2 Samuel 3:7

KJV

¶ And Saul had a concubine, whose name [was] Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah: and [Ishbosheth] said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father's concubine?

KJV (with Strong's)

And Saul {H7586} had a concubine {H6370}, whose name {H8034} was Rizpah {H7532}, the daughter {H1323} of Aiah {H345}: and Ishbosheth said {H559} to Abner {H74}, Wherefore hast thou gone in {H935} unto my father's {H1} concubine {H6370}?

Complete Jewish Bible

Sha'ul had had a concubine named Ritzpah, the daughter of Ayah; and [Ish-Boshet] challenged Avner: "Why did you go and sleep with my father's concubine?"

Berean Standard Bible

Meanwhile, Saul had a concubine named Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah. So Ish-bosheth questioned Abner, “Why did you sleep with my father’s concubine?”

American Standard Version

Now Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah: andIsh-boshethsaid to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father’s concubine?

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Second Samuel 3:7 details a critical moment in the protracted civil war between the house of Saul, nominally led by Ishbosheth, and the burgeoning kingdom of David. This verse records Ishbosheth's furious accusation against Abner, Saul's former commander and the true power behind Ishbosheth's fragile throne, concerning Abner's appropriation of Rizpah, one of Saul's concubines. This seemingly personal act carried immense political weight in the ancient Near East, serving as a symbolic claim to the throne or a profound assertion of dominance over the royal household, thus igniting a confrontation that would ultimately lead to Abner's defection and accelerate the unification of Israel under David's righteous rule.

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** This verse is strategically positioned as a pivotal turning point in the narrative of David's ascent to kingship over all Israel. It immediately follows a period of prolonged civil war, where the house of David was steadily gaining strength while the house of Saul was progressively weakening, as explicitly stated in [2 Samuel 3:1](/2_samuel/3-1 "2 Samuel 3:1 - The Prolonged War Between the Houses of Saul and David"). The preceding verses list David's sons born in Hebron, emphasizing his growing stability, legitimacy, and the divine favor resting upon his household. The accusation in this verse serves as the direct catalyst for the dramatic and decisive confrontation between Ishbosheth and Abner, detailed in [2 Samuel 3:8-11](/2_samuel/3-8 "2 Samuel 3:8-11 - Abner's Furious Response and Defection"), which then leads to Abner's momentous shift of allegiance to David in [2 Samuel 3:12](/2_samuel/3-12 "2 Samuel 3:12 - Abner Offers to Bring All Israel to David") and subsequent negotiations to bring all Israel under David's unified rule. Far from being a mere sidebar, this incident is the critical juncture that dismantles the last vestiges of Saul's kingdom, paving the way for God's chosen king.
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** In the ancient Near East, the concubines of a deceased king were considered part of the royal inheritance and potent symbols of the former king's power, legacy, and even his spiritual essence. To "go in unto" or take possession of a king's concubine was not merely a sexual act but a highly symbolic and public assertion of a claim to the throne, or at the very least, a profound statement of dominance over the royal household and a direct challenge to the legitimate heir. This deeply ingrained cultural understanding is paramount for grasping the gravity of Abner's action and the intensity of Ishbosheth's outrage. Historical precedents and parallel accounts illuminate this principle: Absalom's public appropriation of David's concubines was a deliberate act to assert his kingship and irrevocably alienate himself from his father ([2 Samuel 16:20-22](/2_samuel/16-20 "2 Samuel 16:20-22 - Absalom's Public Claim to the Throne")), and Adonijah's request for Abishag, David's former concubine, was immediately recognized by Solomon as a thinly veiled claim to the throne and a capital offense ([1 Kings 2:13-25](/1_kings/2-13 "1 Kings 2:13-25 - Adonijah's Request and Execution")). Abner, as the most powerful military and political figure in Saul's house, was effectively demonstrating his de facto control and open contempt for Ishbosheth's nominal authority.
* **Key Themes:** The central theme underscored by this verse is the **struggle for power and legitimate authority** during a tumultuous period of dynastic transition. Abner's actions starkly highlight the theme of **political maneuvering and unchecked ambition**, revealing his true power relative to Ishbosheth's profound weakness and lack of effective rule. The incident also profoundly touches upon the **symbolism of royal succession**, where even seemingly personal acts carry immense political implications for the stability and future of the kingdom. Furthermore, it subtly but powerfully introduces the theme of **divine sovereignty**, demonstrating how even human conflict, born of ambition, weakness, and sin, ultimately serves God's overarching plan to establish David as king over all Israel, thereby fulfilling earlier prophetic declarations regarding Saul's rejection and David's anointing ([1 Samuel 15:28](/1_samuel/15-28 "1 Samuel 15:28 - God Tears the Kingdom from Saul")). The decline of Saul's house is not merely a natural consequence of war but is dramatically hastened by internal strife and the self-serving actions of its own key figures.

