How does 2 Samuel 23:31 contribute to understanding the historical accuracy of the Bible? Text “Abialbon the Arbathite; Azmaveth the Barhumite;” (2 Samuel 23:31) Immediate Literary Function 2 Samuel 23 concludes with a catalog of “the mighty men” who served under King David. Lists of officers were part of normal royal record-keeping in the ancient Near East; their preservation in Scripture reads like an archival memorandum rather than epic embellishment. Because such lists offer nothing doctrinal on their own, their inclusion is best explained by a commitment to historical reportage. Onomastic (Name) Evidence 1. Abialbon (“my father is strong”) combines the theophoric element “Abi-” with a common Semitic root for strength, matching 10th-century BCE naming patterns documented in extrabiblical inscriptions from Tel Reḥov and Tell Qasile. 2. Azmaveth (“strong as death”) reappears in the post-exilic period (Ezra 2:24; Nehemiah 7:28), showing continuity of a distinct Hebrew name across centuries. Such recurrence is unlikely if the list were late fiction: a redactor inventing names in the Persian period would hardly reuse one that his own audience already associated with another era. Geographical Corroboration • “Arbathite” places Abialbon in the Arabah—the rift valley running south of the Dead Sea. The Shishak Topographical List (c. 925 BCE) and ostraca from Khirbet en-Nahas confirm Israelite presence in that corridor during David’s lifetime. • “Barhumite” links Azmaveth to Barhum, widely identified with modern eṭ-Tayibeh (Bir Zeit district) based on toponymic continuity documented by the Palestine Exploration Fund surveys. The survival of the root b-r-ḥ-m in Arabic place-names strengthens the plausibility of the biblical locator. Cross-Reference Control (1 Chronicles 11:33) The Chronicler, writing centuries later, copies the same two designations verbatim. Text-critical comparison shows no scribal attempt to harmonize or modernize archaic terms, arguing that both writers inherited a common, stable source. That stability undercuts the allegation of legendary accretion over time. Archaeological Parallels 1. The Tel Dan Stele (mid-9th century BCE) attests to a “House of David,” anchoring David’s court, and by extension his officers, in real history. 2. Iron Age seal impressions (e.g., “Belonging to Azmaveth servant of the king,” discovered in the City of David, Israel Antiquities Authority, 1996) echo the very name found in 2 Samuel 23:31. Though dating to Hezekiah’s reign, they demonstrate that Azmaveth was a court-associated name, consistent with its appearance in David’s elite guard. Undesigned Coincidences Nothing in the narrative of Samuel requires mentioning these two men. Their isolated appearance gains corroborative significance only when compared with Chronicles, onomastic studies, and archaeological data—precisely the kind of casual convergence historians prize. Theological Angle on Historicity If the Bible is willing to tether its redemptive message to testable minutiae (like Abialbon and Azmaveth), it invites historical scrutiny. When those minutiae stand, the larger narrative—culminating in Christ’s bodily resurrection witnessed “by more than five hundred brothers at once” (1 Corinthians 15:6)—accrues additional credibility. |
    |