← Back to sermon library

Well, please turn with me in 
your Bibles to 2 Samuel chapter 21. My apologies to those who 
were here on Wednesday night or those who tuned in. This material, 
much of it will be review, but Scripture does present review 
as a good concept. So, this section that we dealt 
with on Wednesday night I think it has much to teach the church 
concerning several New Testament concepts that we'll look at along 
the way and at the end. So I want to read 2 Samuel chapter 
21, beginning in verse 1. Now there was a famine in the 
days of David for three years, year after year. And David inquired 
of the Lord. And the Lord answered, It is 
because of Saul and his bloodthirsty house, because he killed the 
Gibeonites. So the king called the Gibeonites 
and spoke to them. Now the Gibeonites were not of 
the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites. 
The children of Israel had sworn protection to them, but Saul 
had sought to kill them in his zeal for the children of Israel 
and Judah. Therefore David said to the Gibeonites, 
what shall I do for you? And with what shall I make atonement 
that you may bless the inheritance of the Lord? And the Gibeonites 
said to him, We will have no silver or gold from Saul or from 
his house, nor shall you kill any man in Israel for us. So 
he said, Whatever you say, I will do for you. Then they answered 
the king, Ask for the man who consumed us and plotted against 
us, that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the 
territories of Israel. Let seven men of his descendants 
be delivered to us, and we will hang them before the Lord in 
Gibeah of Saul, whom the Lord chose. And the king said, I will 
give them. 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. So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons 
of Rizpah, the daughter of Ayah, whom she bore to Saul, and the 
five sons of Michael, the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up 
for Adriel, the son of Barzillai, the Maholothite. And he delivered 
them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them on the hill 
before the Lord. So they fell, all seven together, 
and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first 
days, in the beginning of barley harvest. Now Rizpah, the daughter 
of Ayah, took sackcloth and spread it for herself on the rock, from 
the beginning of harvest until the late rains poured on them 
from heaven. And she did not allow the birds 
of the air to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field 
by night. And David was told what Rispat, 
the daughter of Ayah, the concubine of Saul, had done. Then David 
went and took the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan, his 
son, from the men of Jabesh-Gilead, who had stolen them from the 
street of Beth-shan, where the Philistines had hung them up, 
after the Philistines had struck down Saul in Gilboa. So he brought 
up the bones of Saul and the bones of Jonathan, his son, from 
there, and they gathered the bones of those who had been hanged. 
They buried the bones of Saul and Jonathan, his son, and the 
country of Benjamin and Zelah in the tomb of Kish, his father. 
So they performed all that the king commanded. And after that, 
God heeded the prayer for the land. When the Philistines were 
at war again with Israel, David and his servants with him went 
down and fought against the Philistines. And David grew faint. Then Ishbi-Banab, 
who was one of the sons of the giant, and the weight of whose 
bronze spear was 300 shekels, who was bearing a new sword, 
thought he could kill David. But Abishai, the son of Zariah, 
came to his aid and struck the Philistine and killed him. Then 
the men of David swore to him, saying, You shall go out no more 
with us to battle, lest you quench the lamp of Israel. Now it happened 
afterward that there was again a battle with the Philistines 
at Gob. Then Sibachai, the Hushethite, killed Saph, who was one of the 
sons of the giant. Again, there was war at Gob with 
the Philistines, where Elhanan, the son of Jeororagim, the Bethlehemite, 
killed the brother of Goliath, the Gittite, the shaft of whose 
spear was like a weaver's beam. Yet again, there was war at Gath, 
where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers 
on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number, 
and he was also born to the giant. So when he defied Israel, Jonathan 
the son of Shemiah, David's brother, killed him. These four were born 
to the giant in Gath and fell by the hand of David and by the 
hand of his servants. Amen. Well, let us pray. Our 
Father in heaven, we thank you for the written word and we pray 
now for the Holy Spirit to guide us as we consider this sobering 
passage of scripture. God, in many ways it probably 
puzzles many of us as to see this sort of thing take place. 
God, I pray that we'd have a proper understanding of it in its context, 
in the larger context of redemptive history. and how we thank You, 
Most High, for Your Holy Spirit, and we pray that He would be 
in us now, guiding us and illumining our minds and our hearts. We 
thank You that You've not left us alone in this world, that 
You've given us that truth that we have in Scripture, and You've 
given us the spirit of truth. and how we pray that He would 
be present among us even now. We ask that You would forgive 
us for all of our sins and our transgressions, and we pray that 
You would cleanse us from all iniquity through that precious 
blood shed by our Lord Jesus Christ in that atonement that 
in many respects is hinted at and pointed to even in this passage 
in 2 Samuel. We thank You for Your graciousness 
to us, we thank You for Your goodness and for Your mercy, 
and we just pray now that You would be glorified and honored, 
and that the Word would do genuine good to the souls of Your people, 
and as well to those who are outside of Christ. Our hearts 
desire that they would see their sin, and they would see the sufficiency 
of Jesus Christ alone to save to the uttermost. And we pray 
in His most blessed name. Amen. Well, just briefly, I want 
to set this section in its larger context. Again, it's a reminder 
for those who attend the Wednesday night studies, but essentially 
what we have in 2 Samuel is the history of David, the king of 
Israel. It certainly starts in 1 Samuel, 
but in 2 Samuel, in chapters 1 to 4, you have the commencement 
of David's reign at Hebron. And then in chapters 5 to 8, 
the consolidation of David's reign over all Israel. And then 
chapters 9 to 20 is the consequences of David's sin. David was indeed 
a man after God's own heart, but David was not a perfect man. 
