What is the meaning of 2 Samuel 11:20? if the king’s anger flares • Joab knows David’s military standards and anticipates the king’s reaction. After years of leading Israel’s armies (2 Samuel 5:2; 8:15), David was quick to spot strategic blunders, and anger was a predictable response (Proverbs 16:14; 19:12). • The phrase signals tension: Joab’s tactics at Rabbah appear reckless, yet they serve David’s hidden agenda to see Uriah killed (2 Samuel 11:15). • Scripture here underscores both the reality of righteous authority resenting incompetence (Ecclesiastes 8:4) and the tragic irony that David’s private sin is steering public policy (Psalm 51:3). he may ask you • Joab prepares the messenger for interrogation, reflecting the chain-of-command accountability seen elsewhere in Israel’s history (1 Samuel 26:15–16; 2 Samuel 1:13). • By scripting the exchange, Joab attempts to manage David’s anger and shift focus toward the “good news” of Uriah’s death (2 Samuel 11:21). • The scene exposes Joab’s shrewdness—he serves the king, yet manipulates events to shield himself and implicate David further (2 Samuel 3:27–29). Why did you get so close to the city to fight? • Ancient siege warfare required distance: staying out of arrow and stone range (2 Kings 14:10). Joab had breached that unwritten rule. • David would immediately recall the disastrous precedent of Abimelech at Thebez, where a woman dropped a millstone on his head when he fought too near the wall (Judges 9:50-54, explicitly cited in 2 Samuel 11:21). • Thus the question reflects sound battlefield wisdom, which Joab knowingly violated to see Uriah exposed (2 Samuel 11:16-17). Did you not realize they would shoot from atop the wall? • City walls were elevated firing platforms (2 Kings 9:17; Isaiah 22:10). Any competent commander understood the lethal zone beneath them. • Joab banked on that certainty. By ordering men close, he guaranteed casualties, including Uriah, while retaining plausible deniability. • The rhetorical sting of David’s expected words highlights the contrast between military prudence and sinful manipulation (Psalm 36:1-4). summary 2 Samuel 11:20 captures Joab’s instructions to a messenger who will face David’s predictable anger over poor tactics. Joab anticipates the king’s objections—drawing too near the wall invites deadly missiles—and crafts a reply that will divert blame and spotlight Uriah’s death. The verse exposes the layers of David’s concealed sin: it corrupts military judgment, endangers troops, and entangles subordinates in deceit. Scripture records the episode with factual precision, reminding readers of the high cost of hidden transgression and the inescapable principles of accountability, leadership integrity, and the sovereignty of God over human schemes (Numbers 32:23; Galatians 6:7-8). |
    |