Skip to content
Translation
King James Version
Let it rest on the head of Joab, and on all his father's house; and let there not fail from the house of Joab one that hath an issue, or that is a leper, or that leaneth on a staff, or that falleth on the sword, or that lacketh bread.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Let it rest H2342 on the head H7218 of Joab H3097, and on all his father's H1 house H1004; and let there not fail H3772 from the house H1004 of Joab H3097 one that hath an issue H2100, or that is a leper H6879, or that leaneth H2388 on a staff H6418, or that falleth H5307 on the sword H2719, or that lacketh H2638 bread H3899.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
Let it fall on the head of Yo'av and all his father's family. May Yo'av's family always have someone with a hemorrhage or tzara'at, or who has to walk with a cane, or who dies by the sword or who lacks food."
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
May it whirl over the heads of Joab and the entire house of his father, and may the house of Joab never be without one having a discharge or skin disease, or one who leans on a staff or falls by the sword or lacks food.”
Ask
American Standard Version
let it fall upon the head of Joab, and upon all his father’s house; and let there not fail from the house of Joab one that hath an issue, or that is a leper, or that leaneth on a staff, or that falleth by the sword, or that lacketh bread.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
Let it fall on the head of Joab, and on all his father’s house. Let there not fail from the house of Joab one who has an issue, or who is a leper, or who leans on a staff, or who falls by the sword, or who lacks bread.”
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
Let the blood fall on the head of Ioab, and on all his fathers house, that the house of Ioab be neuer without some that haue running issues, or leper, or that leaneth on a staffe, or that doeth fall on the sworde, or that lacketh bread.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
it doth stay on the head of Joab, and on all the house of his father, and there is not cut off from the house of Joab one having an issue, and leprous, and laying hold on a staff, and falling by a sword, and lacking bread.'
Ask
See on the biblical-era map
City Plan: Jerusalem in the Time of David
City Plan: Jerusalem in the Time of David View full PDF
Wars Between the Houses of David and Saul
Wars Between the Houses of David and Saul View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 8,111 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

2 Samuel 3:29 records King David's profound and severe imprecation pronounced upon Joab and his entire household. This curse is a direct consequence of Joab's treacherous and politically damaging murder of Abner, the commander of Ish-bosheth's army. David's public denunciation, coupled with the specific afflictions invoked—ranging from ritual impurity and physical infirmity to violent death and economic destitution—serves to unequivocally dissociate David and his nascent kingdom from the bloodguilt of Abner's death, underscoring the king's deep distress and his unwavering commitment to justice in the face of such heinous treachery.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse is strategically placed at a pivotal moment in David's consolidation of power over all Israel. Abner, a formidable general who had previously led the army of Saul's son Ish-bosheth, had recently initiated a defection to David, pledging to unite all Israel under David's kingship, a promise explicitly stated in 2 Samuel 3:21. This alliance represented a crucial turning point, poised to bring an end to the protracted civil war between the house of Saul and the house of David. However, Joab, David's own chief military commander, ambushed and murdered Abner in Hebron, ostensibly to avenge the death of his brother Asahel, whom Abner had killed in self-defense during an earlier skirmish (2 Samuel 2:23). David was utterly horrified by this act, recognizing that it not only violated a sacred peace agreement but also stained his burgeoning reign with bloodguilt, potentially alienating the very tribes Abner was bringing into his fold. David's immediate and public response, which included this potent curse, his heartfelt mourning, and his public fasting (2 Samuel 3:31-35), was essential to demonstrate his innocence, maintain his moral authority, and prevent the bloodguilt from adhering to his throne.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: In ancient Israel, the shedding of innocent blood (Hebrew: דָּמִים, damim) was considered an egregious offense that profoundly defiled the land and necessitated atonement, often through the execution of the perpetrator or, in cases of an unknown murderer, through specific communal rituals (Deuteronomy 21:1-9). A king bore a solemn responsibility to ensure justice and prevent such defilement within his realm. The curse pronounced by David in this verse profoundly reflects the concept of corporate responsibility, a pervasive cultural norm where the actions of an individual, particularly a prominent family head, could bring severe consequences upon the entire household or lineage. The specific afflictions enumerated—"issue," "leper," "leaneth on a staff," "falleth on the sword," "lacketh bread"—were not arbitrary. They constitute a comprehensive catalogue of physical ailments, social ostracization, economic destitution, and violent death, all of which were widely regarded as visible manifestations of divine displeasure and rendered individuals ritually unclean or socially marginalized within ancient Israelite society (Leviticus 13 and Leviticus 15).
  • Key Themes: This verse powerfully contributes to several overarching themes within the book of 2 Samuel and the broader Deuteronomistic History. Firstly, it starkly illustrates the Consequences of Sin and Bloodguilt, emphasizing that acts of treachery and murder carry severe, far-reaching repercussions that extend beyond the immediate perpetrator to impact generations. Joab's private act of vengeance has profound public and generational consequences, demonstrating that actions have pervasive effects. Secondly, it underscores David's Moral Integrity and Quest for Justice. Despite Joab being his nephew and a fiercely loyal, albeit ruthless, commander, David publicly condemns his actions, seeking to distance his reign from the taint of injustice and uphold his reputation as a king committed to righteousness (2 Samuel 3:36-39). This act reinforces the theme of Divine Justice, as David's curse is an appeal to God to bring appropriate retribution upon Joab's house for the innocent blood shed. Finally, the verse profoundly touches upon the ancient Israelite understanding of Corporate Responsibility, where the family unit was perceived as a collective entity, and the actions of one member could significantly influence the destiny of the entire lineage, a concept also evident in the blessings promised to righteous families (Genesis 12:3) and the curses upon wicked ones (Exodus 20:5).

