Jedidiah (2 Samuel 12:24&25)

Every family has moments that mark them forever—moments of joy, moments of sorrow, moments that reshape the future in ways no one could have predicted. Scripture is full of these turning points, where God steps into the middle of human messiness and writes a story no one saw coming. Sometimes his grace arrives in thunder and fire. Other times, it arrives quietly… in the form of a newborn child.

Today, we turn to a passage where a baby’s arrival becomes a sign of something far greater than the child himself. It is a moment when God takes a family that has walked through deep failure, grief, and loss—and instead of abandoning them, He speaks a word of hope. He gives a gift they could never earn. And He marks that gift with a name that reveals His heart.

This passage doesn’t begin with celebration. It begins in the shadows, but it ends with a declaration of God’s mercy so surprising, so undeserved, that it changes the entire trajectory of a household—and eventually, the trajectory of a nation.

And in that ancient story, we find a pattern for today: the God who meets families in their brokenness, the God who restores what sin has damaged, the God who delights in our children and calls them His own. Before we even open the text, we stand on the edge of a moment where God takes what was shattered and brings forth something beautiful.

Before diving into the main text, some background information will set up the context. The context of 2 Samuel 12:24&25 actually begins in the previous chapter, starting right with the opening verse. In 2 Samuel 11:1, the text reads, "In the spring of the year, the time when kings go out to battle, David sent Joab, and his servants with him, and all Israel. And they ravaged the Ammonites and besieged Rabbah. But David remained at Jerusalem." The fact that David remained at Jerusalem during a battle should wave a red flag. To understand the red flag, a dissonance between the ancient world and the modern world might need to be resolved. The modern world seriously needs to answer the rhetorical question posed by the wise philosophers...System of a Down, who questioned, "Why don't presidents fight the war? Why do they always send the poor?" Today, it seems like presidents and prime ministers can declare war on a country without risking their own family members' and relatives' lives. In fact, when documentary director Michael Moore, during the height of the "War" (more like "Invasion") of Afghanistan and Iraq, asked congressmen and congresswomen to volunteer their sons and daughters into the war effort, only one took him up on his offer! Not so in the ancient world. In the ancient world, if a king wanted to declare war or another kingdom, he led his army into battle, risking his own life. Even more so, quite often, he made his sons generals and commanders, who also led into battle, risking his sons' live, and indirectly, he risked his dynasty on the throne. Here, in 2 Samuel 11:1, David looks more like a modern leader than an ancient leader. He should be out there in the battlefield, leading his soldiers into the battle. Instead, he remains at home in his palace, letting his general do his dirty work.

Another red flag waves in the next verse. In 2 Samuel 11:2, it reads, "It happened, late one afternoon, when David arose from his couch and was walking on the roof of the king's house, that he saw from the roof a woman bathing; and the woman was very beautiful." Surprisingly, traditionally, commentators posed Bathsheba as the villain, or at least, the antagonist, of this narrative. According to tradition, the logic would say, "Who bathes on the rooftop? Bathsheba must have been sick and tired of the poor, common life. She wanted to be rich and famous. What a better way to become rich and famous than to marry a king! She purposely bathed on the rooftop, so the king could see her beautiful, naked body, become seduced, and he would have to take her in his wife and queen!" Thus, such a traditional interpretation paints Bathsheba as seductress or a temptress, hence why the bad girl portrayal. Some modern scholars, however, have begun pushing for quite the opposite interpretation. According them, if anything, Bathsheba is a victim of statutory rape! I know the phrase might trigger some people, but hold on while I explain. See, back in ancient times, if a king chose a woman to become his wife, there was no chance to say, "No thank you, I'm married," no opportunity to say, "Eww, no, you're ugly," or no opening to say, "Shouldn't we at least get to know each other better, maybe over coffee?" If the king chose you to become his next bride, you were his next wife, no if, and or but! Of course, the king would want to consummate his marriage, and what do you call consummating a marriage if a person doesn't want to consummate a marriage? Yes, that's rape! Honestly, the correct interpretation could be either/or, or even somewhere in between in the middle. I really like how Sight & Sound Theaters handled it in its production of David. When Nathan passes Bathsheba to confront David (spoiler alert), he simply says, "God sees you." If Bathsheba did purposely seduce and tempt David, then "God sees you" simply means "God saw what you did, and he will judge you accordingly." If Bathsheba is the victim of statutory rape, then "God sees you" simply means, "God saw what happened to you, and he grieves and mourns alongside you." Whether Bathsheba is the offender or the victim, either way, David definitely will come out as the guilty party, as David will invite Bathsheba in, sleep with her and impregnate her.

