2 Samuel 19:13

2Sa 19:13 And say ye to Amasa, [Art] thou not of my bone, and of my flesh? God do so to me, and more also, if thou be not captain of the host before me continually in the room of Joab.

Ver. 13. And say ye to Amasa.] Who having been Absalom’s captain general, had still the command of the strong tower of Zion, and of the city of Jerusalem, and so might have raised further troubles and tragedies had he not been thus won over by promise of free pardon and highest preferment.

Art thou not of my bone? &c.] Mine own sister’s son, and not a bastard neither, as some would prove from 2Sa 17:25. And should not good blood bewray itself?

God do so to me, and more also.] Ita faciat mihi Deus, et ita pergat. So? How? So as I cannot tell how: it importeth the heaviest penalty: it being a fearful thing to fall into the punishing hands of the living God.

In the room of Joab.] Who, though faithful to David, yet was always overbold with him, and therefore suspected by him, nequid novi in eum moliretur, saith Theodoret, lest he should work some treason. The murder of Abner also was fresh in David’s memory, who it seemeth was resolved to cut him off (as the French king did Biron lately), which he could not have done but by making Amasa generalissimo, who was of great power with all Israel. Thus David had designed it likely; but God had otherwise ordered it.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2Sa 19:13. Say to Amasa, Art thou not of my bone, &c. — That is, nearly related to me, being my sister’s son. God do so to me, and more also, &c. — He solemnly promises to prefer him to the highest command in the kingdom; for he now thought it a fit time to depress Joab, who was grown insufferably insolent and imperious, and who, through his credit with the army, had protected himself in the commission of the greatest crimes. He had slain Abner most perfidiously in cold blood, and killed Absalom contrary to the king’s express command, and now lately had insulted him in his sorrow. Having, therefore, now an opportunity of transferring the command to another person, who had as great an interest in the people’s favour as Joab, he gladly embraces it, that so he might both chastise Joab for his faults, and rescue himself from the bondage in which that general had hitherto held him. Some, however, have thought that, considering Joab’s very faithful services to David in all the changes of his fortune, and that his violent measures proceeded in part from a regard to him, as judging them necessary for his safety and tranquillity, David’s conduct in this instance, in making Amasa captain of the host in Joab’s room, is not an amiable trait in his character, and was not a prudent step at this time, especially considering Joab’s violent temper: and, it must be acknowledged, it brought on the murder of Amasa.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

19:13 commander . . . in his place: Amasa’s appointment would be short-lived (20:7-10).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

By this policy David thought that by winning of the captain, he should have the hearts of all the people.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

And say ye to Amasa, &c.--This also was a dextrous stroke of policy. David was fully alive to the importance, for extinguishing the rebellion, of withdrawing from that cause the only leader who could keep it alive; and he, therefore, secretly intimated his intention to raise Amasa to the command of the army in the place of Joab, whose overbearing haughtiness had become intolerable. The king justly reckoned, that from natural temper as well as gratitude for the royal pardon, he would prove a more tractable servant; and David, doubtless, intended in all sincerity to fulfil this promise. But Joab managed to retain his high position (see on Sa2 20:4-10).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(13) Say ye to Amasa.—Amasa, like Joab, was David’s nephew, although possibly his mother may have been only half-sister to David. In this offer of the command-in-chief to the rebel general, David adopted a bold, but a rash and unjust policy. Amasa should have been punished, not rewarded for his treason. He had given no evidence of loyalty, nor was there proof that he would be trustworthy. Moreover, this appointment would be sure to provoke the jealousy and hostility of Joab. But David had long been restless under the overbearing influence of Joab (see 2Sa_19:22; 2Sa_16:10; 2Sa_3:39), and now since he had murdered Absalom, was determined to be rid of him. He therefore took advantage of the opportunity by this means to win over to himself what remained of the military organisation of Absalom.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13. Art thou not of my bone, and of my flesh] Art thou not my bone and my flesh, exactly as in 2Sa_19:12. Amasa was David’s nephew, the son of his sister or step-sister Abigail. See ch. 2Sa_17:25. Of course the message was to be privately conveyed to Amasa through the priests. It was a bold stroke of policy to promise the post of commander-in chief to the general of the rebel army. By so doing, David designed at once to secure the allegiance of that army, and to punish Joab for killing Absalom in defiance of his command. But it was hardly prudent. Joab was certain not to submit to it tamely: Amasa’s military skill was probably inferior, and his loyalty remained to be proved.