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • Rest (Hebrew, חִיל chûwl', H2342): This word, while often meaning "to twist or whirl" (as in labor pains or dancing), here carries the sense of something settling, taking hold, or being firmly established upon someone. In the context of a curse, it implies that the guilt and its consequences are not fleeting but are to be permanently affixed to and borne by Joab and his descendants. It signifies the lasting, inescapable nature of the judgment David invokes.
  • House (Hebrew, בַּיִת bayith', H1004): Beyond a mere physical dwelling, bayith denotes the entire household, encompassing the family, lineage, or dynasty. In ancient Israelite society, the "house" was the foundational social, economic, and political unit, carrying collective identity, honor, and responsibility. David's curse on "all his father's house" signifies a comprehensive, generational judgment, impacting not just Joab but his future descendants and relatives, ensuring that the shame, suffering, and degradation would be a perpetual mark on his entire lineage.
  • Issue (Hebrew, זוּב zûwb', H2100): This term refers to a chronic bodily discharge, such as a persistent flow of bodily fluids or a venereal disease. According to Mosaic Law (Leviticus 15:2-15), a person with an "issue" was rendered ritually unclean, necessitating purification rites and temporary exclusion from the community and temple worship. Its inclusion in the curse implies a state of perpetual ritual impurity, social ostracization, and a visible sign of divine displeasure and degradation, rendering Joab's descendants unfit for full participation in the communal and religious life of the covenant people.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Let it rest on the head of Joab, and on all his father's house;": This opening clause functions as the direct and potent imprecation, explicitly naming Joab as the primary recipient of the curse, but immediately extending its reach to encompass his entire patriarchal lineage. The phrase "rest on the head" vividly signifies that the guilt of Abner's murder and its devastating consequences are to be fully borne by and affixed to them, indicating a comprehensive and inescapable judgment for the bloodguilt incurred.
  • "and let there not fail from the house of Joab one that hath an issue, or that is a leper, or that leaneth on a staff, or that falleth on the sword, or that lacketh bread.": This comprehensive and chilling list details the specific forms of perpetual suffering and degradation that David invokes upon Joab's descendants, ensuring a continuous state of affliction. "One that hath an issue, or that is a leper" refers to severe skin diseases or chronic bodily discharges that rendered individuals ritually unclean and socially isolated under Mosaic Law (Leviticus 13 and Leviticus 15). Their inclusion signifies a state of perpetual ritual impurity, social ostracism, and physical decay, preventing full participation in community life and religious worship. "Or that leaneth on a staff" describes a state of chronic lameness, debilitating weakness, or physical disability that necessitates reliance on a walking aid. It implies an inability to perform productive labor, engage in warfare, or move independently, leading to dependency, vulnerability, and a loss of dignity within society. "Or that falleth on the sword" refers to a violent death, whether in battle, through assassination, or execution. It suggests a lineage prone to bloodshed and violence, perhaps even a perpetual cycle of vengeance, or a failure to die a natural, peaceful death, thereby denying them the honor of a full life. "Or that lacketh bread" signifies extreme poverty, destitution, and starvation. It implies a state of perpetual economic hardship, an inability to secure basic sustenance, and a complete reversal of prosperity and honor, condemning the house of Joab to a life of perpetual want and indignity.

