top of page

Poole on 2 Samuel 6:17-23: Michal's Contempt for David's Passionate Display

Verse 17:[1]  And (1 Chron. 16:1) they brought in the ark of the LORD, and set it in (1 Chron. 15:1; Ps. 132:8) his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched (Heb. stretched[2]) for it:  and David (1 Kings 8:5, 62, 63) offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD.


[In the midst of the tabernacle that David pitched for it]  That is, in which it was covered, as if by the Mosaic veil.  This place was outside of the Royal house; for, after sacrifice is made in it, the King is said to return to his house (Menochius).  The old tabernacle was kept in Gibeon, as it is evident in Chronicles.  Now, he was erecting a tent, not a shrine; because the ark was yet in its wandering, and he had already at that point set his mind on a temple (Martyr).


In the tabernacle that David had pitched for it; for Moses’s tabernacle was still at Gibeon, 1 Chronicles 16:39; 21:29; 2 Chronicles 1:3, which David left there, because he designed to build a temple at Jerusalem with all speed, though he was countermanded therein by God himself.

 

Verse 18:[3]  And as soon as David had made an end of offering burnt offerings and peace offerings, (1 Kings 8:55; 1 Chron. 16:2) he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of hosts.


[He blessed the people]  He supplicated for the people in the name of the Lord (Vatablus, Martyr, Sanchez).  This was among the rights of the King, 1 Kings 8:55 (Grotius).  The functions of King and Priest were associated; and so it is not strange, if they had many things in common.  Both blessed the people.  Both by office were admonishing and teaching the people (Martyr).  Perhaps he is said to bless, because he distributed food to them; for blessing sometimes signifies a gift, as we said on 1 Samuel 25:27 (Sanchez).


He blessed the people, that is, he heartily and solemnly prayed to God for his blessing upon them; which he did both as prophet and as their king, to whom by office it belongs, by all means, to seek his people’s welfare.

 

Verse 19:[4]  (1 Chron. 16:3) And he dealt among all the people, even among the whole multitude of Israel, as well to the women as men, to every one a cake of bread, and a good piece of flesh, and a flagon of wine.  So all the people departed every one to his house.


[A cake of bread, ‎חַלַּת]  This is a torte of bread, to which something of the confectioners art has been added (Sanchez, similarly Lapide).


[And a roast of beef, ‎וְאֶשְׁפָּר]  A morsel of flesh (Munster, Junius and Tremellius, Montanus, etc.), how much is able to suffice for a man in dining (Rabbi Levi in Munster).  An ample portion, which you might call choice; from שָׁפַר, to please, to be pleasant.  Or the word is composed from אֵשׁ/fire and פַּר/ox, as if you would call it the ignition of an ox.  Or it signifies, a measured portion, from the Ethiopic שפר, which signifies to measure, Matthew 7:2 (Dieu).


[And wheat flour fried with oil, ‎וַאֲשִׁישָׁה]  A flagon (Munster out of Kimchi, Vatablus, etc.), understanding, of wine (Vatablus, Junius and Tremellius, Piscator).  Ellipsis of a common adjunct (Piscator).  Others:  meal:  thus Tigurinus and our men (Munster).

 

[circa 1042 BC]  Verse 20:[5]  (Ps. 30 title) Then David returned to bless his household.  And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel to day, who (2 Sam. 6:14, 16; 1 Sam. 19:24) uncovered himself to day in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the (Judg. 9:4) vain fellows shamelessly (or, openly[6]) uncovereth himself!


[Exposing himself…and he was stripped]  Not completely; but that he had put off his outermost Royal garment, so that he might put the Ephod on (Lapide, similarly Sanchez, Estius, Menochius).


Who uncovered himself; either, first, by stripping himself of his royal robes, that he might put on a Levitical ephod; or by discovering some part of his thighs or legs, as might possibly happen whilst he danced with all his might, as is said above, 2 Samuel 6:14, considering that the men did then wear loose garments; or she speaks thus, not that he did so, but only by way of aggravation of his fault, and to vilify him the more, as is usual with persons in such cases.


[Before the handmaids of his servants]  She was feigning this.  For the girls, choruses of which had perhaps preceded the ark, appear to have been, not common, but noble.  Such were Miriam, the sister of Moses,[7] and the daughter of Jephthah[8] (Sanchez).