He was not an infallible man. David committed adultery. and 
he committed murder in order to cover that. And as a result, 
God promised through the prophet Nathan that the sword would never 
depart from his house, that adversity would rise up from within his 
house, and that his own wives would be publicly humiliated 
before all Israel. And certainly in 9 to 20 we see 
those things played out. Now, chapters 21 to 24 are sort 
of a final assessment of the author's regard for David's ministry, 
and it's a positive assessment. And there is a sharp contrast 
between David here and Saul, which we may have occasion to 
notice at the end of the message this morning. So, 21, 22, 23, 
24 are a collection of chapters designed to assess the reign 
of King David of Israel. It serves as well as the precursor 
for the succession narrative in 1 Kings 1 and 2 when Solomon, 
David's son, occupies the throne. Now, this chapter breaks down 
into two sections. First, the Gibeonites avenged 
in verses 1 to 14, and then the Philistines destroyed in verses 
15 to 22. Essentially, what we find is 
that God advances the kingdom in spite of internal threat and 
external threat. The internal is seen here. There 
is famine in the land due to the sin of Saul. And so God gives 
them a way out, a means by which to preserve themselves. And then 
the external threat, of course, is the Philistines described 
in verses 15 to 22. But let's notice the Gibeonites' 
avenged in verses 1 to 14 under four considerations. In the first 
place, we'll notice the situation. Secondly, the resolution. Thirdly, 
the execution. And then fourthly, the aftermath, 
or how the parties respond to what occurs. And there are serious 
things going on. in this chapter. And if you have 
listened to the reading of the Word, you will understand that. It's a sober text. It's a serious 
text. It deserves our careful attention 
as we seek to uncover what's happening. Note in the first 
place the situation. There's famine in the land, verse 
1. Now, there was a famine in the 
days of David for three years. As a reader of the Old Testament, 
you need to pay attention to such things. Oftentimes, as we 
see fleshed out here, it is an indicator that God's judgment 
is upon His people. Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 
28 specify curses to the people of Israel if they violate the 
covenant of God. So when we read that there is 
a famine in the land for three years, We ought to take notice 
of this. God is angry with the nation 
of Israel. Now, no doubt David interpreted 
this way because he inquired of Yahweh. He sought to understand. He wanted to know why there is 
famine. This does not reflect well upon 
an earthly king when his people are dying. The king is to serve. The king is to shepherd. The 
king is to protect. The king is to defend. The king 
is to make sure that his people prosper and are doing well. And 
if they're dying as a result of famine, what David does is 
absolutely appropriate here. He inquires of the Lord. Now 
note the divine response. And this is a great mercy from 
God. Have you ever considered that the pagans, the heathen, 
pray to a God who has ears, but He cannot hear? They pray to 
a God who has a mouth or a tongue, but He cannot speak. They pray 
to a God who has eyes, but He cannot see. So what does that 
indicate? When the heathen pray to their 
gods, do they get responses? Absolutely not. If the dumb idol 
can't speak, if he's non-existent, he certainly can't answer why 
there's famine in the land. It's a shot in the dark, and 
I think the heathen are somehow, in their heart of hearts, conscious 
of that reality. But not the worshipper of the 
true and the living God. Isn't He described thus throughout 
Old and New Testaments? He is the living God. You know 
what one of the benefits is of praying to the living God? Is 
that you get real answers to life's problems and difficulties. 
You seek out the aid of an idol, and you will be frustrated. You 
come to Yahweh of Israel, and He gives answers. And this is 
a blessed thing. And He gives specific answers, 
such that David seeks to address the problem, so that he can help 
the people of Israel. Notice what he describes in verse 
1. Yahweh answers. It is because 
of Saul and his bloodthirsty house, because he killed the 
Gibeonites. This is the issue. That was not 
supposed to happen. Saul was not supposed to destroy 
the Gibeonites. More on that in just a moment. So David receives the divine 
response, and now he calls for the Gibeonites to come to him. 
Note verse 2, so the king called the Gibeonites and spoke to them. 
Now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of 
the remnant of the Amorites. The children of Israel had sworn 
protection to them, but Saul had sought to kill them in his 
zeal for the children of Israel and Judah. You can turn to Joshua 
9 to see this swearing of an oath to these people called the 
Gibeonites. Joshua chapter 9. Now, these 
Gibeonites deceived the children of Israel. They deceived Joshua. But nevertheless, Joshua and 
the leaders swore a covenant to the Gibeonites that they would 
allow them to live in the land. And so, as the Gibeonites approached 
David, they remind him of this particular oath that had been 
sworn. Notice in Joshua 9 at verse 15. It says, so Joshua 
made peace with them and made a covenant. Literally, he cut 
a covenant with them. More on that in just a moment. 
He cut a covenant with them to let them live, and the rulers 
of the congregation swore to them. And it happened at the 
end of three days, after they had made a covenant with them, 
that they heard that they were their neighbors who dwelt near 
them. Then the children of Israel journeyed and came to their cities 
on the third day. Now their cities were Gibeon, 
Kephara, Baroth, and Kirjath-jerum. But the children of Israel did 
not attack them, because the rulers of the congregation had 
sworn to them by the Lord God of Israel, and all the congregation 
complained against the rulers. Then all the rulers said to all 
the congregation, We have sworn to them by the Lord God of Israel. 
Now therefore, we may not touch them. This we will do to them. 
We will let them live, lest wrath be upon us because of the oath 
which we swore to them. And the rulers said to them, 
Let them live, but let them be woodcutters and water carriers 
for all the congregation, as the rulers had promised them. 
So you see what happens. The nation of Israel swears an 
oath. cuts a covenant with these Gibeonites 
to preserve them alive. Now, they're not going to be 
kings and bankers and merchants in Israel. They're going to be 
woodcutters and water carriers, but they're going to be living 
woodcutters and water carriers. That's a great boon, a great 
benefit. So back to 2 Samuel 21, the wrath of God is upon 
the nation because Saul sought to destroy the Gibeonites. There's 
no record of this in 1 Samuel. We need to understand that though 
it's not indicated in 1 Samuel, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. 
Saul and his zeal for Israel and Judah wanted to exterminate, 
liquidate the Gibeonites. And so you see the rub now. Israel 
had sworn an oath in the name of Yahweh. And they had reneged 
on that. They had broken it. It was a 
violation of the third commandment. A violation of the ninth commandment. A violation of holding sacred 
the great name of God Most High. In Saul's pretended zeal for 
Israel and Judah, he engaged in gross covenant sin. And that's what's happening in 
this particular instance. Now note, under the situation 
still, David's request in verse 3. So he says to the Gibeonites, 
what shall I do for you? And with what shall I make atonement 
that you may bless the inheritance of the Lord? Now that word atonement 
is necessary for us to understand. We often talk about the atonement 
of Christ. What do we mean by the atonement 
of Christ? It means the same thing it meant 
for David as he asked these Gibeonites, what shall I do or with what 
shall I make atonement that you may bless the inheritance of 
the Lord? The word atonement in its most basic meaning means 
to cover. We want to cover something. We 
want to cover a particular transgression. We see it used in context as 
forgive, or cleanse, or ransom. It ultimately has to deal with 
the averting of God's wrath. God is angry. and we provide 
atonement and His wrath is averted. It does not come upon the people 
to whom it is targeted because of that atoning sacrifice. And 
so this is precisely what David says to the Gibeonites in an 
attempt to rectify the situation, to correct the famine in the 
land so that the children of Israel can have peace and be 
blessed and increase and do those things God called them to do. Now note the resolution in verses 
4 to 6. The Gibeonites make their request 
known. The Gibeonites here reflect their 
understanding of Numbers 35. In Numbers 35, the text is very 
conspicuous and very specific, that if there is blood guiltiness 
committed in the land, you can't pay a price for that in terms 
of silver or gold. You can't pay a ransom in terms 
of murder. The only way that a murder can 
be atoned for is by the blood of the murderer. And that is 
why the Gibeonites say it cannot be gold, it cannot be silver, 
and it can't just be any man. It has to be the man that was 
guilty of the actual act of transgression. Now since Saul was dead, he obviously 
couldn't be the man that died in this sacrifice. So that's 
why the Gibeonites demand the seven sons of Saul. But note, 
specifically Numbers 35 underscores this reality in verse 33. So you shall not pollute the 
land where you are. For blood defiles the land, and 
no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is 
shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it. Now it's 
just here that people in the 21st century have a bit of a 
recoil at the sacred tax. Well, this seems barbaric. This 
seems unjust. This seems horrific. This seems 
ungodly that these men would demand the blood of seven sons 
of Saul. Why seven? I don't know. Probably 
the number of completion, the number of wholeness, the reality 
that this is the vengeance of God Most High being inflicted 
upon them. But we need to understand something, 
brethren. Israel, covenanted with God in 
the Old Testament, would have never sat idly by while abortion 
was being practiced. I'm talking about the remnant. 
