Matthew Henry on 2 Samuel 3:22–end
We have here an account of the murder of Abner by Joab, and David's deep resentment of it.
I. Joab very insolently fell foul upon David for treating with Abner. He happened to be abroad upon service when Abner was with David, pursuing a troop, either of Philistines or of Saul's party; but, upon his return, he was informed that Abner was just gone (Sa2 3:22, Sa2 3:23), and that a great many kind things had passed between David and him. He had all the reason in the world to be satisfied of David's prudence and to acquiesce in the measures he took, knowing him to be a wise and good man himself and under a divine conduct in all his affairs; and yet, as if he had the same sway in David's cause th…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on 2 Samuel 3:33
the king lamented over Abner--This brief elegy is an effusion of indignation as much as of sorrow. As Abner had stabbed Asahel in open war [Sa2 2:23], Joab had not the right of the Goel. Besides, he had adopted a lawless and execrable method of obtaining satisfaction (see on Kg1 2:5). The deed was an insult to the authority, as well as most damaging to the prospects of the king. But David's feelings and conduct on hearing of the death, together with the whole character and accompaniments of the funeral solemnity, tended not only to remove all suspicion of guilt from him, but even to turn the tide of popular opinion in his favor, and to pave the way for his reigning over all the tribes more h…
Read the whole note in the consoleAdam Clarke on 2 Samuel 3:36
The people took notice - They saw that the king's grief was sincere, and that he had no part nor device in the murder of Abner: see Sa2 3:37.
John Gill on 2 Samuel 3:37
For all the people and all Israel understood that day,.... Not the people of Judah only, but of Israel also, to whom the knowledge of these things came; they knew and were satisfied by his conduct and behaviour, by his words and actions:
that it was not of the king to slay Abner the son of Ner; it was not by the counsel or advice of the king, as the Targum; it was without his knowledge and consent, was contrary to his mind and will; that he had no manner of concern in it, and that if it had been in his power he would have prevented it.
