Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

....his bloody house....


Recommended Posts

  • Members

2Sa 21:1 Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, [it is] for Saul, and for [his] bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites.

skipping down to verse six........

2Sa 21:6 Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the LORD in Gibeah of Saul, [whom] the LORD did choose. And the king said, I will give [them].

Have you ever heard this taught, that these 'seven sons' were executed for something Saul did?
So, IF that was the case, why would God tell king David to do that, when it says in Deuteronomy chapter 24....
Deu 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

I believe, that for God to sanction this or require this to be done, these 'seven sons' would have had to be guilty. Notice the verse says; "and for his bloody house". These members of Sauls household, must have been guilty of the crimes.
What say you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Administrators

I didn't see this until now.

The first verse you posted states that the reason was because Saul slew the Gibeonites. There's a likelihood that, with Saul being the way he was, his sons were guilty...but scripture seems to indicate it was due to Saul.

Don't know why, in response to the question from Deut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Heartstrings,

IMO your deduction in the first post is correct. The scriptures are clear that children acting on their own still affect the family name. For instance when Simeon and Levi slew Hamor and Shechem and the entire city and took all they wanted Jacob says later ?ye have troubled me to make me stink among the inhabitants of the land? ? ?and I shall be destroyed, I and my house?. Here we see Jacob as the father accepting responsibility for what his sons did.

In another for instance, in Hosea 1:4 God said that he would avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu an odd statement since when you go back to 2 Kings 9 God told Jehu to cut off the house of Ahab and annihilate them. So why after so many years is God now avenging Jezreel?

Well Jezreel was a city that housed seventy sons of Ahab and the house hold of the king but most of the people who served the king were not of the family of Ahab and yet Jehu slew everyone who was associated with the former king. In 2 Kings 10:11 we read, ?So Jehu slew all that remained of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, and all his great men, and his kinsfolks, and his priests, until he left him none remaining.?

God said of this deed 2 Kings 10:30 And the LORD said unto Jehu, Because thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in mine heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.

So if God told Jehu to wipe out the family of Ahab and then commended Jehu for wiping out the family Ahab why is he now going to avenge Jezreel on the family of Jehu? Because Jehu wiped out an entire city and he and his family were given 4 generations to make it right and did not. But now in the book of Hosea God says I will repay, vengeance is mine.

The lesson we take away from this is that God keeps accurate books on who has done what and to whom it has been done and gives those who did the act ample opportunity to seek forgiveness. But if forgiveness for wrong is not sought God will exact a final retribution.

Coming back to 2 Samuel 21:6 keep in mind these facts.

1. The Gibeonites were not Israelites though David was their king
a. If one reads all the passages in the histories one finds that the Gibeonites were a sect of the Amorites who had been conquered but allowed to live in Israel.
b. This conquered tribe had begun to look upon the Lord God as their God. (2 Samuel 21:6)
c. As a conquered tribe they could not practice war except with in the Israelite armies. Therefore Saul?s attack on them as a tribe was not one of need but simply an act of bullying because he had the power. The scriptures say he wanted to show Israel his zeal for the Lord. :roll
d. David?s purpose for asking what Israel needed to do for the Gibeonites was to free up the Gibeonites to receive the blessings of God and be a blessing to Israel. ?What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD??
2. The sacrifice of the few for the many is appropriate
3. The Gibeonites had the option of letting these sons go
4. God has the final decision of retribution
5. When all is done David fetches the bodies of Saul, Jonathon, and the seven sons of Saul and has them buried.
6. David seems to show mercy in his selection as much as is possible for he takes all seven sons from two families rather than from several.


Orvals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Orvals,
God said "and for his bloody house". Those three words mean that Sauls "household" were involved in violence. They were klillers. And I don't think these 'sons' were children. I believe they must have been old enough to have participated in the violence.

Read the words carefully; God did not say "it is becasue of Saul", and then stop there.
He went on to say "and for his bloody house".

If these men had been 'sacrificed' for crimes they were innocent of, it would be in direct violation of the command of God........ Sons are not to be put to death for the sins of the father.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This would be only the line of Paul saying, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, AND THY HOUSE." Obviously those in the house would only be saved when they believed. So Saul's "house" being punished also must mean that they willingly helped Saul slay the Gibeonites. Usually, in a patriarchal society when they man of the house did something the rest followed suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
This would be only the line of Paul saying' date=' "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, AND THY HOUSE." Obviously those in the house would only be saved when they believed.[u'] So Saul's "house" being punished also must mean that they willingly helped Saul slay the Gibeonites. Usually, in a patriarchal society when they man of the house did something the rest followed suit.


Absolutely
We do know that Saul's son, Jonathan, was a righteous man.
And had he been alive then, Jonathan would not have been executed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Another verse to consider.

2 Samuel 21:7 But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, because of the LORD'S oath that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul.

Mephibosheth was a child when Saul was king, he was crippled when his nursed dropped him while fleeing after news of the death of Saul and his sons. He could not have committed any crimes but the only reason given for his life being spared was the covenant between Jonathan and David. I would like to think that all the sons of Saul who were hanged committed crimes, but I am not sure that is the case. It may have been a case of the sins of the fathers just as Jonathan died in battle, even though he was a good man, for the wickedness of Saul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I understand that verse. But I am not convinced that it applied in this case. This was a strange situation. I don't know that it is something we can be certain about.

Davids child died for the sins of David here.

2 Samuel 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


No, but does it matter? God did.


Yes, we all know...God informed David that the child would die. It says nothing more. Imply all you want. God is in control of such things. But being God told MAN not to do it, I would say yes; yes it does matter.

Deu 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
I mean, how much plainer can it get? :uuhm: :bonk:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No need to get hot under the collar, I would like to think you are right, I am just not sure the passage supports it. Something else to consider. Deu 24:16, was given to Israel, but the Gibeonites were not Israelites. They may or may not have abided by all the same laws. The situation was this. There was a famine, David asked God about it, God tells David the reason for it, David calls the Gibeonites to ask what he can do to make it right, The Gibeonites say they don't want him to kill any man of Israel for them(I assume those who had a part in the killings) but they tell David they want seven of Sauls sons to hang. David agrees. Given the situation, the wording of the passage, and the fact that the Gibeonites were not Israelites I am not sure we can say conclusively that Sauls sons(and grandsons) who were hanged committed crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...