TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on 2 Samuel 2 verses 8–17
Here is, I. A rivalship between two kings - David, whom God made king, and Ishbosheth, whom Abner made king. One would have thought, when Saul was slain, and all his sons that had sense and spirit enough to take the field with him, David would come to the throne without any opposition, since all Israel knew, not only how he had signalized himself, but how manifestly God had designated him to it; but such a spirit of contradiction is there, in the devices of men, to the counsels of God, that such a weak and silly thing as Ishbosheth, who was not thought fit to go with his father to the battle, shall yet be thought fit to succeed him in the government, rather than David shall come peaceably to it. Herein David's kingdom was typical of the Messiah's, against which the heathens rage and the rulers take counsel, Psa 2:1, Psa 2:2. 1. Abner was the person who set up Ishbosheth in competition with David, perhaps in his zeal for the lineal succession (since they must have a king like the nations, in this they must be like them, that the crown must descend from father to son), or rather in his affection to his own family and relations (for he was Saul's uncle), and because he had no other way to secure to himself the post of honour he was in, as captain of the host. See how much mischief the pride and ambition of one man may be the occasion of. Ishbosheth would never have set up himself if Abner had not set him up, and made a tool of him to serve his own purposes. 2. Mahanaim, the place where he first made his claim, was on the other side Jordan, where it was thought David had the least interest, and being at a distance from his forces they might have time to strengthen themselves. But having set up his standard there, the unthinking people of all the tribes of Israel (that is, the generality of them) submitted to him (Sa2 2:9), and Judah only was entirely for David. This was a further trial of the faith of David in the promise of God, and of his patience, whether he could wait God's time for the performance of that promise. 3. Some difficulty there is about the time of the continuance of this competition. David reigned about seven years over Judah only (Sa2 2:11), and yet (Sa2 2:10) Ishbosheth reigned over Israel but two years: before those two years, or after, or both, it was in general for the house of Saul (Sa2 3:6), and not any particular person of that house, that Abner declared. Or these two years he reigned before the war broke out (Sa2 2:12), which continued long, even the remaining five years, Sa2 3:1.
II. An encounter between their two armies.
1.It does not appear that either side brought their whole force into the field, for the slaughter was but small, Sa2 2:30, Sa2 2:31. We may wonder, (1.) That the men of Judah did not appear and act more vigorously for David, to reduce all the nation into obedience to him; but, it is likely, David would not suffer them to act offensively, choosing rather to wait till the thing would do itself or rather till God would do it for him, without the effusion of Israelitish blood; for to him, as a type of Christ, that was very precious, Psa 72:14. Even those that were his adversaries he looked upon as his subjects, and would treat them accordingly. (2.) That the men of Israel could in a manner stand neuter, and sit down tamely under Ishbosheth, for so many years, especially considering what characters many of the tribes displayed at this time (as we find, Ch1 12:23, etc.): Wise men, mighty men, men of valour, expert in war, and not of double heart, and yet for seven years together, for aught that appears, most of them seemed indifferent in whose hand the public administration was. Divine Providence serves its own purposes by the stupidity of men at some times and the activity of the same persons at other times; they are unlike themselves, and yet the motions of Providence are uniform.
2.In this battle Abner was the aggressor. David sat still to see how the matter would fall, but the house of Saul, and Abner at the head of it, gave the challenge, and they went by the worst. Therefore go not forth hastily to strive, nor be forward to begin quarrels, lest thou know not what to do in the end thereof, Pro 25:8. A fool's lips and hands enter into contention.
3.The seat of the war was Gibeon. Abner chose it because it was in the lot of Benjamin, where Saul had the most friends; yet, since he offered battle, Joab, David's general, would not decline it, but there joined issue with him, and met him by the pool of Gibeon, Sa2 2:13. David's cause, being built upon God's promise, feared not the disadvantages of the ground. The pool between them gave both sides time to deliberate.
4.The engagement was at first proposed by Abner, and accepted by Joab, to be between twelve and twelve of a side. (1.) It should seem this trial of skill began in sport. Abner made the motion (Sa2 2:14): Let the young men arise and play before us, as gladiators. Perhaps Saul had used his men to these barbarous pastimes, like a tyrant indeed, and Abner had learnt of him to make a jest of wounds and death and divert himself with the scenes of blood and horror. He meant, "Let them fight before us," when he said, "Let them play before us." Fools thus make a mock at sin. but he is unworthy the name of a man that can be thus prodigal of human blood, that can thus throw about firebrands, arrows, and death, and say, Am not I in sport? Pro 26:18, Pro 26:19. Joab, having been bred up under David, had so much wisdom as not to make such a proposal, yet had not resolution enough to resist and gainsay it when another made it; for he stood upon a point of honour, and thought it a blemish to his reputation to refuse a challenge, and therefore said, Let them arise; not that he was fond of the sport, or expected that the duels would be decisive, but he would not be hectored by his antagonist. How many precious lives have thus been sacrificed to the caprices of proud men! Twelve of each side were accordingly called out as champions to enter the lists, a double jury of life and death, not of others', but their own; and the champions on Abner's side seem to have been most forward, for they took the field first (Sa2 2:15), having perhaps been bred up in a foolish ambition thus to serve the humour of their commander-in-chief. But, (2.) However it began, it ended in blood (Sa2 2:16): They thrust every man his sword into his fellow's side (spurred on by honour, not by enmity); so they fell down together, that is, all the twenty-four were slain, such an equal match were they for one another, and so resolute, that neither side would either beg or give quarter; they did as it were by agreement (says Josephus) dispatch one another with mutual wounds. Those that strike at other men's lives often throw away their own and death only conquers and rides in triumph. The wonderful obstinacy of both sides was remembered in the name given to the place: Heldath-hazzurim - the field of rocky men, men that were not only strong in body, but of firm and unshaken constancy, that stirred not at the sight of death. Yet the stout-hearted were spoiled, and slept their sleep, Psa 76:5. Poor honour for men to purchase at so vast an expense! Those that lose their lives for Christ shall find them.