Literary Devices

David's curse in 2 Samuel 3:29 is a powerful example of an Imprecation or Curse Formula, a common literary and legal device in the ancient Near East used to invoke severe consequences upon an individual or group for a transgression. The detailed enumeration of afflictions employs vivid Imagery to paint a graphic picture of utter ruin and degradation. The curse also utilizes Hyperbole, using extreme and comprehensive language to emphasize the profound severity of Joab's crime and David's abhorrence of it. While it is unlikely that every single member of Joab's family would literally suffer all these conditions simultaneously, the language conveys the profound, pervasive, and lasting nature of the judgment. The structure of the curse, extending from Joab to "all his father's house," underscores the concept of Corporate Responsibility prevalent in ancient Israelite thought, where the actions of a leader or family head could bring collective consequences upon the entire lineage. This is a literary reflection of a deeply ingrained societal and theological understanding.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

David's curse on Joab's house serves as a stark theological declaration about the profound gravity of innocent blood shed and the unwavering principle of divine justice. It profoundly reflects the Old Testament understanding that God is a righteous judge who will not leave wickedness unpunished, particularly acts of treachery and murder that defile the land and violate covenant principles. While David's immediate motivation was to clear his own name and kingdom from the stain of bloodguilt, his imprecation also functions as a fervent appeal to God's justice, trusting that the Lord would bring about appropriate and comprehensive retribution. The comprehensive nature of the curse—encompassing physical affliction, social ostracization, violent death, and economic ruin—underscores the totality of God's judgment against sin and the far-reaching consequences that can extend to future generations, demonstrating the profound ripple effect of unrighteous actions within a community and family line, highlighting the sanctity of life and the demand for accountability.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

The chilling words of 2 Samuel 3:29 serve as a potent and enduring reminder of the profound gravity of our actions, particularly those marked by treachery, violence, and injustice. David's public and severe condemnation of Joab's act highlights that sin, especially premeditated murder and betrayal, carries immense spiritual weight and far-reaching consequences, not only for the individual perpetrator but potentially for their lineage and the wider community. For us today, this passage underscores the timeless principle that choices have consequences, and while the New Testament emphasizes grace, forgiveness, and individual accountability in Christ, it does not nullify the seriousness of sin or the reality of its effects in the world. It calls us to soberly consider the ripple effect of our decisions, particularly when we are in positions of leadership or influence. We are challenged to cultivate integrity, pursue justice with unwavering resolve, and seek reconciliation, understanding that our actions can either build up and bring blessing or tear down and perpetuate cycles of brokenness. The passage also invites us to reflect deeply on the nature of justice and the vital importance of distancing ourselves from unrighteousness, even when it comes from those closest to us, demonstrating our allegiance to God's standards.

Questions for Reflection

  • How does David's reaction to Joab's egregious sin challenge my own response to injustice or moral compromise within my sphere of influence, whether personal or professional?
  • In what specific ways might the "ripple effect" of my actions, whether positive or negative, extend beyond myself to my family, community, or even future generations?
  • How can I actively and courageously pursue justice and righteousness in my daily life, even when it is difficult, unpopular, or requires personal sacrifice?

FAQ

Why did David not punish Joab directly, rather than just cursing his house?

Answer: David's apparent inability to directly punish Joab immediately after Abner's murder is a complex issue rooted in the volatile political realities of his nascent reign. While David publicly condemned Joab's act and pronounced this severe curse, he was not yet fully established as king over all Israel and lacked the absolute authority to execute such a powerful figure. Joab was not only David's nephew but also his fiercely loyal and indispensable military commander, commanding a significant portion of the army's allegiance. David himself admits his precarious position, stating, "I am this day weak, though anointed king; and these men the sons of Zeruiah are too hard for me" (2 Samuel 3:39). Executing Joab at this sensitive political moment could have severely destabilized his burgeoning kingdom, potentially leading to a military revolt or alienating key supporters. David chose a public demonstration of dissociation and a prophetic curse, trusting God for ultimate justice, which he later instructed his son Solomon to carry out once his throne was firmly established (1 Kings 2:5-6).