David attempts to make it look like Uriah, Bathsheba's husband, got her pregnant. David calls Uriah off the battlefield to give a report on the battle. David rewards Uriah's report by inviting him to spend the night at home with his wife. Uriah declines the invitation, declaring it did not feel right that the ark of the covenant and the soldiers in the battlefields lived in tents when he could go to a house. Therefore, in this instance, Uriah, the Hittite, looks better than David, the king of Israel, because Uriah has his priorities straight! David tries the same plan again, this time getting Uriah drunk, in the hopes that Uriah's drunkenness might make him more susceptible to suggestion. Again, Uriah does not go to his house. Thus, once again, Uriah, the Hittite, looks better than David, the king of Israel, for Uriah knows his priorities, even when drunk. Now David has to resort to more extreme measures. King David instructs General Joab to put Uriah at the forefront of the battle, where the fighting is the fiercest, and then to have the rest of the troops retreat, making Uriah an easy target. Well, clearly Joab is picking up what David is putting down, for not only does Joab follow David's instructions perfectly, Joab provides the messenger with all the excuses David would need to justify Uriah's death. The chapter ends, pretty much reporting that Uriah dies, Bathsheba cries, and David marries Bathsheba. In fact, David could have even set it up to make himself to look like the hero. After all, after Uriah fought so valiantly in battle, fighting to the death, the least he could do is take his wife Bathsheba in and care for her as his own wife. The chapter ends, however, remarking how displeased the Lord feels with David's actions.

The next chapter, 2 Samuel 12, the chapter which contains our main passage, Yahweh sends his prophet to Nathan to confront David. Nathan tells David a parable about a rich man who owns a hundred sheep and a poor man who owns one sheep, which the poor man treats like a pet. In the parable, the rich man steals the poor man's sheep in order to feed a traveler. The parable makes David mad, and David calls for the rich man's execution and repayment four times of what the poor man. Nathan replies, "You the man!" Well, no, it's more like, "You are the man!" Nathan then goes on to pronounce this judgment on David in 2 Samuel 12:7&8: "Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more." That last sentence is the stab-with-knife-and-twist sentence. If I may paraphrase, I would paraphrase it as the Lord saying, "If you felt like this was not enough, all you had to do was ask, and I would have given it to you." Ouch. See, I think that line is telling. See, I think David knew that the covenant he had with God allowed him to ask anything of the Lord, and the Lord would fulfill that request. Therefore, for David to pursue Bathsheba without asking Yahweh, David knew Yahweh would never fulfill it or approve of it, for it was sinful. If David wanted it, David had to act on his own. Understanding this is helpful if someone wants to comprehends the Lord punishing David with the death of the newborn. I imagine that God allowing a baby to die, or even actively killing a baby, could rub anyone the wrong way. The punishment, however, fits the sin. David knew Yahweh would never fulfill his request for Bathsheba or even approve of it, for it was sinful, so David had to act outside of the covenant to obtain Bathsheba. In response, the Lord punishes David by making him live outside the covenant, as David wanted to, which would result in David losing his covenant blessings, including God sustaining his family. It is as if Yahweh was saying to David, "You want to act outside our covenant? Then you will truly live outside the covenant. You have taken for granted by covenant blessings to you, so now, you will live without them. Oh, by the way, your infant is is about to get sick. Good luck keeping him alive and healthy on your own without me sustaining him." I believe this reflects The Fall in Genesis 3, in which Adam and Eve outside the covenant by eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, so the Lord God removes the covenant blessing of the Garden of Eden. I also think this reflects what Romans 1:21-32 teaches.

