October 6, 2014

Biblical Studies

There is still a son of Jonathan; he is crippled in his feet” (2 Sam. 9:3).1

I remember clearly the first time my mother told me the story of David and Mephibosheth. I immediately loved it. The paralyzed Mephibosheth got the surprise of a lifetime. It’s immensely touching. Little did I know that the story has more to do with me than I had thought. I was a kid, and Mephibosheth’s story is a well-loved children’s story—but also so much more. Jesus indicated to His disciples on the way to Emmaus that the Scriptures (our Old Testament, or Jesus’ Bible) testified of Him (Luke 24:30, 44). It is wonderful that the main purpose of the Old Testament writings is to foreshadow Christ and show God’s salvation, or at least some of its aspects. I wonder what Mephibosheth’s story tells us about God.

For Jonathan’s Sake

When I study a biblical passage, I first read the entire story carefully—better even repeatedly. The more familiar we are with a text, the more details we discover that help us see its obvious significance, along with its deeper message. Obviously, context surrounding the story is very important and requires our attention. The story in 2 Samuel 9 is told after Israel gained military victories over surrounding nations (2 Sam. 8:14). At this point David wondered whether someone is left from the house of Saul “that I may show him kindness for Jonathan’s sake” (2 Sam. 9:1). We are reminded of the fact that David and Jonathan shared a deep friendship that crossed family boundaries and grew in spite of Jonathan’s father, Saul, persecuting David.

The attentive reader of Samuel also remembers that David and Jonathan made covenants with each other (1 Sam. 18:1-4; 20:14, 15; 23:16-18). On one occasion Jonathan had said: “If I am still alive, show me the steadfast love of the Lord, that I may not die; and do not cut off your steadfast love from my house forever, when the Lord cuts off every one of the enemies of David from the face of the earth” (1 Sam. 20:14, 15). Even though Jonathan was dead when David finally became king over Israel (2 Sam. 5), David never forgot his oath; it’s fascinating to see that he remembered it exactly after a time of military victories, as Jonathan’s words indicated.

Anyone Left?

David wondered whether there was anyone left from Saul’s family to whom he could show “kindness for Jonathan’s sake” (2 Sam. 9:1). A former servant of Saul by the name of Ziba was called to him. David’s question regarding his name receives an intriguing response: “I am your servant.” Ziba clarified his loyalty to his new king, David.2 But David didn’t seem interested in Ziba’s loyalty. He wondered: “Is there not still someone of the house of Saul, that I may show the kindness of God to him?” (verse 3). You can almost feel a positive, anticipating tension in this question. “There is still a son of Jonathan; he is crippled in his feet,” answered Ziba. What an odd answer. Ziba highlights two facts. First, there is a son of Jonathan. Second, he is crippled in his feet. No name, age, or further description is supplied. Ziba later indicates where Jonathan’s son was living, so he surely knew his name. For some unidentified reason, however, he didn’t deem his name important enough to mention. But his disability seemed significant.

David never even mentioned Mephibosheth’s disability.

David was hooked now. A son of Jonathan, his beloved friend! Nothing was more important than to know his whereabouts. Following Ziba’s reply, David sent for this son of his dead friend. What followed was a highly emotional encounter—although its description is rather short. The moving element, however, doesn’t lie so much in a touching description of their encounter, but in some details given in the story that point to a bigger, even more impressive truth.

Servant or Son?

Prostrating himself before David in reverence and thus acknowledging his position (and the danger) of being a descendant of the fallen king, Jonathan’s son heard his own name. David did nothing else upon seeing the son of his beloved friend than calling out his name. “Mephibosheth!” Meeting David for the first time, Mephibosheth follows Ziba’s lead: “Behold, I am your servant” (verse 6), thus underlining his loyalty. No claims to the throne, no accusations. He knew that David was the king and had power to do whatever he wanted.

Whatever Mephibosheth may have expected at this point, he surely didn’t expect what followed. After calling him by his name, and thus acknowledging his identity, David encouraged Mephibosheth not to be afraid (verse 7). David showed mercy, basically saying: You will be safe, because your father was my friend. You and I have a loved one in common. But David didn’t stop there: “I will restore to you all the land of Saul your father” (verse 7). David gave back to Mephibosheth what had belonged to him originally: the land of his (fore)father Saul. Yet David was still not finished: “And you shall eat at my table always” (verse 7). The biblical text mentions four times the phrase “eating at the king’s table”—highlighting a significant point. What is this last favor if not a declaration of adoption?

