometime after this that David engaged in adultery with the wife of Uriah, one of his own valiant warriors (see “David’s Mighty Men” map), and then he tried to cover up his sin by arranging for Uriah’s death in battle. His sin was later exposed by Nathan the prophet, and David repented. After this Joab returned to Rabbah to finish capturing the city, and when victory was close at hand he called for David to come and finish taking the city. Thus the Ammonites became subject to Israel as well. From all these conquered nations David took many spoils and dedicated them to the Lord’s service, including great amounts of bronze from the towns of Tebah (also called Betah and Tibhath), Berothai, and Cun.
The Battle with the Ammonites and the Arameans
⤓ download hi-res file 🔍 see in TimeGlider
The Battle with the Arameans
Does Bible Geography Matter?
If you are reading this post, chances are you already understand the importance of understanding context–particularly Bible geography–when reading the Bible. But the value of knowing Bible geography is often difficult to convey to others, because they are not yet aware of all that they are missing when they read the Bible without a sense of where it took place. So to help make this gap in understanding more evident to others and demonstrate the value of knowing context, I have written a short story below. The story is recounted twice, with the first rendition containing no real meaningful geographical references. The second rendition is exactly the same as the first, except that meaningful place names (at least for those familiar with the United States today) have been substituted for the names that lacked real meaning in the first rendition.
Story without Meaningful Context:
One day a passenger train was traveling from Alpha City to Bravo City. Soon after the train passed beyond Charlie City, however, it slowed to a stop, and the conductor announced that the train had broken down and would not be able to take the passengers to their final destination. He assured them that alternate transportation would be arranged for them but that it would not arrive for several hours. The passengers soon began to react to the news. A well dressed man from Alpha City immediately pulled out his phone to make other arrangements but quickly realized there was no mobile phone service this far outside the city. Then he snapped, “There’s no way I’m staying on this train any longer,” so he stepped off the train to begin walking back to Charlie City. But it didn’t take long for him to realize that this was not a good plan for him. A woman from Delta City frantically exclaimed, “But casting starts tomorrow morning! This could mean millions of dollars lost!” A man from Echo City sanctimoniously assured everyone, “You can be sure I will be taking action in Echo City about these deplorable traveling conditions!” A man from Pretendia, however, simply picked up his luggage, jumped down from the train, and non-chalantly began the long trek back to Charlie City.
So what did you think about the story?
Why did each of the people react the way they did?
Is there a discernable “punchline” at the end of the story?
Would you consider this a very interesting or meaningful story?
David Transports the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem
2 Samuel 6; 1 Chronicles 13
Perhaps no other event in David’s life demonstrates his zealous love for God than his efforts to move the Ark from Kiriath-jearim to Jerusalem. The story takes place about twenty years after the Ark had been captured by the Philistines but was later returned to Israel, where it was kept at Kiriath-jearim (1 Samuel 6:1-7:2; see “The Ark of the Covenant Is Captured and Returned” map). The Tabernacle and altar appear to have been relocated to the High Place of Gibeon/Gibeah after the Philistines overran Shiloh as well (1 Kings 3:4; 1 Chronicles 16:39-40; 21:29). By this time David had secured his grip on the throne of all Israel and had established Jerusalem (also called the City of David) as his new capital, and he wished to bring the Ark into it. So David called together all the leaders of Israel and placed the Ark on a new cart, and they all danced before the Lord as the Ark was brought from Kiriath-jearim to Jerusalem. When the Ark reached the threshing floor of Nacon (1 Chronicles 13:9 calls him “Chidon”), the oxen stumbled, and a man named Uzzah, who was helping to move the Ark, reached out to steady the Ark. The Lord immediately struck Uzzah dead for touching the Ark, and after this David was angry and afraid of the Lord. David called the place Perez-uzzah, meaning “bursting forth against Uzzah”. This parallels an earlier instance (or perhaps later; see 2 Samuel 5:20; 1 Chronicles 14:11) when David named a place Baal-perazim, meaning “the Lord of bursting forth,” because the Lord had enabled him to win a battle against the Philistines (2 Samuel 5; 23:13-17 ; 1 Chronicles 11:15-19; 14:10-17; also see map “David Defeats the Philistines in the Valley of Rephaim”). In both cases, David may have been using the term for “bursting forth” as a double entendre to describe both the actions of the Lord and the presence of springs in the area. If so, this author has found that a good candidate for Perez-uzzah is located just to the north of what was likely ancient Mozah, because there are multiple springs in the area, including one at the top of the hill that may have been the location of the threshing floor of Nacon. After Uzzah’s death, the Ark was temporarily taken to the house of Obed-edom, presumeably located nearby, for three months. Though the Lord’s actions against Uzzah might seem harsh to the modern reader, especially given David’s desire to honor the Lord through his efforts, the biblical writers provide clues as to why the Lord must have responded as he did. By noting that the Ark was put on a “new cart,” just as the Philistines had done when they returned the Ark (1 Samuel 6:7), the writers were likely indicating that David was going about his efforts in a pagan way instead of in accordance with God’s commands for transporting the Ark, which required that it be carried with poles (Numbers 4:15; also see 1 Chronicles 15:12–15). This is underscored by David’s renewed–and successful–efforts to transport the Ark again, this time using poles (note “those who bore the Ark of the Lord” in 2 Samuel 6:13) and making sacrifices along the way. David and all Israel danced and shouted as the Ark made its way to Jerusalem, with David wearing only a linen ephod, essentially an undergarment. After the Ark arrived in the city, David placed it in a tent and offered sacrifices to the Lord. But David’s wife Michal sarcastically noted that David had “honored” himself that day by uncovering himself before all the young servant girls. David responded by insisting that he was willing to abase himself even further to worship the Lord.