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **Concubine (Hebrew, _pîylegesh'_):** This term refers to a secondary wife, often of lower social standing than a primary wife but still legally recognized within the household. Her children could be legitimate heirs, though typically with lesser rights than those of a primary wife. Crucially, in a royal context, a concubine of a king was considered part of the royal property and household, a symbol of the king's virility, power, and legacy. Taking her was a direct challenge to the king's authority or a symbolic claim to the throne itself. Rizpah's identity as "the daughter of Aiah" further grounds her in the narrative, distinguishing her from an anonymous figure and setting the stage for her later, poignant role in [2 Samuel 21:8-14](/2_samuel/21-8 "2 Samuel 21:8-14 - Rizpah's Vigil for Her Sons").
* **Father (Hebrew, _ʼâb'_):** In this context, "my father's concubine" (H1) emphasizes the direct lineage and the perceived violation of Ishbosheth's inherited royal prerogative. The term "father" here signifies not just biological paternity but also the source of royal authority and legacy. Ishbosheth is asserting his claim as the rightful heir to Saul's throne, and thus, to all that belonged to Saul, including his concubines. Abner's action is seen as an affront to Saul's memory and, more importantly, to Ishbosheth's current, albeit fragile, kingship.
* **Gone in unto (Hebrew, _bôwʼ'_):** This is a common biblical euphemism for sexual intercourse, literally meaning "to come into" or "to enter." However, in the specific context of a king's concubine, the phrase carries immense political and legal weight far beyond mere sexual liaison. It implies a public act of appropriation, possession, and a deliberate act of claiming what belongs to the king or the royal household, thereby asserting authority over it. Ishbosheth's choice of this phrase emphasizes the perceived transgression against his royal prerogative and the symbolic usurpation of his power.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"And Saul had a concubine, whose name [was] Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah:"** This opening clause establishes the identity of the woman at the center of the dispute and, more importantly, her direct connection to the deceased King Saul. By explicitly stating her royal affiliation, the text immediately frames the subsequent action within the context of royal succession, property, and authority. Her specific lineage ("daughter of Aiah") gives her a distinct identity, setting her apart from a generic concubine and perhaps hinting at her future significance in the unfolding narrative.
* **"and [Ishbosheth] said to Abner,"** This identifies the accuser (Ishbosheth, the nominal king) and the accused (Abner, the military commander and de facto power), setting up a direct and highly charged confrontation. The fact that Ishbosheth, the weak, titular king, is confronting Abner, the strong, actual power-broker, immediately highlights the precarious and imbalanced power dynamic within Saul's dwindling house. Ishbosheth's challenge, though legitimate in principle, was a dangerous and ultimately self-destructive move given his own lack of real power.
* **"Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father's concubine?"** This is Ishbosheth's direct and indignant accusation. The phrase "my father's concubine" underscores the perceived violation of royal property, honor, and the very legitimacy of Ishbosheth's claim to the throne. Ishbosheth views Abner's action not as a private affair, but as a public affront and a symbolic attempt to usurp the royal authority that belonged to Saul and, by extension, to him as Saul's heir. The rhetorical question "Wherefore" (Why?) expresses profound outrage, demanding an explanation for such a blatant challenge to his already fragile kingship.