David confesses, which the Lord accepts by sparing David's life, but God still passes judgment and punishment with the death of David's newborn son. David repents by laying prostrate and fasting, but the baby still dies. After the baby dies, David returns to normal, befuddling the servants, who feared reporting the news the infant had died, in fear of what David might do to himself. David states that he did everything he could do while the child still lived, but now his kid died, he could do nothing more.

With this context in mind, 2 Samuel 12:24&25 can now best be understood.

"Then David comforted his wife, Bathsheba, and went in to her and lay with her, and she bore a son, and he called his name Solomon. And the Lord loved him and sent a message by Nathan the prophet. So he called his name Jedidiah, because of the Lord." ~2 Samuel 12:24&25 (ESV)

The conjunction then introduces the next episode in the story of David. While commentaries debate how much passed between the death of the previous baby and the birth of the next child, the conjunction indicates that the author desires the audience to link the previous episode with the next episode. This episode early on introduces the characters of David and Bathsheba. For the first time in the book of 2 Samuel, Bathsheba receives the title of David's wife instead of the wife of Uriah the Hittite. This subtle change already hints at a sanctioned union in marriage and a valid son. Finding comfort in acceptance of Yahweh's judgment, David takes the initiative to comfort his wife Bathsheba and to provide a replacement baby. Compare the text here in 12:24 to 11:4, in which Bathsheba may have had to succumb to statutory rape. Whereas in 11:4, where David's position of power may have made Bathsheba comply to fulfill David's sexual urges,  here in 12:24, David's only concerns himself with taking care of his wife. Without an infant occupying her arms, Bathsheba may have sought comfort by filling her arms with her husband, which invited intimacy. The chain of the phrases "went into her," "lay with her" and "bore a son" do function as a euphemism for coitus and conception, the chain may also imply ease of conception. Such ease of conception insinuates the Lord's grace, mercy, forgiveness and reconciliation, which in turn contrasts God's judgment and punishment. The text wants its reader to parallel the death of the infant in 12:18 to the birth of the newborn 12:24 and does so with parallels throughout this passage. For example, the same language is used to describe the conception of both embryos (compare 11:4 to 12:24). This parallel exist to show Yahweh did not create any barriers that would cause barrenness. Because of the Lord's grace and mercy, God did not punish David and Bathsheba with barrenness, as he had done in the past (cf. Genesis 20:17&18). In his forgiveness, Yahweh provided David and Bathsheba with another son.

At this point, the text makes it apparent that, at birth, the newborn receives 2 names.

The text first calls the baby "Solomon." The baby received his name from his father David, specified probably due to the abnormality of the situation. The Old Testament most often records the mother naming the newborn (see Genesis 29:32 and 1 Samuel 1:20 & 4:21, for example). Uncommon yet not rare, the father would sometimes name the infant (see Genesis 16:15 and Exodus 2:22, for example). The text makes it apparent David named the child because of the 3rd-masculine singular pronoun attached to the root word (albeit some manuscript exceptions), although some English Bibles, like the NIV, try to reconcile the naming going against convention by claiming both parents named the boy, hence "they" in the NIV. Some scholars hypothesizes the name means "his replacement/substitute," as Solomon in a way does replace or substitutes the child who died. According to this hypothesis, David and Bathsheba hoped that Solomon's birth would make the citizens of Israel forget of the baby who was born out of adultery and who died out of God's wrathful judgment. Instead, the people of Israel would focus in on a child born out of love, who would become the future heir of the throne. Such a hypothesis has received criticism from other scholars. If Solomon truly means "replacement" or "substitute," this name would have to come from Bathsheba, and the dead baby would have to be Bathsheba's firstborn, for David already had plenty of kids, with no need of a replacement. All in all, while a valid hypothesis, the name's meaning feels a little too on the nose, which makes the criticisms even more valid, thus justifying a rejection of this hypothesis. More likely, etymologically speaking, the name "Solomon" matches closest with the Hebrew term שָׁלוֹם (shalom), meaning "peace." Reading 1 Chronicles 22:17-19, the text does not explicitly state David named the boy Solomon, but his reasoning for the name would reinforce this, for David himself links Solomon to the peace in the land. That little extra hey at the end probably serves as a 3rd person masculine singular pronoun, or simply put, "his." Therefore, Solomon means "his peace." Who the "his" in "his peace" refers to leaves room for debate, with the his referring to David or Yahweh as the top 2 candidates. Both David or Yahweh would make sense. Solomon as David's peace because David now has peace with another infant to substitute for the one he just loss. Solomon as Yahweh's peace makes sense, for the Lord will give David peace by restoring the lost baby with Solomon. Either way, the name indicates a peaceful relationship, or a restored relationship between Yahweh and David. This in turn means that David will once again receive the blessings he received previously in the relationship. The name also does foreshadow the future. When Solomon becomes king, his coronation will signifying a peace in the land, both internally and externally, a peace so peaceful that King Solomon can commence on construction of the temple.

