In this chapter, and the next four chapters, we see that David’s troubles and the trouble for his household are continued to be lived out as Nathan the prophet told him earlier, 2 Samuel 12:10.
Ziba was a steward of Mephibosheth, and it appears he may have been plotting against Mephibosheth so he could find favour with David, 2 Samuel 16:1. He brings donkeys for David and his household to ride, along with some food to eat for his escape from Jerusalem, 2 Samuel 16:1-2.
Clarke, in his commentary, says the following.
‘This is the Eastern method of speaking when anything is presented to a great man: ‘This and this is for the slaves of the servants of your majesty,’ when at the same time the presents are intended for the sovereign himself, and are so understood. It is a high Eastern compliment: These presents are not worthy of your acceptance; they are only fit for the slaves of your slaves.’
When David asks where his grandfather is, he tells him he’s staying in Jerusalem because ‘the Israelites will restore to me my grandfather’s kingdom’, 2 Samuel 16:3. This is clearly a lie being told by Ziba. He appears to be plotting to get back what was given to David, which is the property of Mephibosheth, 2 Samuel 16:4.
David approached Bahurim, 2 Samuel 16:5, which was a tiny village some distance away from the Mount of Olives. This is the same place where Paltiel was told to leave his wife, Michal, 2 Samuel 3:15-16.
It’s also the same place where the sons of the priests, Jonathan and Ahimaaz, were hidden in a well during their information-gathering mission, 2 Samuel 17:18.
David approached Bahurim, a man called Shimei, who belonged to the family of Saul, 2 Samuel 16:5. He is possibly Cush the Benjamite, who is described in Psalm 7.
Here we read about him expressing his anger against David, 2 Samuel 16:6, because of all the troubles that had happened to the house of Saul. He tells David to get out and calls him a murderer, 2 Samuel 16:7. Some versions use the words, ‘man of blood’, which is the same description which God used to describe David, 1 Chronicles 22:8.
Barnes, in his commentary, says the following.
‘The Lord’s word to David, 1 Chronicles 22:8, was probably known to Shimei and now cast in David’s teeth by him, with special reference to the innocent blood of Uriah.’
Shimei tells David he is being paid back by God for all the blood he shed in the house of Saul, 2 Samuel 16:8. There’s no doubt that the Benjamites blamed David for the death of Saul and his sons on Mount Gilboa, 1 Samuel 31:1-6, Abner, 2 Samuel 3:22-39, Ish-Bosheth, 2 Samuel 4:5-12, and particularly, the seven descendants of Saul whom David handed over to the Gibeonites, 2 Samuel 21:1-14.
He appears to be speaking on behalf of many who were still loyal to Saul, which tells us that those who were loyal to Saul were still loyal to him many years after his death.
This is one reason why God didn’t want Israel to have a physical king in the first place, because when that king dies, there will always be those who remain loyal to him, which in turn would cause trouble for the next king.
Abishai then speaks to David concerning Shimei and calls him a ‘dead dog’, 2 Samuel 16:9 / 2 Samuel 9:8. It is clear he isn’t very happy with what is being said to David and he wants David to give him permission to punish Shimei, 2 Samuel 16:9. Notice David’s reaction, he says to leave him alone, it has nothing to do with anyone else except him, 2 Samuel 16:10-11.
He is perhaps leaving Shimei for God to deal with, 2 Samuel 16:12 / Deuteronomy 32:35, or more likely, David was still thinking that this was happening because of what Nathan told him earlier, 2 Samuel 12:10. In other words, he still believes he’s reaping what he sowed when he ordered the murder of Uriah, 2 Samuel 11:14-15.
David and his men continued along the road while Shimei continued to demonstrate his disproval of David by cursing him, throwing stones at him, and showering him with dirt, 2 Samuel 16:13. No wonder David and all the people arrived at their destination exhausted, and David refreshed himself, 2 Samuel 16:14.
Absalom and all the men of Israel came to Jerusalem, and Ahithophel was with him, 2 Samuel 16:15. The reason why Hushai says, ‘long live the king!’ to Absalom, 2 Samuel 16:16, was simply to try Absalom’s favour again and to bring about the downfall of Absalom.
Absalom asks Hushai, so this is the love he shows David, his friend? If David is his friend, why didn’t he go with him? 2 Samuel 16:17, and so, Hushai tells him, no, the one chosen by the LORD, by these people, and by all the men of Israel, his I will be, and I will remain with him, 2 Samuel 16:19.
He asks, whom should I serve? Should I not serve the son? Just as I served David, so he will serve Absalom, 2 Samuel 16:19. When Absalom asks for Ahithophel’s advice, 2 Samuel 16:20, Ahithophel tells him to sleep with his father’s concubines, 2 Samuel 16:21 / Leviticus 20:11.
If Absalom does this, he will achieve two things: first of all, if he sleeps with David’s concubines, he would be publicly declaring that he now owns everything which once belonged to David. Secondly, if he sleeps with David’s concubines, he would be publicly declaring that there would be no reconciliation between him and David.
Barnes, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Taking possession of the harem was the most decided act of sovereignty, 1 Kings 2:22. It was also the greatest offence and insult that could be offered. Such an act on Absalom’s part made reconciliation impossible. A further motive has been found in this advice, namely, the desire on the part of Ahithophel to make David taste the bitterness of that cup which he had caused others (Uriah and all Bath-Sheba’s family) to drink, and receive the measure which he had meted withal.’
Clarke, in his commentary, says the following.
‘It may be remembered that David left ten of them behind to take care of the house, 2 Samuel 15:16. Ahithophel advised this infernal measure, in order to prevent the possibility of a reconciliation between David and his son, thus was the prophecy to Nathan fulfilled, 2 Samuel 12:11. And this was probably transacted in the very same place where David’s eye took the adulterous view of Bath-Sheba, 2 Samuel 11:2.’
Absalom took Ahithophel’s advice, 2 Samuel 16:22, and notice that they pitched a tent for Absalom; they pitched it on the roof, 2 Samuel 16:22. This would be the roof of the palace; this is in a very open place, in full view of everyone. This tent was called the ‘wedding tent’, Psalm 19:5 / Joel 2:16.
Absalom’s plan is very clear; he wanted to publicly humiliate David. There appears to be no depths of sin to which Absalom won’t go. Here is a man who murdered his brother for the rape of a half-sister, 2 Samuel 13:1 / 2 Samuel 13:28-29, and now he himself is guilty on ten counts of incest, which was a capital offence, Leviticus 20:11 / 1 Corinthians 5:1.
It’s also important to note that what Absalom did here was exactly what the prophet Nathan said to David would happen because of David’s sin with Bathsheba, 2 Samuel 12:11. Notice that ‘the advice Ahithophel gave was like that of one who inquires of God,’ 2 Samuel 16:23.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following concerning 2 Samuel 16:22-23.
‘It is plain enough that this is not an expression of divine approval of Ahithophel’s counsel, but a statement of the way it was received in those days, particularly a report of the way in which David and Absalom received it. Actually, Ahithophel’s counsel, from the worldly viewpoint, was indeed wise, but in reality, it was the counsel of Satan himself as it regarded Absalom’s outrageous incest. In that particular, Ahithophel’s cursed counsel was an oracle of the Devil, not of God.’