The handmaids of his servants; who either bore a part in the solemnity, as women sometimes did, Exodus 15:20; or at least were spectators of it, and of David’s carriage in it.


[As if he should be naked, ‎כְּהִגָּל֥וֹת נִגְל֖וֹת]  Just as to be naked by stripping (Montanus); just as he is undressed and exposed (Jonathan); altogether as he uncovers himself (Junius and Tremellius).  The doubling has regard to the augmentation of the signification (Mariana).


[One of the buffoons, ‎אַחַ֥ד הָרֵקִֽים׃]  One of the foolish (Pagnine), the vain (Jonathan, Munster, Vatablus); any of the vainest men (Syriac, Junius and Tremellius, Piscator); one of the idle men, or buffoons, that is, as one vile and abject (Vatablus).


As one of the vain fellows; as idle and light persons use to do.

 

Verse 21:[9]  And David said unto Michal, It was before the LORD, (1 Sam. 13:14; 15:28) which chose me before thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the LORD, over Israel:  therefore will I play before the LORD.


[Before the Lord, etc.,לִפְנֵ֣י יְהוָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֙ר בָּֽחַר־בִּ֤י מֵֽאָבִיךְ֙ וּמִכָּל־בֵּית֔וֹ לְצַוֹּ֙ת אֹתִ֥י נָגִ֛יד עַל־עַ֥ם יְהוָ֖ה עַל־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְשִׂחַקְתִּ֖י לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָֽה׃]  Some maintain that it is an oath, Before the God (or, God lives), who chose me, etc., namely, that I will play before the Lord, etc. (certain interpreters in Sanchez).  Before Jehovah, who chose me, etc., and I will play (will dance [Septuagint], will praise [Jonathan]) before Jehovah (Pagnine, Septuagint, Jonathan).  Before Jehovah (understanding, did I that [Vatablus, Arabic], or I exulted or played [Junius and Tremellius, Piscator, similarly Munster]) and (and therefore [Munster]) I will exult, or play, before the Lord (Junius and Tremellius, Piscator, Munster).  It is an Ellipsis of the antecedent, or hypozeuga, which indicates a copula (Junius).  Before Jehovah, says he, who chose me, etcBefore Jehovah, I say, I played (Castalio).


It was before the Lord; in his presence and service, which though contemptible to thee, is, and ever shall be, honourable in mine eyes.  Which chose me before thy father, and before all his house; which took away the honour from him and his, and transferred it upon me, whereby he hath obliged me to love and serve him with all my might.

 

Verse 22:[10]  And I will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base in mine own sight:  and of the maidservants (or, of the handmaids of my servants) which thou hast spoken of, of them shall I be had in honour.


[I will play and be more vile, etc., and more glorious I shall appear]  I think that the particle if is to be supplied here, which is elsewhere done; Proverbs 1:28, they shall call upon me (that is, if they call upon me), and I will not answer:  John 7:34, ye shall seek me, and ye shall not find me, that is, if ye seek me, etc.  Thus in this place, I will play and be more vile, etc., that is, if I play, and am vile, etc., then I shall appear more glorious, that is, in the eyes of the Lord.  Of course, the judgment of God is one thing; the judgment of men another (Sanchez). וּנְקַלֹּ֤תִי וגו״ עוֹד֙ מִזֹּ֔את, and I will be more vile than this, understanding, vileness; that is, I will endeavor to appear more vile, if it ought to be called vileness (Vatablus).  And I will be more vile than this, etc. (certain interpreters in Malvenda), or, than now, etc. (other interpreters in Malvenda) [that is to say, than at this time].  Than which I will abase myself yet further, etc. (Junius and Tremellius). 


Will be base in mine own sight; I will always be ready to humble and abase myself before God.


[And with the maidservants…shall I appear more glorious,וְעִם־הָֽאֲמָהוֹת֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר אָמַ֔רְתְּ עִמָּ֖ם אִכָּבֵֽדָה׃]  Before those maidservants of whom thou hast spoken, and before those (namely, the Israelites whom thou hast called my servants [Junius]) shall I be more glorious (Junius and Tremellius).  [The ‎עִמָּם, of them, they translate those men, since it is masculine, and does not agree with the feminine ‎אֲמָהוֹת/maidservants:  But others connect these through an Enallage of gender, and translate it:]  Before the maidservants…before them, I say (Syriac, Piscator, thus Munster, Tigurinus, Piscator, etc.).  The sense:  The more lowly I think myself, the more glorious I shall appear to the maidservants, that is, to the people (Mariana, similarly Munster).  It is a great thing, to retain this virtue while in Royal power (Grotius).