The text second calls the infant "Jedidiah." The surrounding phrases teach that the infant received this name from Yahweh through his prophet Nathan. The phrase concluding the verse "because of the Lord" could just mean an expression of the Lord's feelings towards this infant, but the phrase best translates and interprets to mean "by the word of the Lord." As a prophet, Nathan merely acts as the mouthpiece of God. Put that phrase together with the other phrases, the announcement of the name Jedidiah sounds like a royal proclamation or a divine revelation. Therefore, the text clearly iterates and emphasizes that Yahweh, not Nathan, bestows the name Jedidiah onto the infant. Still, Nathan having the honor of delivering this good news plays an important role in signifying the Yahweh's forgiveness. The prophecy Nathan delivered to David was the Lord's judgment on David's sin. Nathan needs to communicate this message of God's love for the child, reflected in the name Jedidiah, to demonstrate that God indeed loves David, too, and God has indeed forgiven David.  The name Jedidiah is what we call in the scholarly world a hapax legomenon, or what we call in the Bible quizzing world a keyword: a word that only appears once in all the text. Yes, the name Jedidiah only occurs once in the entire Bible. Many English Bible translations will have a footnote explaining the name means "beloved by the Lord." Consider this name is a hapax legomenon/keyword, this means that this is the only character in the entire Old Testament described as loved by the Lord. The meaning behind the name has many levels. The name emphasizes the parallels and the contrasts between the two infants. The first baby conceived over lust; the second baby made from love. The first child got the Lord's judgment; the second child received God's love. The first infant brought anxiety and depression, but the second infant delivers comfort and peace. Again, the name, meaning "beloved by the Lord" contrasts the previous infant. Calling the infant "beloved by the Lord" assures the infant will not receive the same fate as the prior infant. Also, the Lord naming the newborn Jedidiah foreshadows that God has anointed this child to become the next king of Israel. As further proof, in Hebrew, the name Jedidiah shares the same root with David of dalet-vav-dalet or dvd. On top of that, the big difference between the names David and Jedidiah in the Hebrew is that the divine name of Yahweh is partially inserted into it, too. Not only does this etymology prove the Lord set Jedidiah aside to become the next God-ordained king, it also insinuates that Jedidiah has the capability of become a good, godly king, like David, a man after God's own heart. As a matter of fact, by partially inserting Yahweh's name into David's name, it also denotes that the Lord intends to bless Jedidiah even more than David! Solomon will become richer and smarter than his father. All in all, the name Jedidiah representing God's love for this new son of David displays again God's grace. Despite the heinous nature of David's sin, God would still keep his promise to continue David's family into a dynasty.

