2 Samuel 13

Passage

David disobeys the Lord

Egypt on the south, to the Euphrates River on the north, and on the east he conquered Edom, Moab, and Ammon, and on the north defeated the Arameans and the Syrians, including Hamath. Because of God’s gifts and help, David undoubtedly became Israel’s greatest king and greatest military genius. He was blessed with courageous men like Joab and Abishai, plus his “mighty men” (2 Sam. 23; 1 Chron. 11:10–47).

David’S Unruly Sons

We have seen in the first ten chapters of 2 Samuel how God empowered David to defeat Israel’s enemies and establish and expand the kingdom. Then David committed the sins of adultery, murder, and deception (chap. 11—12), and the rest of the book describes David wrestling with problems caused by his own children. His days are dark and disappointing, but he still depends on the Lord, and the Lord enables him to overcome and prepare the nations for the reign of his son Solomon. What life does to us depends on what life finds in us, and in David was a muscular faith in the living God.

Absalom is the chief actor in this part of the drama, for it was Absalom who helped to turn the drama into a tragedy. The three heirs to David’s throne were Amnon, David’s firstborn, Absalom, his third son, and Adonijah, who was born fourth (1 Chron. 3:1–2). God had warned David that the sword would not depart from his own household (12:10), and Absalom (which means “peaceful”) was the first to take up that sword. David’s judgment against the rich man in Nathan’s story was, “He shall restore the lamb fourfold” (12:6), and that judgment fell upon David’s own head. Bathsheba’s baby died; Absalom killed Amnon for raping Tamar; Joab killed Absalom during the battle of Mount Ephraim; and Adonijah was slain for trying to usurp the throne from Solomon (1 Kings 2:12–25).

David was reigning over Israel, but sin and death were reigning within his own family (Rom. 5:14, 17, 21). God had forgiven David’s sins (12:13), but David was discovering that the consequences of forgiven sin are very painful. God had blessed David with many sons (1 Chron. 28:5), but now the Lord would turn some of those blessings into curses (Mal. 2:1–2). “Your own wickedness will correct you, and your backslidings will rebuke you” (Jer. 2: nkjv). The events in chapters 13 and 14 unfold like a tragic symphony in five movements: from love to lust (13:1–14), from lust to hatred (13:15–22), from hatred to murder (13:23–36), from murder to exile (13:37–39), and from exile to reconciliation (14:1–23).

From love to lust

Absalom is mentioned first because chapters 13–19 focus on the “Absalom story,” and Tamar was Absalom’s full sister. Both Tamar and Absalom were noted for their physical beauty (13:1; 14:25). Their mother was Maacah, a princess from the royal house of Talmai in Geshur, a small Aramean kingdom near what we know as the Sea of Galilee. David had no doubt taken Maacah as his wife in order to establish a peace treaty with her father. The fact that Absalom had royal blood in his veins from both his father and his mother may have spurred him on in his egotistical quest for the kingdom.

Amnon was the oldest of David’s sons and the apparent heir to the throne, so perhaps he felt he had privileges that the other sons didn’t have. It was evil for him to nurture an abnormal love for his half sister and he should have stopped feeding that appetite the moment it started (Matt. 5:27–30). The sin was not only unnatural, but it violated the standard of sexual purity established by God’s law (Lev. 18:9–11; 20:17; Deut. 27:22). However, he became so infatuated with Tamar that he really thought he loved her and became ill thinking about it. The virgin princesses were kept secluded in their own quarters, apart even from their male relatives, and Amnon’s imagination worked overtime as he thought about her.

Jonadab was Amnon’s cousin, the son of David’s brother Shammah, here called Shimeah (1 Sam. 16:9), and he was a very crafty man, probably a minor official in the palace. He will show up again in 14: after Amnon has been killed by Absalom’s servants. Anybody in our lives who makes it easy for us to sin is certainly not much of a friend; in fact, by following Jonadab’s advice, Amnon ended up becoming a rapist, committing incest, and getting killed.

Amnon must have begun to recover from his “love sickness” because he had to pretend to be ill when David came to visit him. Perhaps Amnon was thinking, “If my father committed adultery and murder and got away with it, surely I can get away with rape.” Such is the destructive power of a bad example. “If the godly compromise with the wicked, it is like polluting a fountain or muddying a spring” (Prov. 25: nlt). David’s family was now polluted and the consequences would be calamitous. David was known for his wisdom and keen insight (14:17, 20), but after the “Bathsheba affair,” he seems to have lost ground. By ordering Tamar to obey her half brother’s wishes, he sent her into pain and humiliation, and when two years later David allowed Amnon to attend Absalom’s feast, he sent his firstborn to his death. David the deceiver was himself deceived!