Obviously, the ungodly were throwing their children to Moloch, so 
they didn't give one, you know, care whatsoever concerning the 
demand of God. But in terms of the faithful, 
their land was not to be polluted with blood guilt. Their land 
was not to be a place for gross sexual immorality, and it was 
certainly not supposed to be a place of idolatry. You see, 
we've grown accustomed to such sins. Those are three biggies 
in North America. Idolatry, sexual immorality, 
and blood guiltiness. You trace out the Old Testament 
and you will see there are three sins in particular that God the 
Lord demands punishment for, and very specifically in its 
idolatry, blood guiltiness and sexual immorality. In fact, this 
is why God tells Israel to go and dispossess the land of the 
Canaanites, because they engaged in gross immorality. They engaged 
in all manner of bestial sex. They engaged in child sacrifice. They engaged in the sin of blood 
guiltiness, and certainly they were idolaters. So God says to 
Israel, go ahead and cast them out. Not because God is capricious, 
or God woke up on Tuesday and thought, wow, wouldn't it be 
nice for Israel to inherit all that the Canaanites built? It 
was because the Canaanites were wretched. How many times do we 
receive those arguments from unbelievers saying, well, that 
stuff in the Old Testament is harsh. Do you know what's harsh? 
Sinning against God. Not God's judgment for that sin. We get it all backwards. That 
seems a bit severe. We never give any thought or 
concern whatsoever to the fact that a sinner stands before a 
holy God and rebels and rejects Him. We have more problems with 
the fact that this holy God punishes sin. And the church, so often, 
is right alongside the unbelieving world, embarrassed by passages 
like these. Saul had defiled the land. Saul must pay. If Saul is not 
present, it will be his seven sons. The Gibeonites are not 
bloodthirsty. The Gibeonites are not driven 
by personal revenge. Matthew Henry notes that. Had 
they been, they would have pursued this a lot earlier. But now the 
problem is the famine in the land. David summons the Gibeonites. The Gibeonites are consistent 
with what we find in Numbers 35. And the Gibeonites say it 
can't be silver, can't be gold, can't be any man, but rather 
give us these seven sons of Saul, so that we may hang them before 
the Lord, whom chose Saul. This is what's happening. Now, 
you might be tempted to think about the text in Deuteronomy 
24. Deuteronomy 24, 16. Brethren, this is all going someplace. 
If you think, well, I don't know what this has to do with anything, 
then please pay attention. This passage teaches us several 
concepts that I hope are starting to take shape in your own mind 
and in your own heart. God is holy. Sin is terrible. and atonement is absolutely necessary. If a New Covenant believer hasn't 
grasped that fact and doesn't appreciate something of that 
fact more after considering 2 Samuel 21, then we really need to pay 
closer attention. We need to understand what's 
happening here. But Deuteronomy 24, 16 says, 
Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall 
children be put to death for their fathers. A person shall 
be put to death for his own sin. We understand that the act of 
Saul polluted the land with blood guiltiness, so there must be 
blood atonement. That much is granted. As well, 
the act of Saul was the breach of a covenant oath. Now, I mentioned 
that in Joshua 9 they caught a covenant. That's the language 
that's employed by the Hebrew authors when they refer to making 
a covenant. More often than not, when your 
English version says, make a covenant, the literal is, cut a covenant. 
And the significance behind this is the ceremony involved. It's 
most vividly spelled out in Genesis 15. God the Lord covenants with 
Abraham. And one of the aspects of that 
covenant ceremony is to take animals and to split them in 
pieces. Take dogs, no, not dogs, but 
bulls. Don't think of Fido at home getting 
split open for your sins, but the sacrificial animals, they 
are split in two and put on either side of a particular walkway. 
The parties to the covenant walk between those animals. The significance 
is in the maledictory oath. We all know what a benediction 
is. At the end of a service sometimes, we pronounce a benediction, a 
good word from God. Malediction is the opposite. 
It is to take on oneself the curse of God. And so the parties 
to the covenant walk between the animals. And the symbolism 
is this. If I renege on my covenant obligation, 
if I break or I breach my covenant oath, May what happened to these 
animals happen to me. May I be cut into pieces. May 
I be destroyed. May God require it at my hand. And if you ponder the Genesis 
15 covenant, I think it takes on even more significance when 
we understand that it's only Yahweh that passes between the 
animals. It's not Yahweh and Abraham. 
And then we get to Galatians 3 and we find out that Christ 
became a curse. In other words, what happened 
to those animals happens to the Son of God on our behalf at Calvary's 
tree. It's beautiful. They cut a covenant. They swore in the name of Yahweh 
and they violated it. They broke it. So they have, 
under Saul, collectively and nationally said, what happens 
to those animals may have happened to us as well. The act of Saul 
was not as an individual, but he was a public person. It was 
representational. He's acting as the covenant head. 
So when he sins, all Israel sins. Also, the demands of Deuteronomy 
24, 16 were not applicable here because those were individual 
criminal offenses. It wasn't this national public 
covenant breach. So what Saul does here on behalf 
of the people does not bring him under the auspices of Deuteronomy 
24, 16. One commentator said, the few 
instances where punishment of children was legally sanctioned 
were not criminal cases, but those involving offenses against 
God, such as a violation of national oaths. And you know the way we 
know for sure that it doesn't violate Deuteronomy 24, 16? Because 
God accepts it. See, that's what I always want 
to say to those dear brethren that recoil in horror against 
2 Samuel 21. Oh, that's barbaric. That's horrific. That's terrible. That just seems 
so un-God-ish. What happens? Rizpah's sitting 
with the bodies until the rains come. What do the rains coming 
signify? The famine ends! Verse 14, it 
says, And then the Lord heeded the prayer for the land, So before 
you're more holy than God and start condemning what happens 
here at Gibeah, understand that God received it, God accepted 
it, God's wrath was averted, the atonement was wrought, and 
the Lord Most High remedied the situation as a result of punishment 
being inflicted properly upon the house of Saul. Now notice, 
thirdly, by way of a major concern, the execution, verses 7 to 9. 