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

The severe curse pronounced upon Joab's house for the shedding of innocent blood in 2 Samuel 3:29 finds its ultimate resolution and glorious fulfillment in the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ. The Old Testament concept of bloodguilt, where the land is defiled by innocent blood and requires divine atonement (Numbers 35:33), profoundly points to humanity's pervasive sin problem and the desperate need for a perfect, atoning sacrifice. While human curses and judgments, like David's, could only invoke temporal consequences and perpetuate cycles of brokenness, Christ's sacrifice on the cross definitively addresses the very root of all curses—sin itself. He became the ultimate innocent one, the Lamb of God, whose precious blood was shed not to defile the land, but to cleanse it and redeem humanity from the curse of the law (Galatians 3:13). Through His substitutionary death and victorious resurrection, Jesus absorbed the full weight of God's righteous judgment against sin, offering radical forgiveness, complete reconciliation, and eternal life to all who believe. The afflictions enumerated in David's curse—physical infirmity, social ostracization, violent death, and destitution—are all tragic consequences of the fallen world and the pervasive curse of sin; Christ, however, offers profound healing, full inclusion into the family of God, triumphant victory over death, and spiritual abundance beyond measure (John 10:10). Thus, the terrifying prospect of a perpetual curse on a lineage gives way to the glorious reality of God's boundless grace and the transformative promise that in Christ, there is no condemnation for those who are in Him (Romans 8:1), and we are blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places (Ephesians 1:3).

Copy as

Commentary on 2 Samuel 3 verses 22–39

I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points

We have here an account of the murder of Abner by Joab, and David's deep resentment of it.

I. Joab very insolently fell foul upon David for treating with Abner. He happened to be abroad upon service when Abner was with David, pursuing a troop, either of Philistines or of Saul's party; but, upon his return, he was informed that Abner was just gone (Sa2 3:22, Sa2 3:23), and that a great many kind things had passed between David and him. He had all the reason in the world to be satisfied of David's prudence and to acquiesce in the measures he took, knowing him to be a wise and good man himself and under a divine conduct in all his affairs; and yet, as if he had the same sway in David's cause that Abner had in Ish-bosheth's, he chides David, and reproaches him to his face as impolitic (Sa2 3:24, Sa2 3:25): What hast thou done? As if David were accountable to him for what he did: "Why hast thou sent him away, when thou mightest have made him a prisoner? He came as a spy, and will certainly betray thee." I know not whether to wonder more that Joab had impudence enough to give such an affront to his prince or that David had patience enough to take it. He does, in effect, call David a fool when he tells him he knew Abner came to deceive him and yet he trusted him. We find no answer that David gave him, not because he feared him, as Ish-bosheth did Abner (Sa2 3:11), but because he despised him, or because Joab had not so much good manners as to stay for an answer.

II. He very treacherously sent for Abner back, and, under colour of a private conference with him, barbarously killed him with his own hand. That he made use of David's name, under pretence of giving him some further instructions, is intimated in that, but David knew it not, Sa2 3:26. Abner, designing no harm, feared none, but very innocently returned to Hebron, and, when he found Joab waiting for him at the gate, turned aside with him to speak with him privately, forgetting what he himself had said when he slew Asahel, How shall I hold up my face to Joab thy brother? (Sa2 2:22), and there Joab murdered him (Sa2 3:27), and it is intimated (Sa2 3:30) that Abishai was privy to the design, and was aiding and abetting, and would have come in to his brother's assistance if there had been occasion; he is therefore charged as an accessary: Joab and Abishai slew Abner, though perhaps he only knew it who is privy to the thoughts and intents of men's hearts. Now in this, 1. It is certain that the Lord was righteous. Abner had maliciously, and against the convictions of his conscience, opposed David. He had now basely deserted Ish-bosheth, and betrayed him, under pretence of regard to God and Israel, but really from a principle of pride, and revenge, and impatience of control. God will not therefore use so bad a man, though David might, in so good a work as the uniting of Israel. Judgments are prepared for such scorners as Abner was. But, 2. It is as certain that Joab was unrighteous, and, in what he did, did wickedly. David was a man after God's own heart, but could not have those about him, no, not in places of the greatest trust, after his own heart. Many a good prince, and a good master, has been forced to employ bad men. (1.) Even the pretence for doing this was very unjust. Abner had indeed slain his brother Asahel, and Joab and Abishai pretended herein to be the avengers of his blood (Sa2 3:27, Sa2 3:30); but Abner slew Asahel in an open war, wherein Abner indeed had given the challenge, but Joab himself had accepted it and had slain many of Abner's friends. He did it likewise in his own defence, and not till he had given him fair warning (which he would not take), and he did it with reluctancy; but Joab here shed the blood of war in peace, Kg1 2:5. (2.) That which we have reason to think was at the bottom of Joab's enmity to Abner made it much worse. Joab was now general of David's forces; but, if Abner should come into his interest, he would possibly be preferred before him, being a senior officer, and more experienced in the art of war. This Joab was jealous of, and could better bear the guilt of blood than the thoughts of a rival. (3.) He did it treacherously, and under pretence of speaking peaceably to him, Deu 27:24. Had he challenged him, he would have done like a soldier; but to assassinate him was done villainously and like a coward. His words were softer than oil, yet were they drawn swords, Psa 55:21. Thus he basely slew Amasa, Sa2 20:9, Sa2 20:10. (4.) The doing of it was a great affront and injury to David, who was now in treaty with Abner, as Joab knew. Abner was now actually in his master's service, so that, through his side, he struck at David himself. (5.) It was a great aggravation of the murder that he did it in the gate, openly and avowedly, as one that was not ashamed, nor could blush. The gate was the place of judgment and the place of concourse, to that he did it in defiance of justice, both the just sentence of the magistrates and the just resentment of the crowd, as one that neither feared God nor regarded men, but thought himself above all control: and Hebron was a Levites' city and a city of refuge.