Tamar baked the special cakes for Amnon, who asked everyone to leave so he could enjoy the meal with his sister, and then he forcibly violated her. What he thought was love was really only lust, a passion that so controlled him that he became like an animal. Of course she resisted him as long as she could. Her refusal to cooperate was based on the law of God and the responsibility of the nation of Israel to be different from their pagan neighbors (v. 12). David’s sin had given occasion to the enemy to blaspheme God (12:14). Her use of the words “folly” and “fool” (vv. 12–13) remind us of Genesis 34 and Judges 19–20, two other despicable rape scenes in Scripture. (See Gen. 34:7; Judg. 19:23–24; 20:6, 10.) Tamar tried to stall for time by suggesting that he ask the king for permission to marry her (v. 13), even though she knew that such a marriage was prohibited by the law of Moses (Lev. 18:9–11; 20:17; Deut. 27:22).

From lust to hatred

Amnon thought he loved Tamar. First he was distressed over her (vv. 1–2), and then he became ill longing for her (v. 2) even to the point of looking haggard (v. 4). But after he committed the shameful act, he hated Tamar vehemently and wanted to get rid of her! True love would never violate another person’s body just to satisfy selfish appetites, nor would true love try to persuade someone to disobey the law of God. In his sensual cravings, Amnon confused lust with love and didn’t realize that there is a fine line between selfish love (lust) and hatred. Before he sinned, he wanted Tamar all to himself, but after he sinned, he couldn’t get rid of her fast enough.

Sexual sins usually produce that kind of emotional damage. When you treat other people like things to be used, you end up throwing them aside like broken toys or old clothes. The word “woman” is not in the Hebrew text of verse 17, so Amnon was saying, “Throw this thing out!” This explains why Tamar accused Amnon of being even more cruel by casting her aside than by raping her. Having lost her virginity, Tamar was not a good prospect for marriage, and she could no longer reside in the apartments with the virgins. Where would she go? Who would take her in? Who would even want her? How could she prove that Amnon was the aggressor and that she hadn’t seduced him?

She went to the apartment of her brother Absalom, because in a polygamous society, it was the responsibility of a full brother to protect the honor of a full sister. When Absalom saw her tears, her torn garment, and the ashes on her head, he realized that she was in great pain and humiliation, and he deduced that Amnon had violated her. His question “Has that Amnon, your brother, been with you?” (v. 20 niv) reveals this, for the phrase “been with you” was a euphemism for “gone to bed with you.” Palace gossips don’t miss much, so it’s probable that Absalom heard of Amnon’s “illness” and Tamar’s intended visit to his apartment. But if Absalom was so concerned about his sister, why didn’t he warn her to stay away from Amnon? The king had ordered Tamar to visit her half brother, and Absalom’s words couldn’t change the king’s command. About all Absalom could do was caution her not to be left alone with him.

Tamar may have said that she was going to the king to tell him what happened, but her brother suggested that she wait. Why? Because Absalom’s cunning brain was already at work on a scheme that would accomplish three purposes: avenge Tamar, get rid of Amnon, and put himself next in line for the throne! His statement “He is your brother” (v. 20) means, “If it were any other man, I would avenge you immediately; but since it’s your brother, I’ll have to be patient and wait for an opportunity.” Absalom was trying to avoid a public scandal that would grieve the family and hurt his own plans to seize the throne.

King David did hear about the tragedy and became very angry, but what could he say? The memory of his own sins shut his mouth, and how could he punish his firstborn son and the heir to his throne? According to the law, if a man raped a virgin not engaged to be married, he had to pay her father a fine and marry her, and he could never divorce her (Deut. 22:28–29). However, the law also prohibited the marriage of half brothers and half sisters, so marriage was out of the question (Lev. 18:9). David had committed two capital crimes—adultery and murder—and God had not applied the law to him.

So, neither David nor Absalom said anything to Amnon about his wicked deed. In fact, Absalom never spoke to him at all (“neither good nor bad”) but simply waited for the right time to kill Amnon and avenge his sister. However, Amnon’s friend Jonadab knew that Absalom wanted to kill Amnon, for he said, “… by the intent of Absalom this has been determined since the day that he violated his sister Tamar” (13: nasb). If Jonadab figured out what was going on, perhaps others suspected something also. Amnon’s lust had turned to hatred, but now it was Absalom who was nurturing hatred in his heart, and that hatred would give birth to murder (Matt. 5:21–22). Then, with Amnon out of the way, Absalom could become king.

From hatred to murder

The French author Emile Gaboriau wrote, “Revenge is a luscious fruit which you must leave to ripen.” For two years Absalom waited to avenge the rape of his sister, but when the time came, he was ready to act. Thanks to the generosity of their father, the princes not only held government offices but they also owned lands, flocks, and herds. Absalom had his land and flocks at Baal Hazor, about fourteen miles north of Jerusalem. It was customary in Israel to arrange great feasts at sheepshearing time and invite members of the family as well as friends to share the festive occasion.