I mentioned on Wednesday night, that's a bit of an unfortunate 
choice of terms, but I think you get the point. The carrying 
out. There's a sharp contrast between 
verse 7 and verse 2. And the careful reader ought 
to appreciate this, especially in a final assessment of David's 
reign. What's Saul known for according 
to verses 1 to 3 in 2 Samuel 21? Covenant breaking. violating the oath sworn to the 
Gibeonites. Saul is the pinnacle of unfaithfulness, 
according to our author. But note verse 7. David is the 
covenant keeper. David is consistent. David swears 
an oath to his own hurt and he does not change. This text is 
very specific. He spared Mephibosheth. There 
are two Mephibosheths in the passage. Don't think the author 
forgot what he just said. There is the Mephibosheth that 
David made a promise concerning to Jonathan back in 1 Samuel 
20. David swore to Jonathan that 
he would not destroy the descendants of Jonathan's house. In 2 Samuel 
9, David finds Mephibosheth and he grants him access to his table. He includes him as one of his 
own sons, he blesses him, he provides for him and he gives 
him provision. See, faithless Saul is busy killing 
Gibeonites. Faithful David is busy sparing 
Mephibosheth. The covenant keeper here, the 
Messiah of God, protects his people. Again, David's greater 
son does that very same thing with his people. He protects 
them. He watches over them. He cares 
for them. He grants them table access. 
He provides for them, He nurtures them, He cares for them. He makes 
sure that if harm is coming, He surrounds them under the shadow 
of His wing. David is the covenant-keeping 
man in this instance, but Saul is the covenant-keeping wretch. 
Notice, the identity of the sons that were chosen are given in 
verses 8 and 9. So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, 
the two sons of Rizpah, the daughter of Ayah, whom she bore to Saul, 
and the five sons of Michael, the daughter of Saul, whom she 
brought up for Adriel, the son of Barzillai, the Maholophite. 
Now, Michael did not have five sons. It was Merib, Michael's 
sister, that was married to Adriel. The margin of the New King James 
reflects that. It identifies it as Merib. The 
actual text of the New King James supplies for us that it was Michael 
that brought up these children. Either way, the identity is giving 
us, or indicating to us, the seven sons that were chosen. 
Two sons of Rizpah, and then the five sons of Merob. So they then deliver them over, 
or David delivers those seven over to the Gibeonites, and then 
notice in verse 9. It says, And He delivered them 
into the hands of the Gibeonites. They hanged them on the hill 
before the Lord. So they fell, all seven together, and were 
put to death in the days of harvest, in the first days, in the beginning 
of barley harvest. So it was done. That actually 
happened. I'm serious, if I preach this 
in another church, people would probably be rolling their eyes. 
I think I've shared with you before, I go to the Cascade every 
other Wednesday to teach a Bible study there, and there's one 
old doll, I love her dearly, but whenever I say I'm going 
to teach from Judges or Revelation, she kind of rolls her eyes or 
lifts her eyebrows. I think the church does that 
with certain books in the Bible, or certain chapters. This is 
an unsavory theme for a Sunday morning, the death of seven judicially 
innocent men. It wasn't them that killed the 
Gibeonites, it was their father. They hadn't done anything wrong. 
Not that they were sinless or perfect, but in terms of this 
particular offense, they were innocent. Why in the world would 
you bring that to nice people on a Sunday morning who have 
a nice day planned out? This is very negative. It's very 
downer. It's very cloudy day-ish. The 
church simply doesn't have time for such things when we need 
to be upbeat and positive, when we need to be the sorts of people 
that bounce from place to place to place, showing smiles and 
reverie and all the like for the people around us. Brethren, 
I suggest there's a whole lot more in 2 Samuel 21, verse 9, 
that is applicable to the church than much of the drivel that 
is peddled day in and day out under the name of gospel preaching. This is the unjust standing in 
the place of the just, or the just, rather, standing in the 
place of the unjust. Put your New Covenant cap on! 
What are these seven sons of Saul typifying? That just One 
who went to the cross for us unjust sinners. Yes, this happened. And yes, God accepted it. Now note the aftermath of this. You know, we may go home today 
and have a burrito and discuss the sermon. But you know, after 
this took place, after these seven men were hanged before 
the Lord, there's a bit of difficulty in terms of the text. We could 
either understand it as they were killed and then impaled, 
or they were killed by impaling. Either way, I think we've got 
the point. Seven innocent men, judicially 
innocent of the offense at hand, died in the place of Saul on 
that day. So we may go home and we may 
talk about this today. Well, there was an aftermath 
involved here. There was a response. I mean, 
what do you do after this, right? What if you're witness to this 
particular situation? What if you understand the situation 
that has just occurred? How does one respond? The author 
gives us a glimpse specifically into one of the mother's hearts, 
Rizpah. Now, verse 10 really isn't essential 
to the narrative at all. But the author wants us to consider 
it as essential. He wants us to ponder the scene. 
He wants us to muse over it. He wants us to feel the effects. 
Notice in verse 10, Now Rizpah, the daughter of Ayah, remember 
she had two sons that were hanged before Yahweh that day, she took 
sackcloth and spread it for herself on the rock from the beginning 
of harvest until the late rains poured on them from heaven. It's 
a good translation. She didn't take sackcloth and 
make a tent to cover the bodies. The sackcloth was for her to 
watch the bodies. She does this from the beginning 
of harvest until the late rains poured on them from heaven. And 
she did not allow the birds of the air to rest on them by day, 
nor the beasts of the field by night. I suspect when I read 
through that the first time, and maybe even this time, you 
haven't really thought through this. You haven't really entered 
in. You're thinking about the burrito I just mentioned. You're 
thinking about how these are downer subjects, and this doesn't 
make me feel peppy. Do you think it made Rizpah feel 
peppy? Do you think she, standing at 
the foot of her dead sons, felt the jocularity and the frivolity 
that so often punctuates the professed people of God today? 