5.The whole army at length engaged, and Abner's forces were routed, Sa2 2:17. The former was a drawn battle, in which all were killed on both sides, and therefore they must put it upon another trial, in which (as it often happens) those that gave the challenge went away with loss. David had God on his side; his side therefore was victorious.
Continue studying 2 Samuel 2:13 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
Second Samuel 2:13 meticulously details the initial, tense encounter between the forces loyal to David, under the command of his formidable nephew Joab, and the soldiers supporting Ish-bosheth, Saul's son, led by Abner. This verse precisely captures the convergence of these two opposing military factions at the strategically important pool of Gibeon, where they deliberately position themselves on opposite sides. This calculated standoff vividly highlights the profound political and military schism that had gripped Israel, setting the immediate and perilous stage for the "deadly game" that swiftly ensues and the ensuing protracted civil war for the unified kingdom's control.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse is strategically placed at a pivotal moment in the unfolding narrative of 2 Samuel, immediately following the establishment of two rival kingships in Israel. David, divinely chosen and anointed, has been crowned king over Judah in Hebron, fulfilling the Lord's promise to establish his dynasty (2 Samuel 2:4). Simultaneously, Abner, the influential commander of Saul's former army, has taken Saul's son, Ish-bosheth, and installed him as king over the northern tribes of Israel, thereby creating a divided kingdom (2 Samuel 2:8). 2 Samuel 2:13 serves as the physical manifestation of this political fragmentation, as the two armies come face-to-face. It acts as the direct prelude to the "deadly game" proposed by Abner in 2 Samuel 2:14, an event that rapidly escalates into a full-scale battle, further entrenching the animosity and defining the early, bloody stages of the civil war that will ultimately pave the way for David's ascent to undisputed power.
Historical & Cultural Context: The period immediately following the death of King Saul was marked by a significant political vacuum and widespread instability throughout Israel. David, despite being divinely chosen and anointed, faced the formidable challenge of consolidating his authority over all twelve tribes. Abner, a powerful and deeply loyal figure from Saul's court, was determined to preserve the legacy of Saul's house by installing Ish-bosheth, a seemingly weaker and more pliable figurehead, as king over the northern territories. The "pool of Gibeon" was not merely a geographical marker but a well-known and strategically vital location in ancient Israel. Gibeon, an important Hivite city that later became a Levitical city, possessed a large and impressive pool—a crucial water source in a generally arid region. This made it a natural gathering point or a recognized site for military encounters. The deliberate act of "sitting down" on opposite sides, rather than immediately engaging in combat, suggests a formal, almost ritualistic, preparation for conflict, reflecting the structured nature of ancient military confrontations and the importance of establishing clear positions before the commencement of hostilities.
Key Themes: 2 Samuel 2:13 powerfully illustrates several profound themes central to the overarching narrative of 2 Samuel. Firstly, it starkly highlights the escalation of conflict and the tragic reality of civil war tearing apart God's chosen nation. The physical standoff at the pool vividly portrays the deep division and hostile opposition between the two factions vying for the throne, a conflict that will consume Israel for years. Secondly, the verse underscores the persistent theme of a divided kingdom, where God's anointed king is not yet universally recognized, leading inevitably to internal strife and bloodshed. This division is not merely political but also reflects a spiritual schism, as a significant portion of the nation resists God's clear anointing of David. Lastly, the prominent presence of Joab, David's formidable military commander, and his loyal "servants" emphasizes the crucial theme of loyalty and leadership. Joab's unwavering commitment signifies David's strong military backing and the steadfastness of his men, highlighting the foundational strength upon which David's eventual consolidation of power over all Israel would ultimately be built. The events here foreshadow the long and often bloody path to national unity under David's reign, as described in 2 Samuel 5.