With the child receiving 2 names, scholars highly debate why the child has 2 names in the first place and how they relate to one another. Some scholars argue that Jedidiah is the official, government, throne name, whereas Solomon is the personal, private name, like a nickname. As proof, proponents of this stance argue that a name given by Yahweh has more importance than a name given by David, so Jedidiah is the official name, and Solomon is the unofficial name. Critics of that stance will point out, however, the oddity of the name Solomon recorded 287 times in the Old Testament and the name Jedidiah only once, if indeed Solomon is the personal, private nickname and Jedidiah the official throne name. Other scholars believe the opposite, that Solomon is the official, throne name, while Jedidiah is the personal, private name. As evidence, supporters of this view go back to the name count in the Old Testament. Critics of that view will highlight, however, that the name is sent by the prophet Nathan. While not strange for the Lord to give names, for God to give a nickname does come across as strange. Klostermann holds an interesting yet not popular opinion. According to Klostermann, David and Bathesheba named the prior baby Solomon upon his birth for government or political reasons, as a way to announce peace has come to the land. With the previous child dead, David and Bathsheba still need a kid with the name Solomon for those governmental or political reasons. Therefore, once Bathsheba gives birth again, to the replacement, they have to name the substitute Solomon, yet because of the trauma of losing the last infant, the family calls this son Jedidiah in private. Such an interpretation requires, however, a lot of reading between the lines. The reader has to assume that that events recorded in 2 Samuel 12:1-23 were private events, only known to the royal family, David's advisors, David's attendants and David's servants, which never became public knowledge. Thus, most scholars promote a compromise. Simply put, the kid received 2 equal names, yet for some reason or another, Solomon became more popular and Jedidiah became less popular, to the point people vaguely remember or almost forgot the other name Jedidiah. Such a practice became common among royalty in many other kingdoms, for kings to receive a name at birth and then to receive a new name when coronated. Israel copying this cultural practice would not come across as surprising, although it does feel strange that the name Jedidiah, with its important meaning, became the lesser known name.

Interesting enough, 2 Samuel 12:24&25 not only has the first mention of Solomon/Jedidiah, but it also contains the last mention of Solomon/Jedidiah for the entire book. Solomon/Jedidiah will not re-enter the history books until 1 Kings 1, where a conflict arises on whether Adonijah or Solomon/Jedidiah will become the next king of Israel. The rest of 2 Samuel retells the story of Absalom, who not only wants to become the next king of Israel, he also wants to take the throne while his father still lives on the throne. Solomon's/Jedidiah's absence may hint that Solomon/Jedidiah had to go into hiding, in fear of his life while Absalom went on his tirade. More importantly, however, the text uses names and their meaning to point out an irony. Absalom's name means "my father's peace." If not already evident, the irony lies in the fact that, this son of David, meant to bring David peace, actually takes peace away from him by causing conflict and war! Those who argue that that the "his" in Solomon's name's meaning, "his peace," believe that David here attempts to redeem Absalom's name. Absalom, meaning "my father's peace," did not bring David peace. David wants to bestow that title upon another son, but he can't rename another child Absalom. Therefore, David finds a close alternative, Solomon, meaning "his peace," referring to David's peace. Those who believe the "his" in Solomon's name "his peace" refers to Yahweh give even more redemption to David's naming. Whereas David trusted in himself for peace, hence Absalom meaning "my father's peace," David learned his lesson and now trust in the Lord for peace. Thus, the "his" in Solomon's name meaning "his peace," refers to God. Whether the conflict with Absalom or Adonijah, the name Jedidiah also comes into play here. The name Jedidiah, meaning "beloved by the the Lord," predicts and highlights that God ordained by his good, pleasing and perfect will to make this son the next king of Israel, not Absalom or Adonijah.

Not only does the name Jedidiah and its meaning implies the Lord reconciling with David, it also insinuates God's faithfulness to Israel. Despite David's sin, Yahweh would not hold it against Israel. Israel would continue to exist as a sovereign kingdom, with peaceful, secure borders. The birth of Jedidiah prove this, as Yahweh would continue on the kingdom of Israel with another king. Thus, the birth of Jedidiah becomes evidence for the fulfillment of the Lord's promises in 2 Samuel 7:12&13 for future generations. Indeed, under Jedidiah, the country does not merely survive, but rather, the nation thrives, experiencing a age of prosperity, culminating in the construction of the temple.