Doesn't James tell us in James 4 that there are seasons for 
lament, for sorrow, for weeping? Isn't our Savior characterized 
as a man of sorrows and one acquainted with grief? It behooves the people 
of God, yes, to rejoice with those who rejoice, but to weep 
with those who weep. This is a pathetic scene. This 
is a horrible scene. This is sin in all of its consequences 
and all of its grim reality. This is what we see in this case 
of Rizpah. One commentator says, the moment 
we allow our imagination to dwell on the details of our situation, 
we recoil. The bodies just hang there. And it's probably for a significant 
amount of time. The author takes pains to let 
us know when the hanging took place in verse 9. He takes pain 
to tell us that in verse 10, the later rains came. Deuteronomy 
21 specifies that if a man is hung for a crime, you're to take 
his body down. It's not to remain overnight, 
lest the land be cursed. Matthew Henry suggests this was 
an extraordinary case, that's why the bodies were left hanging. 
But visualize the scene, not visualize the way these weirdos 
tell you, but think about the scene. This mother has watched 
her two sons be hanged to death, and now she's making sure that 
birds and beasts don't get them. Focal men again. The moment we 
allow our imaginations to dwell on the details of our situation, 
we recoil. The bodies just hang there, exposed 
to the elements. The stench and the sight of decay 
can hardly be borne by any outsider, let alone a relative, and Rizpa 
is a mother who, day in, day out, week in, week out, is forced 
to experience this with her own children. The horror defies description 
and the narrator does not describe it either. It's terrible! It's wretched. Why? Because Saul wanted to kill Gibeonites. 
Do we ever let our minds go to where sin will ultimately take 
us? I don't think we do. You know, a man wants to commit 
adultery, or he wants to fornicate, or a woman wants to commit adultery 
or fornicate. They never think about the consequences 
of sin. They never consider what the 
outcome may be. Saul, in his pretended zeal for 
Israel and Judah, wanted to exterminate Gibeonites. Did he ever think, 
did he ever contemplate, did he ever consider the possibility 
that seven of his sons might die in his place? Brethren, maybe 
we ought to take notice of this and consider that the consequences 
of others' sins do affect us, and to contemplate the fact that 
the consequences of our sins affect others. And we as fathers, 
when we continue in neglect and laziness and sloth, we cannot 
be surprised when our children imitate that self-same ethic. 
When we as the professed people of God continue in patterns of 
rebellion and wickedness, we can't suppose for a moment that 
it's not going to have effect upon others. When we as mothers 
set terrible examples, we don't submit to our own husbands, as 
to the Lord. Not a suggestion, by the way. 
Or when we as men don't love our wives as Christ loved the 
Church. What are we doing? We're promoting 
consequences of our sins to fall upon the heads of others. It's 
really terrible when you stop and think about it. The hymn 
writer says, Ye who think of sin but lightly, here its guilt 
may estimate. And he's pointing us to the cross. 
I mean, ultimately, that's where we ought to ponder this connection. 
But I think we see it here with Rizpah at the foot of the son's 
death. She knows all too well what Saul's 
sin meant to the house of Saul. So David then collects the bones 
of Saul and Jonathan, mingles them with the bones of the men 
hanged at Gibeah, and he gives them a burial. That's his action, 
that's his response. He enters in, at least to some 
degree, to the suffering and to the grieving of Rizpah, collects 
those bones and gives them a proper burial. And then the response 
of Yahweh, verse 14b, and after that, God heeded the prayer for 
the land. God heeded the prayer for the 
land. We're going to just quickly run through this destruction 
of the Philistines. You have several men here descended 
from the giant. He's identified as Rapha. and 
several things we ought to observe just quickly. The death of Ishbi 
Banab in verses 15 to 17. David is faint in the battle. Some commentators take this as 
an indication, because there's not really consensus on the time 
frame of chapters 21 to 24. But some suggest that the faintness 
of David indicates that he's an old man at this time, and 
he just doesn't have the gumption for battle that he had at one 
point. It could have been that David in his youth didn't have 
the gumption for battle that he always possessed, because 
he battled so much. So David was unable to take Ishbi-Benab. You can kind of hear Ishbi-Benab. 
He sees the faintness of David. He thinks, well, I can clean 
house now. I can get him. But Abishai, the trusty swordsman, 
is there and he dispatches Ishbi-Benab on behalf of David. And the men 
of Israel say to David, we don't want you to go out to battle 
anymore. We don't want the lamp of Israel extinguished. This 
indicates the revere that these men held David in. This indicates 
the esteem that they had for him. It also indicates to us 
that while the Bible presents David very favorably, as typical 
of his greater son, it never gives us a portrait of a perfect 
man. He sinned. He committed adultery and he 
committed murder. As well, he wasn't Superman in 
battle. He needed Abishai. He needed 
faithful troops. He needed some to come alongside 
of him to help dispatch Ishbi Benab. Then you've got this fellow 
called Saf, and he's taken out by Sibachai. Then you've got 
this man called Lame. He's not identified as such in 
verse 19. If we take the text as written in 2 Samuel 21, without 
the supplier's notes, it will read that Elhanan killed Goliath. There are anti-David commentators 
out there that say Elhanan really did kill Goliath in the Valley 
of Elah. But once David's popularity started 
to grow, this pro-David faction said that it was David who killed 
Goliath in the Valley of Elah. I think the suppliers are right. 
They're working with 1 Chronicles 20, verse 5. Goliath, that big 
meathead, had a brother named Lame. And it's Elhanan who took 
Lame out. There is no contradiction in 
the sacred text. David did what the narrator tells 
us David did, and we give glory and praise to God, from whom 
all servants come. And then you have this man in 
verses 20 to 21. If I were to ask you, what is 
his problem? I hope you'd understand. He needed to go to a special 
place that sold extra large gloves and shoes, right? I mean, he 
had six digits on each hand and on each foot. Digits are your 
fingers and your toes. I think they're also known as 
phalanges, is that correct? I learned that from my granddaughter 
many years ago. Phalanges. This is the six-fingered 
man. Six on each hand, six toes. Not fingers on toes, but he had 
six toes on each foot. He said, certainly that's a problem. 
I mean, where does this guy find shoes? How can he find gloves 
big enough to fit such hands? That's not his problem. Physical 
abnormalities are not his issue. His problem is indicated for 
us in verse 21. He defied Israel. The same language applied to 
Goliath in the Valley of Elah when he continued to trash talk 
Israel and God Himself. So you see, in each of these 
instances, what we are given is a glimpse of God's victory 
over the Philistines through His king, David. But notice as 
well, David didn't actually physically kill all the ones indicated in 
this passage. David had help. David had servants. And the sacred narrative gives 
us their names. If Paul in Romans 13 tells us, 
with reference to the governing authorities, that we render honor 
to whom honor is due, shouldn't we honor national heroes? Shouldn't 
we praise God from whom all Elhanan's flow? Or this Sibachi? Shouldn't we praise God for an 
Abishai who's quick with the sword, who defends our king and 
keeps the Philistines at bay? This is what the author is doing. 
