See
companion passage in (1 Chron. 19:1-19).
The
Ammonites were descendants of Lot. Ammon was the son of
Lot's incestual relationship with his youngest daughter
(Gen. 19:38). Actually the name given him was "Ben-Ammi"
meaning "son of my people" or "children of my people"
i.e., relatives. Hence, we find that the Israelites are
commanded to avoid conflict with them on their march to
the Promised Land (Deut. 2:19). Their dwelling place was
on the Jordan, between the Arnon and the Jabbok, but,
before the advance of the Hebrews, they had been
dispossessed of a portion of their land by the Amorites,
who founded, along the east side of the Jordan and the
Dead Sea, the kingdom of Sihon (Num.
21:21-31).
In the days
of Jephthah they oppressed the Israelites east of the
Jordan, claiming that the latter had deprived them of
their territory when they came from Egypt, whereas it was
the possessions of the Amorites they took (Judg.
11:1-28). They were defeated but their hostility did not
cease, and their conduct toward the Israelites was
particularly shameful as in the days of Saul (1 Sam. 11)
and of course our text. This may account for the cruel
treatment afforded them in the war that followed in (2
Sam. 12:26-31). They seem to have been completely subdued
by David and their capital was taken, and we find a
bitter spirit manifested afterward, for Nahash of Rabbah
showed kindness to him when a fugitive (2 Sam. 17:
27-29).
Hanun is the
son of Nahash, although no more information is recorded
in the word of God concerning him (with the exception of
(1 Chron. 19). We have met his father Nahash in an
earlier study, (1 Sam. 11). We noted in that study that
Nahash is the Hebrew word for "serpent" and the
word used to describe the devil in Genesis 3. Nahash
encamped against the men of Jabesh-gilead where he
threatened them, "On this condition will I make a
covenant with you, that I may thrust out all your right
eyes, and lay it for a reproach upon all Israel" (1 Sam.
11:2). As you will recall Saul was summoned by the
Jabesh-gileadites to whom he responded to scatter Nahash
and his troops.
The kindness
of Nahash to David is not recorded as to its particulars.
We might speculate that during David's escape from Saul
in (1 Sam. 22:3), he passed through the land of Ammon
where Nahash afforded David safe passage, assuming David
was an enemy of Saul. After the events of (1 Sam. 11) any
enemy of Saul was a friend of his.
Unfortunately,
David's good intentions and pure motives are questioned
and misunderstood. The young King Hanun listens to his
advisors who accuse David of sending messengers to spy
out the land (vs. 3). This is exactly what Joseph accused
his brothers of in (Gen. 42:9). We might make the
observation that true
friendships
do not find a common bond in hatred or spite for another
person. See Pilate and Herod in (Lk. 23:12).
First Chron.
(19) tells us that Hanun had the messengers shaved, but
(2 Sam. 10) is more specific, "shaved off the one half of
their beards" (vs. 4). The purpose was to humiliate and
embarrass the messengers. Shaving was a sign of voluntary
humility (Job 1:20; Gen. 41:14; Jer. 41:5; Isa. 15:2).
The Jews were instructed in the law not even to round the
corners of their beards, (Lev. 19:27; 21:5).
It appears
that their clothing is cut to waist level from the ground
up. The practice is very common in prisoner of war and
concentration camps to distinguish the prisoners from the
guards. The results ... effective - "the men were greatly
ashamed." (vs. 5).
The
children of Ammon saw that they "stank. The colloquialism
is common in the U.S.A. in the 1980's; see (Gen.
34:30).
Hanun might
have experienced a severe case of "buyer's remorse" after
the shaving stripping incident. The actions were aimed at
David personally. David had ways of dealing with such
people. Hanun hires himself some Syrian mercenary
soldiers, a group of soldiers that Joab obviously had a
great deal of respect for, (vss. 9,10,11).
Joab along
with his brother Abishai (1 Sam. 26:6) lead the Israelite
armies into battle. Joab plans his strategy. The
Israelites find themselves surrounded, "before and
behind." Joab chooses the "mighty men" to oppose the
Syrians, obviously and historically a ruthless fighting
force, and sends brother Abishai to oppose the Ammonites.
No provisions for failure, defeat or retreat are
discussed; note that a third alternative is missing in
(vs. 11), what if both armies are too
strong???
Joab
commissions the troops, "Be of good courage" (Josh.
1:6-9), "and let us play the men." Joab simply says,
"let's be men, do our best and leave the consequences to
God'" Joab does not pray for victory! He simply decides
to do his best and let God's will be done (1 Sam.
3:18).
The
Israelites present themselves as an awesome foe, the
Syrians "take to the hills." A mercenary soldier can
never be dedicated to a cause like a true patriot can.
Nary a shot is fired and the enemy is running for cover.
"Resist the devil and he will flee from you." (Jas.
4:7).