#### Literary Devices
The verse employs several potent literary devices to convey its profound significance and foreshadow future events. **Symbolism** is paramount, as Abner's act of taking Rizpah is not merely a personal indulgence but a potent symbol of his assertion of power and a veiled, yet unmistakable, claim to the throne, or at least to absolute dominance over the royal household. This act profoundly **foreshadows** the imminent collapse of Saul's house and Abner's subsequent defection, setting in motion the irreversible events that will lead to David's ultimate kingship over all Israel. There is also a strong element of **irony** in Ishbosheth, the weak, nominal king, confronting Abner, the strong, actual power-broker, over an act that symbolically asserts royal authority. Ishbosheth's accusation, while culturally and legally valid, tragically highlights his own political impotence and lack of true influence in the face of Abner's overwhelming power.

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
The incident in 2 Samuel 3:7, while deeply rooted in ancient political and cultural norms, offers profound theological and thematic insights that transcend its immediate context. It vividly illustrates the destructive nature of unchecked ambition, the corrupting influence of power, and the inherent instability of human leadership, particularly in a vacuum of legitimate, divinely appointed authority. Abner's actions, driven by a desire to assert his dominance and perhaps even to secure his own future, inadvertently become a crucial catalyst for God's sovereign plan to establish David's kingdom. Even amidst human sin, political machinations, and personal betrayals, the divine purpose for David's unified rule over Israel steadily unfolds, demonstrating God's ultimate control over history and human affairs. This narrative powerfully reminds us that God can use even the fractured and fallen actions of humanity to advance His redemptive purposes, proving His unwavering sovereignty over all of creation.

* [2 Samuel 16:20-22](/2_samuel/16-20 "2 Samuel 16:20-22 - Absalom's Public Claim to the Throne")
* [1 Kings 2:22](/1_kings/2-22 "1 Kings 2:22 - Adonijah's Request for Abishag")
* [Proverbs 16:9](/proverbs/16-9 "Proverbs 16:9 - The Lord Directs Our Steps")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
The intricate power dynamics and symbolic actions in 2 Samuel 3:7, though culturally specific to ancient Israel, resonate with timeless truths about human nature, the pursuit of power, and the far-reaching consequences of ambition. We are soberly reminded that actions, even those seemingly personal or insignificant, can carry profound weight and trigger unforeseen consequences, especially when they touch upon issues of authority, respect, and perceived legitimacy within any community or organization. This narrative challenges us to critically examine our own motives when pursuing influence or exercising power, whether in our families, workplaces, churches, or broader societal spheres. Are our actions genuinely aimed at service, the common good, and the flourishing of others, or are they subtly (or overtly) designed to assert dominance, secure personal gain, or undermine those around us? The story also underscores the importance of discerning the true power structures at play in any given situation, recognizing that nominal titles do not always equate to actual authority. Ultimately, it invites us to trust in God's overarching sovereignty, knowing that even in the midst of human chaos, conflict, and sin, His divine purposes will ultimately prevail, bringing about His perfect will.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **How do we see the pursuit of power and the assertion of dominance manifesting in our own lives or communities today, perhaps in less obvious or more subtle ways than in ancient Israel?**
* **What are the "Rizpah moments" in contemporary contexts—actions that, while seemingly personal, carry profound symbolic or political weight and challenge established authority or relationships?**
* **How does this narrative challenge or affirm our understanding of God's sovereignty amidst human sin, political intrigue, and personal ambition, and what comfort can we draw from His ultimate control?**

### FAQ
**Was Abner's act purely sexual, or was it political?**

Answer: While the act of "going in unto" a concubine certainly involved sexual relations, Abner's appropriation of Rizpah was primarily a political act, not merely a personal or sexual indulgence. In the ancient Near East, taking a deceased king's concubine was a highly symbolic gesture that implied a claim to the throne or, at the very least, a public assertion of dominance over the royal household and a challenge to the legitimate heir. It was a common way to demonstrate control over the former king's property and legacy. Ishbosheth's outrage was not simply about a personal slight but about a direct challenge to his already weak authority as king. This is clearly seen in other biblical accounts, such as [Absalom's actions with David's concubines](/2_samuel/16-20 "2 Samuel 16:20-22 - Absalom's Public Claim to the Throne") and [Adonijah's request for Abishag](/1_kings/2-22 "1 Kings 2:22 - Adonijah's Request for Abishag") in the early days of Solomon's reign, both of which were understood as veiled claims to the kingship.

