2 Samuel 3 15

2 Samuel 3:15 kjv

And Ishbosheth sent, and took her from her husband, even from Phaltiel the son of Laish.

2 Samuel 3:15 nkjv

And Ishbosheth sent and took her from her husband, from Paltiel the son of Laish.

2 Samuel 3:15 niv

So Ish-Bosheth gave orders and had her taken away from her husband Paltiel son of Laish.

2 Samuel 3:15 esv

And Ish-bosheth sent and took her from her husband Paltiel the son of Laish.

2 Samuel 3:15 nlt

So Ishbosheth took Michal away from her husband, Palti son of Laish.

2 Samuel 3 verses

2 Samuel 3 15 Meaning

2 Samuel 3:15 describes Ish-bosheth's act of returning Michal, Saul's daughter, to David. Following David's demand as a condition for Abner's allegiance, Ish-bosheth sends to retrieve Michal from Paltiel, her current husband. This action directly validates David's historical claim to Michal as his first wife and thus reinforces his legitimacy as the rightful heir to Saul's throne and a significant step in his becoming king over all Israel.

2 Samuel 3 15 Context

The immediate context of 2 Samuel 3 involves the ongoing civil war between the house of Saul, led by Ish-bosheth (Saul's son) and his commander Abner, and the house of David, who reigned in Hebron over Judah. Abner, disillusioned by Ish-bosheth, decides to switch allegiance and secure the rest of Israel for David. David agrees to a covenant with Abner but sets a critical condition: the return of his wife, Michal. David's demand for Michal (detailed in 2 Samuel 3:14) was not solely an emotional reunion, but a highly strategic political move. By bringing Michal back, David solidified his claim to the throne of all Israel as Saul's legitimate son-in-law and proved his entitlement over Saul's property and kingdom. Ish-bosheth, powerless without Abner and likely hoping for Abner's help to unify Israel under David (thus saving his own life or position), complies with this demand, illustrating his diminishing authority and the shift of power towards David. This verse directly recounts Ish-bosheth's execution of David's demand. Historically, Michal was first married to David, then taken by Saul and given to Paltiel (1 Samuel 25:44), creating a complex legal situation relevant to the Deuteronomic laws regarding marriage.

2 Samuel 3 15 Word analysis

• And Ish-bosheth: Hebrew: וַיִּשְׁלַח אִישׁ בֹּשֶׁת (vayyishlach 'iysh-bosheth).
  • Ish-bosheth (אִישׁ בֹּשֶׁת): Translates to "man of shame" or "man of humiliation." This name is often seen as a deliberate biblical alteration from his original name, Eshbaal (אֶשְׁבַּעַל), meaning "man of Baal," likely to avoid associating a figure from Israel's royal line with the pagan deity Baal. His very name reflects his ultimate weakness and the tragic end of Saul's dynasty. In this verse, he acts not out of strength but under the sway of David and Abner, a clear sign of his weakening authority and subservience.
• sent, and took her: Hebrew: וַיִּשְׁלַח...וַיִּקָּחֶהָ (vayyishlach...vayyiqqachehā).
  • sent (וַיִּשְׁלַח vayyishlach, from שׁלח shalach): To send forth, dispatch. It signifies that Ish-bosheth actively commanded the action, even if compelled. It shows a degree of his remaining authority, but now used to serve David's interest.
  • took her (וַיִּקָּחֶהָ vayyiqqachehā, from לקח laqach): To take, to seize, to acquire. This strong verb highlights the forceful and definitive act of separation from Paltiel, despite the human cost involved. The act of "taking" here legally signifies transfer of possession.
• from her husband: Hebrew: מֵאֵת אִישָׁהּ (me'et 'ishah).
  • her husband (אִישָׁהּ 'ishah): Lit. "her man." This acknowledges Paltiel's established, albeit temporary, legal status as Michal's husband according to Saul's decree (1 Sam 25:44). The verse doesn't negate Paltiel's conjugal rights at the time, underscoring the legal complexity and human suffering of the situation.
• even from Phaltiel the son of Laish: Hebrew: מֵאֵת פַלְטִיאֵל בֶּן לָיִשׁ (me'et Paltiy'el ben Layish).
  • Phaltiel (פַלְטִיאֵל Paltiy'el): Meaning "God is my deliverance" or "God has delivered." This name carries a tragic irony, as God's plan for David's ascendancy results in Phaltiel losing what he holds dear.
  • the son of Laish (בֶּן לָיִשׁ ben Layish): "Son of a lion." Identifies Paltiel by his lineage. Laish might refer to his father's name or a place of origin.