III. David laid deeply to heart and in many ways expressed his detestation of this execrable villany.

1.He washed his hands from the guilt of Abner's blood. Lest any should suspect that Joab had some secret intimation from David to do as he did (and the rather because he went so long unpunished), he here solemnly appeals to God concerning his innocency: I and my kingdom are guiltless (and my kingdom is so because I am so) before the Lord for ever, Sa2 3:28. It is a comfort to be able to say, when any bad thing is done, that we had no hand in it. We have not shed this blood, Deu 21:7. However we may be censured or suspected, our hearts shall not reproach us.

2.He entailed the curse for it upon Joab and his family (Sa2 3:29): "Let it rest on the head of Joab. Let the blood cry against him, and let divine vengeance follow him. Let the iniquity be visited upon his children and children's children, in some hereditary disease or other. The longer the punishment is delayed, the longer let it last when it shall come. Let his posterity be stigmatized, blemished with an issue or a leprosy, which will shut them out from society; let them be beggars, or cripples, or come to some untimely end, that it may be said, He is one of Joab's race." This intimates that the guilt of blood brings a curse upon families; if men do not avenge it, God will, and will lay up the iniquity for the children. But methinks a resolute punishment of the murderer himself would better have become David than this passionate imprecation of God's judgments upon his posterity.

3.He called upon all about him, even Joab himself, to lament the death of Abner (Sa2 3:31): Rend your clothes and mourn before Abner, that is, before the hearse of Abner, as Abraham is said to mourn before his dead (Gen 23:2, Gen 23:3), and he gives a reason why they should attend his funeral with sincere and solemn mourning (Sa2 3:38), because there is a prince and a great man fallen this day in Israel. His alliance to Saul, his place as general, his interest, and the great services he had formerly done, were enough to denominate him a prince and a great man. When he could not call him a saint or a good man, he said nothing of that, but what was true he gave him the praise of, though he had been his enemy, that he was a prince and a great man. "Such a man has fallen in Israel, and fallen this day, just when he was doing the best deed he ever did in his life, this day, when he was likely to be so serviceable to the public peace and welfare and could so ill be spared." (1.) Let them all lament it. The humbling change death puts all men under is to be lamented, especially as affecting princes and great men. Alas! alas! (see Rev 18:10) how mean, how little, are those made by death who made themselves the terror of the mighty in the land of the living! But we are especially obliged to lament the fall of useful men in the midst of their usefulness and when there is most need of them. A public loss must be every man's grief, for every man shares in it. Thus David took care that honour should be done to the memory of a man of merit, to animate others. (2.) Let Joab, in a particular manner, lament it, which he has less heart but more reason to do than any of them. If he could be brought to do it sincerely, it would be an expression of repentance for his sin in slaying him. If he did it in show only, as it is likely he did, yet it was a sort of penance imposed upon him, and a present commutation of the punishment. If he do not as yet expiate the murder with his blood, let him do something towards it with tears. This, perhaps, Joab submitted to with no great reluctancy, now he had gained his point. Now that he is on the bier, no matter in what pomp he lies. Sit divus, modo non sit vivus - Let him be canonized, so that he be but killed.

