Abstract
The “Series preface” preceding the introduction states that the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible takes the position that doctrine is a crucial “clarifying agent” that aids our understanding of the Bible as Christian Scripture. Readers therefore should not expect 2 Samuel to contribute much to the literary or historical–critical understanding of its subject. This is (or should be) a theological commentary, contextualizing 2 Samuel within the broad scope of Christian dogma. Consequently, Barron’s interactions with theologians and theology constitute this commentary’s great strength.
The main character of 2 Samuel is King David, and Barron contextualizes David by describing all prior leading figures from Adam through Samuel as kings, responsible for righteous governance. David exceeds all of his predecessors, unifying Israel and establishing a capital at Jerusalem, thus becoming a new Adam who rules a restored Eden. David is also an example of “bad fathering and bad kingship,” following in the tradition of Adam and Eli, who allowed their kingdoms to be compromised by evil influence. Barron overdoes this by making David into the high priest as well, based solely on his reading of 2 Samuel 6. Fortunately, except in his discussion of that chapter, he does not attempt to develop this idea. Second Samuel thus contains both positive and negative portrayals of David, the difference being that when Barron’s David is good he is the best of kings, whereas his rare bad behavior is unremarkable.
Barron begins in his introduction and first chapter by explaining why God favors David in 1 Samuel. (Note: Barron regularly flips between “Yahweh” and “God” to refer to the deity, without giving reasons for his choice. In this review, I will simply refer to “God”.) First Samuel 8 is not, despite its literal wording, about the evils of kingship, but rather addresses the evils of “bad” kingship. Samuel rails against a monarchy reminiscent of the surrounding nations, exemplified through Israel’s history by Adam and his successors. In Barron’s thinking, then, Israel ever has a human king, although his exact title and responsibilities may change at times. Saul represents the bad kingship of the surrounding nations, so that his failure is foreseeable. David, however, is distinct from all of his predecessors because he keenly listens to God.
David’s place in the Bible as God’s man is a major theme of this commentary. For example, Barron’s discussion of 2 Samuel 7, where God establishes his covenant with David, is less about the text than about its use in the rest of the Bible. Barron notes that the idea of an eternal covenant with David’s line must have been incredible to the post-exilic Israelites responsible for final editing of this passage. Yet God’s passion for the impossible goes so far as to ultimately fulfill the covenant through one whom God himself condemned to death. Barron celebrates the covenant through copious references to the Psalms, Isaiah, and sundry New Testament passages, making theological observations along the way. Barron’s grand conclusion is that the covenant with David is completed when Christ is declared king.
David, therefore, is not merely king of Israel; he is a model for Jesus Christ. Barron duly plays up David’s actions and motivations, making him into a grand hero of the Bible, regularly portraying his behavior as exemplary. This contrasts with the tendency of many modern commentaries (including those listed in Barron’s bibliography) to raise questions about David’s behavior and motivations at virtually every turn. For example, in 2 Samuel 9, David brings Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan and the grandson of Saul, to live at his palace in Jerusalem. Whereas he notes the “cynical” reading of this scene (favored by most scholars) that says that David wished to keep the last of Saul’s descendants under close surveillance, Barron finds in David only a desire to “show tender mercy” to the outcast, however disadvantaged and separated from society. Moreover, whereas most scholars find it suspiciously convenient that in 2 Samuel 21 David “must” hand over seven of Saul’s progeny for execution, David behaves again, according to Barron, beyond reproach. This chapter instead illustrates the Old Testament idea, only cancelled at the cross of Jesus, that balance in the universe requires a “blood-for-blood” exchange. These examples made me wonder why Barron needs to criticize David for being a poor father in 2 Samuel 13–15. As the text does not say so explicitly, can we not read these chapters also in a way which exonerates David? Like Amnon and Absalom, God’s children are also wont to behave barbarically, and just as David enables Amnon to rape Tamar in 2 Samuel, God sometimes stands accused of enabling horrific deeds.
In the opening paragraph of this review I put “should be” in parentheses because Barron sometimes gets away from his theological approach. He often draws broad biblical parallels that seem more in keeping with a devotional commentary rather than a theological tome. As this is not a large volume, I fear that frequent allusions to other parts of the canon may have come at the expense of further interaction with Christian dogma.
Nevertheless, the theology present enables this commentary to meet its goals. 2 Samuel is a helpful addition to the literature on the books of Samuel, especially for readers looking to fit its material into the broad scope of Christian doctrine. As it is well written and engaging, pastors and students will benefit from its theological insights.