Words-group Analysis:

• "And Ish-bosheth sent, and took her": This phrase succinctly conveys Ish-bosheth's submission to David's demand. It highlights his political weakness and the transfer of effective authority. Ish-bosheth's active role in returning Michal legitimized David's claim in the eyes of all Israel. This action effectively dismembered the last semblance of Saul's house's royal authority and provided undeniable proof of David's prior rights.
• "from her husband, even from Phaltiel the son of Laish": This specifies the person from whom Michal was taken. It underscores the forced separation and the human drama behind the political maneuver. The mention of Paltiel's "husband" status, though it was given by Saul and contrary to David's prior claim, legally emphasizes the impact of the action on Paltiel. This clause, followed by Paltiel's weeping in 2 Samuel 3:16, grounds the political machinations in profound personal cost. The narrative choice to explicitly name Paltiel and describe his relationship ("her husband") gives pathos to his involuntary sacrifice.

2 Samuel 3 15 Bonus section

The narrative of Michal's return brings to the forefront several underlying theological and historical tensions. Firstly, it implicitly confronts the legal nuances of divorce and remarriage within the ancient Israelite context, specifically referencing the difficult application of Deuteronomy 24:1-4. While the law seemingly prohibited a man from taking back a wife given to another, David's unique claim (that she was unlawfully taken from him in the first place, rather than divorced by him) allowed for this re-establishment of marital ties. Secondly, Michal's identity as Saul's daughter was crucial. Reclaiming her solidified David's link to the previous dynasty, providing continuity and an indisputable visual and genealogical testament to his inheritance of Saul's kingdom, serving as a powerful counter-polemic against any lingering claims of illegitimacy from Saul's loyalists. The "sons-in-law of kings" held a significant political position, and possessing Michal was vital to demonstrate his established standing. Thirdly, this episode foreshadows the future disharmony between David and Michal, culminating in Michal's contempt for David's exuberant worship and her resulting barrenness (2 Sam 6:16-23), suggesting that this forced reunion, while politically expedient, did not result in marital happiness, reminding us that even divinely ordained plans unfold through complex human experiences and choices.

2 Samuel 3 15 Commentary

2 Samuel 3:15 marks a pivotal moment in the narrative of David's ascension. David's demand for Michal was not merely about reclaiming a beloved wife; it was a strategically brilliant move to assert his legitimacy over Saul's throne. By marrying Saul's daughter, David had legally become a part of the royal house and gained a right to the succession, strengthened by the bride-price he had paid (1 Samuel 18:25-27). Saul's subsequent act of giving Michal to Paltiel was a deliberate attempt to undermine David's claim. By insisting on her return, David challenged Saul's illegal action and forced Ish-bosheth to acknowledge David's superior right, thereby symbolically acknowledging David's rightful claim to the kingdom itself. Ish-bosheth's compliance highlights his waning power and his de facto submission to David's authority. The poignant detail, though recounted in the subsequent verse, of Paltiel weeping behind Michal (2 Sam 3:16), subtly underscores the personal human cost intertwined with divine providence and political ambition in biblical narratives. It raises questions regarding the strict interpretation of Deut 24:1-4, where David taking Michal back could be seen as violating the law against a man remarrying his divorced wife if she had been married to another; however, many interpret this specific situation as one where David never divorced Michal, but Saul unlawfully seized and gave her away, maintaining David's claim as primary.