God do so, &c.] See note on ch. 2Sa_3:9.

in the room of Joab] i.e. instead of. Room = place, space, from A.-S. rúm, Germ. Raum. Cp. Mat_2:22.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And say ye to Amasa,.... Who was the general of Absalom's army, and who might fear he should never be pardoned, whoever was, and looked upon his case as desperate; who had led on the army with Absalom against the king's threes, and fought them:

art thou not of my bone, and of my flesh? nearly related to him, being his sister's son:

God do so to me, and more also: than he had done to Absalom; or he imprecates the greatest evil upon himself that could be thought of or named:

if thou be not captain of the host before me continually in the room of Joab; signifying that he would not only pardon the treason he had been guilty of, but raise him to the highest post in the army; and to assure him of it, of which he might be doubtful, considering what he had done to merit his displeasure, he makes this oath or imprecation. Joab had got his ill will by many instances, as by the murder of Abner, and now by slaying Absalom against his orders; and by his rude and insolent behaviour to him when lamenting the death of his son; he wanted to be rid of him, and now, having an opportunity of putting a valiant man into his place, and thereby attaching him to his interest, he was determined to make use of it.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Of my bone ... - Render as in preceding verse, “art thou not my bone and my flesh?” It is curious to note how the phrase is used in 2Sa 5:1 of common descent from Israel, in 2Sa 19:12 of the closer kindred of the tribe of Judah, and in this verse of the yet nearer kindred between David and Amasa his sister’s son.

Captain ... in the room of Joab - It is very plain that David felt the weight of Joab’s overbearing influence to be very oppressive (compare 2Sa 19:22; 2Sa 3:39; 2Sa 16:10). He was, at this time, very angry with Joab for killing Absalom; and so, thinking it of vital importance to win over Amasa and the army of Judah, he did not scruple to offer him Joab’s high post.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Flesh? Amasa was his nephew, and as he had been appointed general by Absalom, his influence would be the greatest to bring back those who had given into the delusion. A sense of his misconduct would also render him more humble, and easier to manage than Joab, whose insolence caused him to be insupportable to the king. David designed to transfer the authority of the latter, (Calmet) which he had now enjoyed 23 years, since the taking of Sion. David’s promise did not oblige him to keep Joab in that office for life, if his conduct should prove unsatisfactory. Hence he appointed Amasa to pursue the rebels, and afterwards Abisai, setting Joab aside. But the haughty warrior supplanted both, and retained the command, as it were in spite of his sovereign, chap. xx. 4, 15., &c. (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Amasa, Absalom’s late general; who judging his case, above all others, desperate, might be ready to use all his interest with that tribe to delay or hinder the king’s return.

Of my bone, and of my flesh, i.e. my near kinsman, my nephew. See 1Ch 2:16,17.

Before me, i.e. in my presence, or now whilst I live; lest he should think he promised him only the reversion of it.