Absalom asked his father to come to the feast and bring his officials with him, but David declined, explaining that so many guests would be an unnecessary financial burden to his son. Absalom was hoping for that kind of response because he didn’t want David and his guards present when Amnon was murdered. Then he asked if David would permit his successor Amnon to attend the feast, a request that made David feel apprehensive. But David knew that the crown prince often took his place at public functions that demanded royal presence, so why couldn’t he represent the throne at Absalom’s feast? Furthermore, two years had passed since Amnon violated Tamar and Absalom hadn’t done anything against him. To guarantee some kind of safety for Amnon, David went the extra mile and permitted all the adult king’s sons to attend the feast, assuming that Absalom wouldn’t dare attack Amnon with so many of his family members present.

But during those two years, Absalom had perfected his plan and made arrangements for escape. His father David had arranged for the murder of Uriah the Hittite and had survived, so why shouldn’t his son Absalom survive? Like his father, Absalom used other hands to do the deed, and at a time when the victim least expected it. David had made Uriah drunk but had failed to achieve his purpose, while Absalom made his brother drunk and accomplished what he had set out to do. Absalom followed his father’s evil example and committed premeditated murder.

When Absalom gave the command and his servants killed Amnon, the princes at the feast fled for their lives, no doubt convinced that Absalom was planning to wipe out the royal family and take the throne. The young men mounted their mules, which were considered a “royal animal” (18:9; 1 Kings 1:33, 38, 44), and they hastened back to Jerusalem as fast as the animals could move. But Absalom also fled (vv. 34, 37) and probably his servants with him.

In verses 30–36, which are a parenthesis, we move from Baal Hazor to Jerusalem and see the escaping princes from David’s point of view. Before the guards on the wall could clearly observe the men riding furiously toward Jerusalem and recognize them as the king’s sons, a messenger arrived from Absalom’s house announcing that all the king’s sons had been slain! (Bad news travels fast and often is exaggerated.) David tore his garments and fell to the ground in grief (see 12:16), no doubt blaming himself for allowing his sons to attend Absalom’s feast. David’s nephew Jonadab, who knew more than he admitted, gave the true account that only Amnon had been killed, but even this was a terrible blow to David, for Amnon was his firstborn and heir to the throne. The fleeing princes arrived safely and everyone joined in expressing grief because Amnon was dead and Absalom was the murderer.

The problem with revenge is that it doesn’t really solve any problems and eventually turns around and hurts the perpetrator. “In taking revenge,” wrote Francis Bacon, “a man is but even with his enemy, but in passing it over, he is superior.” No one was treated more unjustly and inhumanely than Jesus Christ at His trial and crucifixion, yet He refused to retaliate, and He is our example (1 Peter 2:18–25). The old slogan “Don’t get mad—get even” may satisfy some people, but it can never be pleasing to the Lord. The Christian way is the way of forgiveness and faith, trusting the Lord to work everything out for our good and His glory (1 Peter 4:12–19).

From murder to exile

Twice we’re told that Absalom fled (vv. 34, 37), and he probably did it during the confusion that ensued when the king’s sons fled. Only Absalom and his guilty servants knew what was going to happen at the feast, so everybody else was caught unawares. They were all witnesses of the “murder most foul” and could easily testify that Absalom was guilty.

Absalom fled eighty miles northeast to the home of his maternal grandparents in Geshur, where his grandfather Talmai was king (3:3). No doubt this safe haven had been arranged beforehand, and it’s likely that Talmai would have enjoyed seeing his grandson crowned king of Israel. Back in Jerusalem, David mourned over his firstborn son Amnon, but in Geshur, the exiled son was no doubt plotting how he could take the kingdom away from his father. Normal grief heals in its time, and after three years, David was comforted concerning the death of the crown prince.

The statement “And the soul of king David longed to go forth unto Absalom” (v. 39) has been given at least two interpretations. It means either that David wanted very much to see his son again, which is understandable, or that David planned to go after Absalom and deal with him, but his anger gradually quieted down. I prefer the second interpretation. If David had really wanted Absalom back home, he could have accomplished it very easily, since Joab was for it (14:22) and David’s in-laws in Geshur would have cooperated. However, when Absalom did come home, David kept him at a distance for two years (14:28)! If the king was anxious to see his son again, he went about it in a peculiar way. It appears that a struggle was going on in David’s heart: he knew that his son deserved punishment, but David was known for being lenient with his sons (1 Kings 1:6). David initially planned to deal severely with Absalom but decided against it as his attitude changed. As explained in chapter 14, David compromised by finally bringing Absalom home, but he punished him by delaying full reconciliation. It was five years before father and son saw each other face-toface (13:38; 14:28).