He's highlighting this victory over the Philistines, specifically 
mentioning the men who got the kills in the scenario. And then verse 22 summarizes 
the passage and says, So what do we learn? Well, in the first 
place, I hope that we learn there are some contrasts between Saul 
and David. Saul and David. In the first 
place, Saul violates the covenant with the Gibeonites. David keeps 
covenant with Jonathan and Mephibosheth. You see, we made this observation 
on Wednesday night. This is job number one for a 
political leader. I know it's become common for 
us to just accept that all politicians lie. It's almost become synonymous. I suspect someday when we type 
in in our Google search engine, politician, the definition will 
be liar. Or we'll type in liar and we'll 
get, you know, politician. Or we'll get Google images of 
various politicians who have lied, you know, in course. David 
wasn't the Psalm 15 man, but he was a Psalm 15 man. He swore 
to his own hurt and he did not change. He had integrity. He made a covenant with Jonathan 
concerning Mephibosheth, so when push comes to shove, he protects 
him. As well, Saul fails to protect 
Israel from the Philistines. This was one of his mandates 
in 1 Samuel 9, 16. If Saul had been successful, we wouldn't 
need 21, 15 to 22. A couple of indicators here. The fact that there was famine 
in the land when David was reigning, And it was connected to Saul, 
indicates something of the nature of Saul's reign. The fact that 
these pesky Philistines are still a problem for Israel shows us 
something of the failure of Saul. But it shows us David and his 
faithfulness, who knew what Philistines were for. As well, Saul tried 
to kill David. You'll see this in 22.1. Saul 
tried to kill David. David, by God's grace, flees 
from Saul. You see what the author is doing? 
Final assessment of David, A+. Well, maybe not A+. He had some 
sins along the way. He wasn't a perfect man. But 
the final assessment of David in terms of Saul? Saul was a 
wretch. And as well, here in chapter 
21, they're reaping the wrath of God for the sin of Saul. Did 
Saul ever repent? Did Saul ever forsake? Did Saul 
ever confess his sins? No. In 24, David will be called 
out for sin that he had committed. He numbers the children of Israel. 
When God comes to call him on it, what does he do? He repents. 
He confesses. He says that he has sinned. So, 
21 to 24 present this positive image of David as the king and 
ruler over Israel. A second thing we ought to take 
from the passage is the protection of God over the people of God 
with reference to the enemy's internal and external. God purges 
the sin from Israel with reference to Saul's transgression. And 
God protects the people of Israel from this Philistine threat. 
Carry that into the New Covenant situation. The Lord Most High 
will protect us. He'll watch over us. His kingdom 
marches on. Jesus wasn't lying. I will build 
my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 
Whatever Philistine hordes may try to destroy, God, by the power 
of His Spirit, will keep them out. as well with internal threats. When there's issues, when there's 
trials, when there's difficulties, we would be at a loss apart from 
the Word and the Spirit. But God gives us the Word and 
the Spirit, so that we're able to deal with those internal things 
that threaten the safety of God's people. We're able to confess 
to one another. We're able to talk with one another. 
We're able to reconcile with one another. We're able to enact 
what Paul says to forgive one another, even as God in Christ 
forgave us. I told someone yesterday, a pastor 
friend of mine, I'm amazed that the kingdom of God still marches 
on. But I know that it does because God has promised to secure it. God has promised to protect it. 
And God has displayed that right before our eyes in 2 Samuel 21, 
from problems in and from problems out. Nevertheless, we emerge 
with the kingdom. Thirdly, this is where I reworked 
the sermon just a little bit from Wednesday night. in terms 
of RISPA. In talking with a dear brother, 
he suggested some things to me that I totally agreed with. But 
I mentioned on Wednesday night that Ralph Davis, in his commentary, 
said we shouldn't look at RISPA here and just try to pull out 
a bunch of self-help applications. Well, I want to dare to be a 
RISPA. You're never probably going to be a RISPA. I mean, 
you may have trials and difficulties. I don't want to discount them, 
but the thought of you watching two of your sons hanged before 
Yahweh in Gibeah, and then watching their dead bodies decompose for 
however long, keeping birds off of them, keeping beasts off them, 
which she couldn't have been completely successful. She had 
to sleep sometime. Sackcloth's not the most comfortable 
mattress in the world, but the most tired we get, we'll fall 
asleep anywhere. You're not going to have a Rizpah 
ministry In fact, Davis suggests the thing we ought to appreciate 
in verse 10, or the thing we ought to ponder, is the reality 
that it's good for us to be sad once in a while. He says, the 
writer tells you this very solemn story, especially about Rizpah, 
because he wants to make you solemn. He depicts this very 
sad episode because he wants you to be sad over it, and marinate 
in that sadness, and not to go worrying about how to pilfer 
some application from it. Again, in further reflection 
and discussion, I think we ought to try and at least glean something 
from it. I think there's a theological 
lesson for us in the sorrow of Rizpah, and I think I even mentioned 
it on Wednesday night. But in the first place, we ought 
to recognize the sadness associated with living in a sin-cursed world. I don't know why, but sometimes 
we get surprised when there's sorrow and hardship and difficulty. We just can't believe it that 
we'd be with Jesus and get into a boat, and the waves would come, 
and the winds would crash, and the sea would be tumultuous. 
We'd just get blown away. How could bad things happen to 
me, a child of the King? This has been fostered, of course, 
by the health, wealth, prosperity gospel, and hymns that basically 
tell us that as long as we do what we're supposed to do, everything's 
just going to be peachy keen. This is a sin-sick world, and 
connected to living in a sin-sick world is sadness, sorrow, hardship, 
heartache, whether it's our own sin or the sins of others. Paul 
was not kidding. We are to weep with those who 
weep. We are to enter in. We're not to try and fix everything. You know what? Sometimes the 
best thing you can do for people is listen to them and cry with 
them. You can't fix everything. You're not God. You don't have 
the magic bullet. You don't have the five-point 
sermon. You don't have the ability to get into the hearts of men, 
turn them properly, so that they can embrace their reality. Wasn't 
this Job's complaint to his friends? You're miserable counselors. Miserable. I just needed to pour 
out my heart and weep and cry. And you guys are going to lecture 
me on how I'm a sinner, how I'm not just, how I'm not righteous. 