David Strengthens Southern Judah
1 Samuel 27-30
The Bible makes it clear that David was specially chosen and raised up by God to be Israel’s next king (1 Samuel 16:1-13), but Scripture also makes it clear that David’s rise to power came about through several shrewd maneuvers on his part. Among these shrewd maneuvers were David’s clandestine attacks on hostile peoples to the south of Judah and his distribution of Amalekite plunder among the towns of southern Judah. These actions by David strengthened southern Judah against their enemies and no doubt cemented Judah’s loyalty to him as a champion for their well-being. It should be noted that the Bible affirms King Saul’s effectiveness at attacking Israel’s enemies (1 Samuel 14:47-52), especially the Philistines, but various character flaws and bad choices by Saul led to God’s selection of David as the one who would replace Saul as king (1 Samuel 13:1-23; 15:1-35). Because of this, Saul grew jealous of David and sought to kill him, forcing David to seek refuge among various towns throughout Judah and even in Philistia (1 Samuel 16-27). After seeking asylum in Gath for a time, David asked King Achish if he could move his family outside of the city, and Achish gave him the border town of Ziklag. Apparently Achish still tried to keep tabs on David’s activities, however, periodically asking him where he had recently raided. David would answer that he had been raiding the Negev of Judah, the Negev of the Jerahmeelites (see 1 Chronicles 2:42), or the Negev of the Kenites (Judges 1:16; see “Saul Attacks the Amalekites” map), which were inhabited by people loyal to Israel. In reality, however, David had been raiding the Amalekites (longtime enemies of Israel; see Genesis 14:7; Exodus 17; Numbers 13:29; 14:45; Deuteronomy 25:17-19), the Geshurites, and the Girzites. These peoples lived to the south of Israel’s territory and along the Way to Shur leading to Egypt. Soon after this King Achish mustered his men at Aphek to head to battle against the Israelites in the Jezreel Valley further north. As they set off for battle and the other Philistine rulers realized David and his men were accompanying them, the rulers protested and insisted that David would turn on them in battle. So Achish sent David home and continued on to Jezreel. When David and his men arrived at Ziklag, they found that Amalekites had burned the town and carried off their wives and children. David and his men set out to attack the Amalekites and recover their families. When they reached the Besor Brook, two hundred of the men were too exhausted to go on and stayed with the other equipment while the remaining four hundred men continued toward Amalek. Along the way, David’s men found an abandoned Egyptian slave of the Amalekites who had participated in the attack on Ziklag and on other locations in southern Judah. The man led David’s men to the Amalekite camp, and then they attacked the Amalekites and retrieved all the captives and plunder that had been taken. Only four hundred Amalekites were able to escape, fleeing on camels. David’s men then rejoined their fellow warriors at the Besor Brook and returned to Ziklag. David sent some of the plunder to the leaders of Ziklag as well as to other towns where David had roamed during the time when he was fleeing from Saul. Many of these towns were located in territory formerly inhabited by Amalekites (Numbers 13:29; 14:25, 43-45; Judges 1:16; see also Judges 12:15) and were likely among those attacked by the Amalekites and other hostile peoples to the south. After this, the Amalekites are only mentioned again in Scripture to note that David killed an Amalekite who himself had killed Saul (to fulfill what Saul requested of him), to note that Amalekite plunder was among the treasures that David dedicated to the Temple of the Lord (2 Samuel 8:9-12), and to recount how in the days of Hezekiah some Simeonites went to Mount Seir and destroyed the remnant of Amalekites that had survived (1 Chronicles 4:42-43).