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The narrative in 2 Samuel 2:13 masterfully employs several potent literary devices to convey its profound meaning and heighten the dramatic tension. Foreshadowing is prominently featured, as the deliberate "sitting down" on opposite sides of the pool immediately precedes and sets the chilling stage for the deadly "game" proposed by Abner in the very next verse, which will inevitably lead to significant bloodshed. This calm before the storm creates a palpable sense of impending doom and tragedy. Symbolism is also powerfully at play, with the "pool of Gibeon" serving as far more than just a geographical location; it becomes a potent symbol of the deep and unnatural division within Israel. A source of life-giving water is tragically transformed into a boundary line for conflict, reflecting the perversion of national unity into destructive civil strife. Furthermore, the explicit juxtaposition of "the one on the one side... and the other on the other side" is a clear and effective use of antithesis, powerfully emphasizing the absolute separation, opposition, and irreconcilable differences between the forces loyal to David and those loyal to Ish-bosheth, thereby highlighting the fractured and perilous state of the nation.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
The standoff at the pool of Gibeon, while a specific historical event, carries profound theological weight. It serves as a stark and sobering reminder of the tragic consequences of human resistance to divine will and the inherently destructive nature of internal division. Despite God's clear anointing of David as king over all Israel, human ambition, political maneuvering, and a misguided loyalty to a fallen dynasty (Saul's house) led to a protracted and bloody civil war. This conflict highlights the enduring tension between God's sovereign plan and human free will, demonstrating how even within the covenant community, disobedience, self-interest, and a failure to discern God's chosen path can lead to immense suffering and significantly delay the fulfillment of divine promises. The scene underscores the critical importance of recognizing and submitting to God's appointed leadership, even when it challenges established norms, personal loyalties, or comfortable traditions. It also powerfully prefigures the later, devastating divisions within Israel, culminating in the split kingdom after Solomon's reign—a recurring biblical theme of disunity and decline when God's people deviate from His righteous path.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The scene at the pool of Gibeon offers a powerful and sobering reflection on the origins and escalation of conflict, both on a grand national scale and within our personal lives and communities. It reminds us that significant disputes often begin not with immediate violence, but with a tense standoff, where opposing parties are clearly demarcated, whether physically or ideologically, and poised for confrontation. The chilling image of "sitting down" on opposite sides is a vivid portrayal of entrenched positions, where open dialogue has ceased and the threat of violence looms large. This serves as a profound warning about the dangers of allowing divisions to fester, harden into irreconcilable opposition, and ultimately erupt into destructive conflict. For believers today, this passage issues a compelling call to be peacemakers, to actively seek reconciliation and understanding rather than allowing differences to escalate into destructive strife within families, communities, or the church. It challenges us to critically examine our own loyalties and ensure they are ultimately aligned with God's perfect will and kingdom purposes, rather than with personal ambition, tribalism, or worldly allegiances that can lead to division and bloodshed.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did they "sit down" rather than immediately fight?
Answer: The act of "sitting down" on opposite sides of the pool suggests a deliberate, formal, and perhaps even ritualistic preparation for conflict, rather than an immediate, chaotic skirmish. In ancient warfare, such positioning could be a way to survey the opposing forces, to issue challenges (as Abner indeed does in 2 Samuel 2:14), or to establish the terms of engagement. It highlights the gravity of the situation and the fact that this was not a casual encounter but a pre-arranged or highly anticipated confrontation between two organized military factions. This formal "sitting down" also specifically sets the stage for the unique "game" proposed by Abner, which required a structured arrangement of combatants before the deadly contest began.
What was the significance of the "pool of Gibeon"?
Answer: The "pool of Gibeon" was a well-known and strategically important landmark in ancient Israel. Gibeon itself was a significant city, and its large, deep pool (an impressive natural or artificial reservoir) would have been an absolutely vital source of water in the arid region. Its prominence and accessibility made it a natural gathering point or a recognized location for military maneuvers and confrontations. By meeting at such a public and identifiable place, the confrontation gained a certain level of formality and visibility, underscoring the public and national nature of the civil war between the houses of David and Saul. It tragically transforms a life-sustaining resource into a stage for death and division, highlighting the profound irony and sorrow of the conflict. The archaeological remains of this impressive pool are still visible today, confirming its historical existence and scale, adding to the tangible reality of this biblical account.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The tragic scene at the pool of Gibeon, with its stark imagery of a divided people poised for self-destruction, finds its ultimate contrast and glorious fulfillment in the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ. While Joab and Abner led opposing factions into a bloody civil war, Jesus came not to divide but to unite, to bring profound peace where there was deep enmity. He is the true King, the Prince of Peace, who actively breaks down dividing walls, rather than creating them. The "pool" of Gibeon symbolized division and impending death, but in Christ, we find the living water that brings eternal life and true reconciliation. His sacrificial death on the cross was the ultimate act of peace-making, reconciling estranged humanity to a holy God and profoundly breaking down the dividing wall of hostility not only between Jew and Gentile but between all who are brought into saving relationship with Him. Unlike the temporary, often violent, and ultimately insufficient solutions of human leaders like Joab, Christ establishes an everlasting kingdom of peace and righteousness, where those who were once on "opposite sides" are now miraculously one in Him. He is the King who truly unites His people, not through conflict and bloodshed, but through His reconciling love, His atoning sacrifice, and the transformative power of His indwelling Spirit.