That's what Job says to his friends. Miserable counselors are you 
all. Brethren, do you realize that 
fixing things at times just means to sympathize with brethren, 
to cry for brethren, to weep for brethren, to pray for brethren, 
to sorrow with brethren? Somebody might just need to tell 
you something. Well, let me give you a 15-part 
response on how best to fix this. That might be fitting in certain 
instances, but in others it isn't. I remember an illustration from 
a book I read many years ago. The author suggested that when 
a woman has had a particularly bad day, and you come home at 
5.30, and the dinner isn't ready, and the kids have green stuff 
down their faces, and diapers full of things that we don't 
want to think about on a Sunday morning, Your wife doesn't need 
a three-point sermon on time management. She may just need 
a hug. Sometimes the people of God don't 
need a three-point sermon on how to be a better you. They 
may need a hug. They may need some tears. They 
may need the encouraging word, I will pray for you. Maybe that's 
what the author is leading us by the hand and causing us to 
reflect on in this particular instance. As well, we ought to 
consider when we look at Rizpah standing at the foot of her dead 
sons, the terrifying wrath of God. It's good to consider that 
as well. God accepts this atonement. God 
sends rain. God's anger is averted by the 
sacrifice. This ought to cause us to reflect 
on the Day of Atonement. It ought to cause us to reflect 
upon the realities involved. These people in Israel didn't 
go through this sacrificial system because God wasn't holy. They 
went through it precisely because God was holy. Christ didn't die 
on the cross because God wasn't holy, but precisely because He 
is holy. We ought to reflect with rizpah 
something about the terrifying wrath of God. And then, of course, 
the wretched consequences of our sin and of other people's 
sins. We've already pointed out this 
earlier, but it bears repetition. Now, finally, we ought to look 
at the typical significance of the chapter. In other words, 
what is a type? A type is something, an event 
or a person or a place in the Old Testament that points us 
to a reality in the New Testament. We call that reality the anti-type. Not like against the type, but 
a fulfillment of the type. So for instance, Paul says in 
Romans 5 that Adam was a type of him who was to come. In fact, 
the Bible, Paul specifically, speaks of the first Adam and 
the last Adam. Adam was a type. He pointed forward 
to the typical, or to the anti-type, which was Jesus Christ. So as 
we've been studying the book of Samuel, and I hope 1 Samuel 
and the other books before that, we've sought to acknowledge the 
typical significance along the way. In other words, in light 
of the entirety of the Bible, how should this point us, or 
where should this point us? In the first place, and we won't 
spend a whole lot of time here because we've already touched 
on it, the victory of the kingdom in spite of internal and external 
threats. I wonder at times if David would 
have said, I don't know how we continue. I don't know how we 
continue to manage. I don't know how we're still 
standing. The power of God, the glory of God, the majesty of 
God. In the second place, we ought to appreciate the messianic 
protection of his people in light of the covenant. David provided 
for Mephibosheth according to verse 7. David's greater son 
provides for new covenant Mephibosheths according to covenant. In John 
6, verse 39, Jesus says, This is the will of the Father who 
sent me, that of all He has given me I should lose nothing, but 
should raise it up at the last day. He speaks the same sorts 
of things in the priestly prayer in John 17. He is the covenant 
keeper who provides protection for His people. He secures us. He stabilizes us. He'll never 
let us go. Muse on this reality. Romans 
8. There is nothing that shall separate 
us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. 
Philippians 1.6. I am confident, Paul says, of 
this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will 
complete it unto the day of Christ. Consider John 10. Jesus says, 
believers are in my hand. They're in the hand of the Father. 
And there is nobody who can snatch you out. Paul in Romans 8 says, 
who is he who condemns? It is Christ who has died and 
has risen. Brethren, we have comfort, protection, 
security, safety, and blessing. Not because we're good, not because 
we're upright, not because we're excellent, but because our mediator 
is. Because our David is. Because 
he swore to a Jonathan, I am not going to let destruction 
come to your household. And he made good on the promise. 
In the third sense, we ought to appreciate the typical significance 
of Rizpah. It's not a formal type, the way 
Adam and Jesus is, but brethren, I would at least think the suggestion 
may have entered your mind that when Rizpah is standing at the 
foot of her hung sons, it makes you think of another woman who 
stood at the foot of her hung or hanged son. Again, not a formal 
type. I don't think the author is saying, 
okay, Rispa is typical of Mary, and you ought to make all those 
connections, but do you get the suggestion? Am I grasping at 
straws? Does everybody see this? Rispa 
standing at the foot of two judicially innocent sons who took the place 
of Saul, and Mary standing at the foot of the cross of her 
son, who was judicially innocent, completely innocent, who took 
the wrath due to us. In Luke 2, verses 34 and 35, 
Simeon says to Mary, Behold, this child is destined for the 
fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be 
spoken against. Yes, a sword will pierce through 
your own soul also. I think it's somewhat common 
in Protestantism because Romanism elevates Mary. We almost never 
say Mary. Mary was the mother of Jesus. 
Mary stood at the cross of Christ. Mary saw her son butchered, her 
judicially innocent son hanged as an atoning sacrifice. Gil 
comments on the text, "...the sorrows she met with on account 
of her son, as he was a man of sorrows, so she was a woman of 
sorrows, from his cradle to his cross. And his sorrows, like 
so many darts or javelins, rebounded from him to her." Again, not 
like a Roman Catholic mediatrix, that somehow she was a co-sufferer 
or co-mediator with Christ. But if Christ really was here 
according to his humanity, if he really was a physical being 
as the Bible sets forth, he really had a real mother that he cared 
for and he loved and he commended to the care of John, the beloved 
disciple. We ought not to neglect the fact 
that this woman is our sister who was redeemed by the same 
Savior, and we ought to appreciate the length she went to, again, 
not as a co-mediator, but as a sufferer for the kingdom of 
God Most High. He says, "...rebounded from him 
to her and pierced her soul through, as when Herod sought his life, 
when she had lost him for a whole day, and when he was frequently 
exposed to danger among the spiteful and malicious Jews. But never 
more than when she stood at his cross and saw him, in his agonies 
extended on the tree, bleeding, gasping, and dying." So let Rizpah 
point you to Calvary. And that's the last of the typical 
significance that we ought to appreciate this morning. We ought 
to notice conspicuously, if it has not been yet, we ought to 
see predominantly the vivid reminder of substitutionary atonement 
rendered to satisfy the justice of God. What we have in Gibeah 
is what Christ accomplished for us. What we have here with the 
seven men is substitution. What we have here with their 
death is penal substitution. What we have here is the satisfaction 
of the demands of a holy God to deal with the blood guiltiness 
and the covenant unfaithfulness of a sinful nation. This is what 
Christ did Christ is the just who stands in the place of the 
unjust. Christ is our representative. Christ took in Himself the punishment 
that was due for us, the just for the unjust, bearing our sin, 
taking our penalty, then dealing with the wrath and fury of God. 
Listen to what Davis says. I quoted this on Wednesday night. 