The chapter ends recording a historical battle with the Ammonites over Rabbah, the capital of the Ammonites. Although the text recounting the battle following the birth announcement, both events probably happened at the same time. The author chose to end the chapter with this historical account to loop full circle to the beginning of chapter 11. Now that another battle has arisen David decides to do it right, and the Lord blesses him with victory. Between the birth announcement and the declaration of victory in battle, the text clearly teaches that God and David have reconciled back to their original relationship.

So how does a birth announcement become applicable for a Christian living in the 21st century? The answer does not come directly from these verses, this chapter, or even this book. No, for the application, the 21st century Christian has to jump to the New Testament, more specifically, the book of Hebrews. In the book of Hebrews, the author loves quoting Jeremiah 31:34. In fact, the author quotes it twice: once in 8:12 and again in 10:17. In both quotations, the author highlights the phrase "I will remember their sins [...] no more" Such a phrase may sound like a paradox. How can the omniscient Lord, the all-knowing God, forget? A clue can be found in the original context, in the original Old Testament passage of Jeremiah 31:34. In Jeremiah 31:34, the phrase "I will remember their sin no more" is proceeded by "I will forgive their iniquities." God forgives sin, and once he does, he will never hold it against you after forgiving you. Your relationship with God is not like that of an old married couple - God will never bring up past sins of long ago for reasons to discipline you or punish you. David sinned, Yahweh disciplined him, the Lord forgave him, and God began reconciling with him. Therefore, the Lord did not continue to punish David with barrenness; God blessed David and Bathsheba to conceive and give birth to a new son. In the same way, any sin confessed and repented has already received forgiveness and reconciliation. When life turns for the worst, the Christian mind in tempting to confess and repent of old sins. An adult Christian might even confess and repent again for sins committed in childhood, and even as a teenager! Know for sure the curses of life do not come as the result of previously confessed and repentant sins. They have been dealt with at the cross.

In 2 Samuel 12, after a season marked by sin, loss, and deep sorrow, God does something astonishing. Into the ashes of David’s failure and Bathsheba’s grief, the Lord brings new life. A son is born. And God Himself gives that child a name: Jedidiah—“beloved of the Lord.” That name is more than a label. It is a declaration. A promise. A reminder that God’s love is not fragile, not fickle, not dependent on human perfection. It is a love that restores what is broken, a love that keeps covenant even when we do not, a love that speaks blessing over a child before that child can speak a word in return.

Bibliography

Anderson, A. A. 2 Samuel. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1989.

Barry, John D., Douglas Mangum, Derek R. Brown, Michael S. Heiser, Miles Custis, Elliot Ritzema, Matthew M. Whitehead, Michael R. Grigoni, and David Bomar. Faithlife Study Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2016.

Bergen, Robert D. 1, 2 Samuel. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996.

Beyer, Bryan E. “2 Samuel.” Pages 459–98 in CSB Study Bible: Notes. Edited by Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017.

Biblical Studies Press. The NET Bible First Edition Notes. Biblical Studies Press, 2006.

Dockery, David S., ed. Holman Concise Bible Commentary. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1998.

Edersheim, Alfred. Bible History: Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975. 

Hughes, Robert B., and J. Carl Laney. Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. The Tyndale Reference Library. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001.

Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997.

Knowles, Andrew. The Bible Guide. 1st Augsburg books ed. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 2001. 

Merrill, Eugene H. “2 Samuel.” The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Edited by J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985.

McCarter, P. Kyle, Jr. II Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction, Notes, and Commentary. Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008.

Omanson, Roger L., and John Ellington. A Handbook on Second Book of Samuel. UBS Handbook Series. New York: United Bible Societies, 2001.

Payne, David F. “1 and 2 Samuel.” Pages 296–333 in New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Edited by D. A. Carson, R. T. France, J. A. Motyer, and G. J. Wenham. 4th ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.

Smith, Henry Preserved. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Samuel. International Critical Commentary. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1899.

Smith, James E. The Books of History. Old Testament Survey Series. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1995.

Spence-Jones, H. D. M., ed. 2 Samuel. The Pulpit Commentary. London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909.

Tsumura, David Toshio. The Second Book of Samuel. Edited by E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. New International Commentary on the Old and New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2019.