**Why was Ishbosheth so upset by Abner's actions, given that Abner was already the most powerful figure?**

Answer: Ishbosheth was profoundly upset because Abner's act, though symbolic, was a direct, public, and deeply humiliating challenge to his nominal authority as king. Despite Abner being the true power behind the throne and the one who had installed Ishbosheth, Ishbosheth still held the title and the perceived legitimacy of Saul's heir. By taking Rizpah, Abner was not only disrespecting Ishbosheth's royal prerogative but also publicly demonstrating his own superior power and contempt for Ishbosheth's kingship. This act exposed Ishbosheth's vulnerability and Abner's de facto control, stripping away any remaining illusion of Ishbosheth's royal power. It was a profound humiliation and a direct threat to the very foundation of his fragile rule, ultimately leading to the confrontation that would seal the fate of Saul's house and accelerate the transition of power to David.

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
The chaotic and sin-laden power struggles depicted in [2 Samuel 3:7](/2_samuel/3-7 "2 Samuel 3:7 - Ishbosheth Accuses Abner of Taking Rizpah"), which ultimately lead to the demise of Saul's house and the establishment of David's kingdom, powerfully foreshadow the ultimate need for a King whose reign is not built on human ambition, political maneuvering, or symbolic claims of earthly power, but on divine authority and perfect righteousness. The instability, internal strife, and moral compromises that plagued Saul's earthly kingdom highlight the brokenness of all human systems and the futility of seeking lasting peace or justice apart from God's perfect rule. In stark contrast to Abner's self-serving appropriation of power, Jesus, the true Son of David and the promised Messiah ([Matthew 1:1](/matthew/1-1 "Matthew 1:1 - Genealogy of Jesus Christ")), "took" upon himself not symbols of earthly dominion, but the very nature of a servant ([Philippians 2:7](/philippians/2-7 "Philippians 2:7 - Christ's Humility and Exaltation")) and the crushing burden of humanity's sin ([Isaiah 53:4-6](/isaiah/53-4 "Isaiah 53:4-6 - The Suffering Servant")). His kingdom is "not of this world" ([John 18:36](/john/18-36 "John 18:36 - Jesus' Kingdom Not of This World")), established through self-sacrificial love rather than political conquest or military might. He is the true "Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" ([John 1:29](/john/1-29 "John 1:29 - Jesus, the Lamb of God")), offering a reign of grace, peace, and eternal stability that transcends all the temporal and corruptible kingdoms of humankind, bringing true reconciliation and redemption.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.

Cross-References

2 Samuel 21:8

But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:

2 Samuel 21:11

And it was told David what Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, the concubine of Saul, had done.

2 Samuel 16:21

And Ahithophel said unto Absalom, Go in unto thy father's concubines, which he hath left to keep the house; and all Israel shall hear that thou art abhorred of thy father: then shall the hands of all that [are] with thee be strong.

2 Samuel 16:22

So they spread Absalom a tent upon the top of the house; and Absalom went in unto his father's concubines in the sight of all Israel.

2 Samuel 12:8

And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if [that had been] too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

1 Kings 2:21

And she said, Let Abishag the Shunammite be given to Adonijah thy brother to wife.

1 Kings 2:22

And king Solomon answered and said unto his mother, And why dost thou ask Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah? ask for him the kingdom also; for he [is] mine elder brother; even for him, and for Abiathar the priest, and for Joab the son of Zeruiah.