4.David himself followed the corpse as chief mourner, and made a funeral oration at the grave. He attended the bier (Sa2 3:31) and wept at the grave, Sa2 3:32. Though Abner had been his enemy, and might possibly have proved no very firm friend, yet because he had been a man of bravery in the field, and might have done great service in the public counsels at this critical juncture, all former quarrels are forgotten and David is a true mourner for his fall. What he said over the grave fetched fresh floods of tears from the eyes of all that were present, when they thought they had already paid the debt in full (Sa2 3:33, Sa2 3:34): Died Abner as a fool dieth? (1.) He speaks as one vexed that Abner was fooled out of his life, that so great a man as he, so famed for conduct and courage, should be imposed upon by a colour of friendship, slain by surprise, and so die as a fool dies. The wisest and stoutest of men have no fence against treachery. To see Abner, who thought himself the main hinge on which the great affairs of Israel turned, so considerable as himself to be able to turn the scale of a trembling government, his head full of great projects and great prospects, to see him made a fool of by a base rival, and falling on a sudden a sacrifice to his ambition and jealousy - this stains the pride of all glory, and should put one out of conceit with worldly grandeur. Put not your trust in princes, Psa 146:3, Psa 146:4. And let us therefore make that sure which we cannot be fooled out of. A man may have his life, and all that is dear to him, taken from him, and not be able to prevent it with all his wisdom, care, and integrity; but there is that which no thief can break through to steal. See here how much more we are beholden to God's providence than to our own prudence for the continuance of our lives and comforts. Were it not for the hold God has of the consciences of bad men, how soon would the weak and innocent become an easy prey to the strong and merciless and the wisest die as fools! Or, (2.) He speaks as one boasting that Abner did not fool himself out of his life: "Died Abner as a fool dies? No, he did not, not as a criminal, a traitor or felon, that forfeits his life into the hands of public justice; his hands were not pinioned, nor his feet fettered, as those of malefactors are: Abner falls not before just men, by a judicial sentence; but as a man, an innocent man, falleth before wicked men, thieves and robbers, so fellest thou." Died Abner as Nabal died? so the Septuagint reads it. Nabal died as he lived, like himself, like a sot; but Abner's fate was such as might have been the fate of the wisest and best man in the world. Abner did not throw away his life as Asahel did, who wilfully ran upon the spear, after fair warning, but he was struck by surprise. Note, It is a sad thing to die like a fool, as those do that in any way shorten their own days, and much more those that make no provision for another world.

5.He fasted all that day, and would by no means be persuaded to eat any thing till night, Sa2 3:35. It was then the custom of great mourners to refrain for the time from bodily refreshments, as Sa2 1:12; Sa1 31:13. How incongruous is it then to turn the house of mourning into a house of feasting! This respect which David paid to Abner was very pleasing to the people and satisfied them that he was not, in the least, accessory to the murder (Sa2 3:36, Sa2 3:37), of which he was solicitous to avoid the suspicion, lest Joab's villany should make him odious, as that of Simeon and Levi did Jacob, Gen 34:30. On this occasion it is said, Whatever the king did pleased all the people. This intimates, (1.) His good affection to them. He studied to please them in every thing and carefully avoided what might be disobliging. (2.) Their good opinion of him. They thought every thing he did well done. Such a mutual willingness to please, and easiness to be pleased, will make every relation comfortable.

6.He bewailed it that he could not with safety do justice on the murderers, Sa2 3:30. He was weak, his kingdom was newly planted, and a little shake would overthrow it. Joab's family had a great interest, were bold and daring, and to make them his enemies now might be of bad consequence. These sons of Zeruiah were too hard for him, too big for the law to take hold of; and therefore, though by man, by the magistrate, the blood of a murderer should be shed (Gen 9:6), David bears the sword in vain, and contents himself, as a private person, to leave them to the judgment of God: The Lord shall reward the doer of evil according to his wickedness. Now this is a diminution, (1.) To David's greatness. He is anointed king, and yet is kept in awe by his own subjects, and some of them are too hard for him. Who would be fond of power when a man may have the name of it, and must be accountable for it, and yet be hampered in the use of it? (2.) To David's goodness. He ought to have done his duty, and trusted God with the issue. Fiat justitia, ruat coelum - Let justice be done, though the heavens should fall asunder. If the law had had its course against Joab, perhaps the murder of Ishbosheth, Amnon, and others, would have been prevented. It was carnal policy and cruel pity that spared Joab. Righteousness supports the throne and will never shake it. Yet it was only a reprieve that David gave to Joab; on his death-bed he left it to Solomon (who could the better wield the sword of justice because he had no occasion to draw the sword of war) to avenge the blood of Abner. Evil pursues sinners, and will overtake them at last. David preferred Abner's son Jaasiel, Ch1 27:21.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 22–39. Public domain.
Copy as
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying 2 Samuel 3:29 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.