It probably needs to be quoted more and more. Not that he's 
God or that his commentaries are the 67th book of the Bible, 
but he had a way of just capturing the scene. He says, and he muses 
on the fact, that this is a troubling passage. Do you ever come to 
passages like that? The end of Judges is tough. Isn't 
it? Isn't it tough when he cuts up 
his concubine and sends pieces to the 12 tribes to assemble 
them together? Do you read that and then go 
play golf? We probably do, but... Do we 
ponder what sin has produced in this world? Do we contemplate 
the ravages of wickedness in this world? Do we ever stop and 
think that what Jesus went through on our behalf was real? That 
real humanity suffered? That real humanity bled? That 
real humanity was torn apart? Do you ever consider that Jesus, 
and I think I've told you this before, was whipped twice? And 
the Jews brought Jesus to Pilate. He sought to assuage their bloodthirst 
by having Jesus scourged. This was a less formal and not 
as serious form of scourging. He did it to appease the mob. 
I'll have him whipped, you guys will be satisfied and off you 
go. Well, of course they weren't 
satisfied and they said, away with him, away with him, crucify 
him. When the order was given to crucify, another scourging 
took place. This preceded the actual act 
of crucifixion. And this was the particularly 
and notoriously nasty one. This was the whip that had tied 
into it the bone or the metal or the glass, so that as the 
whip landed on the back, it pulled the flesh right from the victim. 
This is why the prophet says in Isaiah 53, by his stripes 
we are healed. Do we Christians ever consider 
what stripes means there? It means the blood of Jesus Christ. It means His back open. Paul 
uses a similar convention in Galatians 6. What does he mean? 
Was he tatted for Jesus? Did he have, you know, Jesus 
on his forehead? No, he had lashes in his back. He had wounds from 
being stoned. He had the actual representations 
of his having suffered for the cause of Christ. So brethren, 
we need to move to the point where we ponder anew and afresh 
what happens at Calvary. And perhaps Gibeah can spur us 
on to that. And this is how Davis reports 
it. He says, Most readers are simply 
aghast at the sheer horror of the episode. That, I suggest, 
points us to its primary application. Readers should be aghast. We 
should be shocked. He says, the text says atonement 
is horrible. It is gory. Atonement is never 
nice, but always gruesome. We need to see this, for we easily 
fall into the trap of regarding atonement as merely a doctrine. 
It is a doctrine. We need to preach the doctrine. 
But we need to understand the doctrine represents something 
true. It represents something that happened. It represents 
a reality. He says, we fall into the trap 
of regarding atonement as merely a doctrine, a concept, an abstraction 
to be explained, a bit of theology to be analyzed, or, little better, 
to view it as a moving story to be replayed during Passion 
Week. But we should know better. Surely the Israelite worshipper 
realized this when he towed a young bull to the tabernacle and had 
to slit its throat, skin it, cut it in pieces, and wash the 
insides and legs. See, if you kids were living 
back then and you came to church on Saturday, the Sabbath back 
then, the positive institution under the old covenant, and you 
came to the tabernacle, it wasn't to come and sit on these really 
comfortable pews and to sing out of these books and, you know, 
to hear some guy ramble on for however long, but you came with 
your father who had an animal from your flock. that you probably 
grew accustomed to. I mean, it's hard. They say, 
oh, don't love them. Don't be affectionate toward 
animals. They're just beasts. They grab our hearts, don't they? 
I mean, a little sheep or whatever. They're just cute and cuddly. 
We love them. Well, you get to see Dad cut its throat, cut it 
up, and present it to the priest. So you would understand back 
then that atonement was bloody business. It's not bloody business 
for us anymore. We have to constantly remind 
and constantly encourage, and again, this isn't a bad thing, 
that this cup we drink is the blood of the New Covenant. We 
have to associate that wine with the blood of the New Covenant. 
In this old covenant setting, when you saw Dad take, you know, 
puffy the sheep and cut its throat and dissect it and present it 
up, you knew that atonement was bloody business. As Davis goes 
on to say, it was all mess and gore. From slicing the bull's 
throat in Leviticus 1 all the way to Calvary, God has always 
said, atonement is nasty and repulsive. Christians must beware 
of becoming too refined, longing for a kinder, gentler faith. 
If we've grown too used to Golgotha, perhaps Gibeah can shock us back 
into truth. Atonement is a drippy, bloody, 
smelly business. The stench of death hangs heavy 
wherever the wrath of God has been quenched. That's what Gibeah 
teaches. That's what we ought to associate 
with Calvary. It wasn't this idyllic scene. It wasn't this haloed scene. Our Savior wasn't up there in 
a glowing robe. As Spurgeon says, our artists 
cover Him, but He was stripped naked for guilty sinners. We got to ponder these things, 
and if Gibeah helps us to that end, to consider, as Davis says, 
that atonement is drippy, bloody, smelly business, then we can 
appreciate anew what our Savior went through on our behalf. For 
you see, we belong on the cross. We belong under the wrath of 
God. We belong under the fury and the judgment of God. We rightly 
deserve that wrath and curse, but our surety, our Savior, our 
David stood up to the task. Our blessed Christ went to that 
place and He gave Himself on our behalf. If you have grown 
accustomed to thinking in terms of an abstraction, as Davis says, 
let Gibeah shock you back into the reality that atonement is 
drippy, bloody, smelly business. The stench of God hangs heavily 
wherever the wrath of God has been quenched. If you don't know 
this Christ, you ought to see him as the Bible presents him. 
He's great, isn't he? Who of us as believers can't 
appreciate him anew right now? Wow, what did our Savior do? 
What did our Christ do? The just for the unjust. I'm 
the unjust in that equation. And He took my punishment. He 
took my hell. He took my wrath. He took my 
suffering. He took my place. Praise God 
from whom all blessings flow. Isn't that what our heart, at 
least to some degree, should be saying? Maybe it's not. Maybe 
we're over 1230 now. We've got to get going. Just 
pause for a moment and ponder how glorious your Jesus is. That 
Jesus is offered in the Gospel to sinners. The Bible says those 
who believe will have everlasting life. The Bible says those who 
look will live. And if you are dead in your trespasses 
and sins, if you are not forgiven of your sins, if you have not 
a saving interest in Christ, may I say to you, believe on 
Him who alone can save. The One who did what we see done 
in 2 Samuel 21, but in a manner far more glorious. Well, let us pray. God, we thank 
you for your word and we thank you for scenes like these that 
hopefully shock us into a new appreciation or a fresh appreciation 
of what we have in the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. I pray 
that you would go with us. I pray that you would watch over 
us. I pray that we would praise you for your son, for that one 
who gave himself as a sacrifice for the sins of his people. I 
pray as well that wherever this gospel is preached today, you'd 
open the eyes and the hearts and the ears of sinners and cause 
them to receive the truth and by grace to believe the truth 
and to pass from death into everlasting life. And we ask these things 
through Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.