Paying homage again to David, Mephibosheth asked: “What is your servant, that you should show regard for a dead dog such as I?” (verse 8). No answer from David is reported. The image of the dead dog had been used by David himself several years earlier, as he was fleeing from Mephibosheth’s grandfather Saul. Being innocent, David felt like a persecuted dead dog who was hunted down (for example, 1 Sam. 24:14). But without any bitterness or revenge toward Mephibosheth’s family, David now builds his royal household with members of the family of that fallen king.

We get the impression that, after communicating these favors to Mephibosheth, David turns to Ziba to do the job properly, giving Ziba detailed orders. Speaking about loyalty, it is remarkable that David fully acknowledged Saul as Ziba’s master. Three times the phrase “your master’s grandson” is repeated. In peace with his past, David actively provided a positive future for someone who expected none.

About Tables and Priests

Several clues in this text and connected texts enlighten and emphasize what this story is about. Let’s consider two significant aspects.

A Table Left, a Table Offered: When the story says that David told Mephibosheth, “You shall eat at my table always” (verse 7), the word for “table” is used here again after a long time. The last time it appeared in the books of Samuel was when David himself left a table, Saul’s table, because of the danger he was in (1 Sam. 20). Many years and several chapters later the same word “table” appears again in 2 Samuel 9. Saul’s blatant lack of trust toward God and David had led to David’s flight, his absence from the king’s table, and the disconnect from the royal family (see also 1 Sam. 25:44). In Mephibosheth’s case these elements were inverted: David’s grace and fearlessness led to Mephibosheth’s invitation to the king’s table and his inclusion into the royal family. It was David’s faithfulness to a covenant that ultimately led to Mephibosheth’s blessings.

David’s Sons: Mephibosheth was included into David’s table fellowship, “like one of the king’s sons” (2 Sam. 9:11). The end of chapter 8 tells us that “David’s sons were priests” (verse 18).3 The end of chapter 9 says: “Now he [Mephibosheth] was lame in both his feet” (verse 13). This lexical link and further information is interesting. The question arises whether Mephibosheth also became a priest. We are reminded of the rules regarding priestly offspring who had defects (Lev. 21:16-23). Priestly (male) family members with a “blemish” (injuries, disability, etc.) were not allow
ed to serve as priests in the sanctuary. Yet what seems outright discriminatory to us had a deep spiritual meaning.

Through the sanctuary God demonstrated how the sin problem gets resolved. To do that, He clearly regulated how His priests should serve Him. Serious prohibitions and regulations (washings, etc.) before fulfilling their priestly duties made sure that any association with human decay and death (by touching corpses, having a discharge, being handicapped, etc.) was clearly avoided, because God drew a very strict line between His life-giving worship and the death-focused cults of other nations.4 The most amazing thing, however, is the fact that although a priestly family member “with blemish” was not allowed to serve at the sanctuary, his survival was secured: “He may eat the bread of his God” (Lev. 21:22). Yes, he could eat freely at God’s table.

The Kindness of God

David set out to “show the kindness of God” (2 Sam. 9:3). What is God’s kindness? What did David do to Mephibosheth? David’s kindness included: (1) calling Mephibosheth by name and acknowledging his identity; (2) encouragement (Fear not!); (3) mentioning for whose sake grace was given; (4) restoration of land; and (5) adoption into the royal family with provision of a future.

We all are descendants of a fallen king, whose disobedience ruined us. The land was lost. We were disabled and living in a place where there is “no pasture” or “no word” (English for Lo-Debar). We didn’t know the Anointed one, the real King. Until the day we met Him and allowed Him to give us not only mercy but grace, resulting in encouragement, restoration, and adoption. God the Father and Christ made a covenant for our salvation. It is through our connection to Christ that we can live. It’s for Christ’s sake! Our connection to Him—similar to Mephibosheth’s connection to Jonathan—is the saving relationship. Not only Christ, however, but God the Father Himself loved us (John 3:16). We are more than just servants—we can be sons and daughters of the ultimate King.

By the way: did you notice that David never even mentioned Mephibosheth’s disability? It was significant for Ziba, but it didn’t matter to David. David saw only the person—a person whom he could show the kindness of God.


  1. All Scripture quotations in this article have been taken from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
  2. It is well known that descendants and inner-circle servants of a former ruler were generally in danger under a new king.
  3. In which sense they served, we don’t know, since David was not a Levite and thus not from a priestly tribe.
  4. See Roy Gane, Altar Call (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Diadem, 1999), chap. 19. God’s worship should not even be slightly associated with the veneration or worship of the dead, something that was very common in the cultures surrounding Israel.
Advertisement
Advertisement