Of them shall I be had in honour; I shall rather choose to get honour from the meanest of my people, in serving and praising God, than to gain esteem from thee by my lukewarmness in God’s service.

 

Verse 23:[11]  Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child (see 1 Sam. 15:35; Is. 22:14; Matt. 1:25) unto the day of her death.


[Therefore, to Michal no son was born, etc.]  He punished her with perpetual sterility (Menochius).  Not a light sort of punishment (Grotius) was this esteemed among the Hebrews (Sanchez); especially in a Royal consort (Grotius); since she was of Royal stock, and more illustrious than the other wives of David, if she had brought forth any son from David, it appeared that he was going to come to Royal dignity (Sanchez).  But you will say that five sons are attributed to Michal in 2 Samuel 21:8.  Response:  1.  That was done, because they were adopted by her; but they were the sons of Merob (Hebrews and a good many in Sanchez); as it is evident from this, that they are said to be the sons of Adriel, etc., to whom was married, not Michal, but Merob, 1 Samuel 18:19 (Sanchez).  2.  Or they were sons of Michal, but by the other husband, not by David (Josephus in Serarius).  3.  Or she was punish with sterility only from the day that she despised her husband, since previously she begat a son to David (certain Hebrews in Malvenda).  See 2 Samuel 3:5; 21:8 (Malvenda).


Therefore; not because of David’s words to her, which have nothing in them to this purpose; but because of her proud, and petulant, and ungodly speech and carriage to David, which God justly punished with sterility.  Michal had no child, to wit, by David, and after this time, which these words evidently respect; which was true, although those five children ascribed to Michal, 2 Samuel 21:8, were hers by birth, and not by adoption only.  Unto the day of her death, that is, never; for if she ever had any, it must be before her death.  Compare 1 Samuel 15:35; Matthew 1:25.


[1] Hebrew: וַיָּבִ֜אוּ אֶת־אֲר֣וֹן יְהוָ֗ה וַיַּצִּ֤גוּ אֹתוֹ֙ בִּמְקוֹמ֔וֹ בְּת֣וֹךְ הָאֹ֔הֶל אֲשֶׁ֥ר נָטָה־ל֖וֹ דָּוִ֑ד וַיַּ֙עַל דָּוִ֥ד עֹל֛וֹת לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָ֖ה וּשְׁלָמִֽים׃

[2] Hebrew:  ‎נָטָה.

[3] Hebrew:  ‎וַיְכַ֣ל דָּוִ֔ד מֵהַעֲל֥וֹת הָעוֹלָ֖ה וְהַשְּׁלָמִ֑ים וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֶת־הָעָ֔ם בְּשֵׁ֖ם יְהוָ֥ה צְבָאֽוֹת׃

[4] Hebrew: וַיְחַלֵּ֙ק לְכָל־הָעָ֜ם לְכָל־הֲמ֣וֹן יִשְׂרָאֵל֘ לְמֵאִ֣ישׁ וְעַד־אִשָּׁה֒ לְאִ֗ישׁ חַלַּ֥ת לֶ֙חֶם֙ אַחַ֔ת וְאֶשְׁפָּ֣ר אֶחָ֔ד וַאֲשִׁישָׁ֖ה אֶחָ֑ת וַיֵּ֥לֶךְ כָּל־הָעָ֖ם אִ֥ישׁ לְבֵיתֽוֹ׃

[5] Hebrew: וַיָּ֥שָׁב דָּוִ֖ד לְבָרֵ֣ךְ אֶת־בֵּית֑וֹ וַתֵּצֵ֞א מִיכַ֤ל בַּת־שָׁאוּל֙ לִקְרַ֣את דָּוִ֔ד וַתֹּ֗אמֶר מַה־נִּכְבַּ֙ד הַיּ֜וֹם מֶ֣לֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל אֲשֶׁ֙ר נִגְלָ֤ה הַיּוֹם֙ לְעֵינֵ֙י אַמְה֣וֹת עֲבָדָ֔יו כְּהִגָּל֥וֹת נִגְל֖וֹת אַחַ֥ד הָרֵקִֽים׃

[6] Hebrew:  ‎כְּהִגָּל֥וֹת נִגְל֖וֹת.