In the room of Joab; who, besides his other crimes, had lately exasperated the king by his wilful murder of Absalom, contrary to David’s express command; and by his insolent carriage towards him. And therefore the king having now the opportunity of another person, who had a greater interest both in Judah and Israel than Joab, he gladly complies with it, that so he might both chastise Joab for his faults, and rescue himself from the bondage in which Joab had hitherto held him. Yet it is not necessary, from those words in the room of Joab, to conclude that Joab was to be displaced to make room for Amasa, but that he might be in like condition with Joab; but what follows in the next chapter makes it very probable that he was indeed displaced, and Amasa put in his place.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. Say ye to Amasa — Amasa had been captain of the rebel hosts, (2Sa_17:25,) and David hoped by honouring him to secure fully the allegiance of his disaffected subjects who had taken up arms against him; but this politic measure — the untimely offspring of his bitter enmity against Joab — was a serious and fatal error. It was also a measure dangerous to himself, and soon resulted in making Amasa the victim of Joab’s deadly jealousy. Chap. 2Sa_20:10.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of my bone, and of my flesh; Hebrew, art thou not my bone and my flesh? a most near and dear relative. It is difficult to understand why in the Authorized Version this common metaphor in the Hebrew has been so meddled with, Ewald thinks that this purposed degradation of Joab and the substitution of Amasa in his stead was a wise and politic act. It was to some extent just, for Joab was a man stained with many murders; but politic it was not. Passing over the fact that Amasa had actually taken the command of the rebel army, he was an ambitious and selfish man, and could lay no claim to that sturdy fidelity which had characterized Joab throughout his long service. For all he had done had been for David"s good, and his advice, however roughly given, had averted grave misfortunes. Joab"s murder of Absalom was an act of wilful disobedience; but David had used Joab for a far meaner murder, committed, not for reasons of statesmanship; but for purposes of lust. The guilt of slaying Absalom was as nothing compared with that of slaying Uriah, nor was it so base as the assassination of Abner, which David had tolerated, though made angry by it. The dismissal of Joab could have been effected only by putting him to death, and this certainly he did not deserve at David"s hands; and the attempt, unless carried out secretly, would have led to tumult and insurrection. Joab, too, was a far more skilful general than Amasa, who, with larger forces, had just suffered a disastrous defeat; and if Joab was removed secretly, his brother Abishai remained to avenge him. David was, in fact, blinded by love for the son whom for so many years he had treated with coldness. There was a strong reaction now in the father"s mind, and under its influence he was prepared to sacrifice the nephew who had been faithful to him and saved him, for the nephew who had joined in Absalom"s rebellion. But possibly it had an immediate good effect, as Amasa, assured of forgiveness and promotion, now took David"s side.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Of Joab - Who, besides his other crimes, had lately exasperated the king by his murder of Absalom, contrary to David's express command. And therefore the king having now the opportunity of another person who had a greater interest than Joab, gladly complies with it, that so he might both chastise Joab for his faults, and rescue himself from the bondage in which Joab had hitherto held him.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

"And say ye to Amasa, Art thou not my bone and flesh? so shall God do to me, and so add, if thou shalt not be prince of the army (chief captain) before me continually in the place of Joab."

Keil & Delitzsch — Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–1891) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API. (Old Testament only.)

Amasa

See how you translated this man's name in 2 Samuel 17:25. (See: How to Translate Names)

Are you not my flesh and my bone?

David uses this rhetorical question to emphasize that they are related. This can be written as a statement. AT: "You are my flesh and my bones." (See: Rhetorical Question)

my flesh and my bone

Here David speaks of them being related by saying that they have the same flesh and bones. See how you translated a similar phrase in 2 Samuel 19:12. AT: "my relative" (See: Metaphor)

God do so to me

This is an idiom that means for God to kill him. AT: "May God kill me" (See: Idiom)

he won the hearts

Here the mens' loyalty is referred to as their "hearts." AT: "he won the loyalty" (See: Metonymy)

as one man

This speaks of the men being united in their loyalty to the king as if they were one man with the same mind. AT: "and they were united together" or "they were united in their loyalty to the king" (See: Metaphor)

They sent to the king

This means that they sent a messenger to the king. AT: "They sent a messenger to the king" (See: Idiom)

translationWords

heart

Gilgal

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.