[7] Exodus 15:20, 21.

[8] Judges 11:34.

[9] Hebrew: וַיֹּ֣אמֶר דָּוִד֘ אֶל־מִיכַל֒ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהוָ֗ה אֲשֶׁ֙ר בָּֽחַר־בִּ֤י מֵֽאָבִיךְ֙ וּמִכָּל־בֵּית֔וֹ לְצַוֹּ֙ת אֹתִ֥י נָגִ֛יד עַל־עַ֥ם יְהוָ֖ה עַל־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְשִׂחַקְתִּ֖י לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָֽה׃

[10] Hebrew:  ‎וּנְקַלֹּ֤תִי עוֹד֙ מִזֹּ֔את וְהָיִ֥יתִי שָׁפָ֖ל בְּעֵינָ֑י וְעִם־הָֽאֲמָהוֹת֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר אָמַ֔רְתְּ עִמָּ֖ם אִכָּבֵֽדָה׃

[11] Hebrew:  ‎וּלְמִיכַל֙ בַּת־שָׁא֔וּל לֹֽא־הָ֥יָה לָ֖הּ יָ֑לֶד עַ֖ד י֥וֹם מוֹתָֽהּ׃ פ

25 views9 comments

9 Comments


George Swinnock's The Christian Man's Calling: 'This reverence must be inwardly, in her affections; she must love him as a member, and fear him as a head. Her fear indeed must not be like that of a servant to his master, nor that of a child to his father. From the former it differs specifically; for the slave fears the rod, not the person; the wife feareth the person, not the rod. From the latter it differeth gradually; according to the degree of the distance, such is the degree of reverence; the child's distance being much greater, his reverence is, or should be, greater also; but her fear must be like that of the church to Christ, an acknowledgment o…

Like

Ralph Erskine's "The World's Verdict": 'But if, notwithstanding of all this, the true followers of Christ be nicknamed a sect; if a strict and sober conversation, if a zealous contending for the faith, if a diligent attendance upon, and adherence to the gospel, and its truths and ordinances, if joining in religious societies for prayer and Christian conference, and endeavouring in our places the suppression of error, immorality, and profaneness, if a vigorous opposition to everything that encroaches upon the prerogative of Christ, or tendeth to hurt the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government of his house, if these, and the like, be called the badge of a sect, or party, let us not be moved at it; but rather sa…

Like

William Gouge's Domestical Duties: 'Question. What if her fault be an heinous notorious sin?


Answer. In an extraordinary case some sharpness may be used: as the reproofs of Jacob, [Gen 30:2] Job, [Job 2:10] and David [2 Sam 6:21-22] do show, for they were every one of them sharp: but yet this sharpness must not be made bitter by any evil language. A woman's wickedness may not move an husband to be forward, and outrageous; but rather to be the more watchful over himself, that he contain himself within the bounds of discretion and moderation. For which end it is meet that husbands lay it down for a rule, never to rebuke their wives when they are in passion. Passion…

Like

William Gouge's Domestical Duties: 'The authority and charge which God has given to an husband over his wife, do require that as good and just occasion is offered, he should reprove her: for this is an especial means to draw her from those sins, wherein otherwise she might live and lie, yea and die also; and so live, lie, and die under God's wrath: out of which misery and wretchedness to free a wife, is as great a token of love, as to pull her out of the water when she is in danger of drowning, or out of the fire when she is in danger of burning. Solomon thus styles reproofs, reproofs of life, [Prov 15:31] and expressly note…

Like

William Gouge's Domestical Duties: 'Contrary is the waspish and shrewish disposition of many wives to their husbands, who care not how hastily and unadvisedly they speak to them, like Rachel; [Genesis 30:1] nor how angrily and chidingly, like Jezebel; [1 Kings 21:7] nor how disdainfully, and spitefully, like Zipporah; [Exodus 4:25-26] nor how scoffingly, and frumpingly, like Michal; [2 Samuel 6:20] nor how reproachfully and disgracefully, like Job's wife. [Job 2:9] If they be reproved by their husbands, their husbands shall be reproached by them: and they are ready to answer again, not only word for word, but ten for one. Many wives by their shrewish speeches, show no more respect to their husbands, than to their servants, if s…


Like
bottom of page