Are there times when integrity comes at too high a price?
Text: 2 Samuel 1:1- 5:5
Hosts:
J. Kent Edwards
Vicki Hitzges
Nathan Norman
Narrator: Brian French
The CrossTalk Podcast is a production of CrossTalk Global, equipping biblical communicators, so every culture hears God’s voice. To find out more, or to support the work of this ministry please visit www.crosstalkglobal.org
Produced by Nathan James Norman/Untold Podcast Production
© 2025 CrossTalk Global
Kent: g
Nathan: Hi, this is Nathan Norman. During the month of July, we're taking a break from recording and bringing you some of our best episodes from the last four years. We'll begin recording new material in August. Until then, enjoy this look back.
Brian: We agree with Dwight D. Eisenhower when he said the supreme quality for leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office. As Christians, we say amen and amen. But what happens when our love for integrity makes cost us personally? When it may cost your dream, your goal in life, the ministry you have prepared for all your life? Are there times when integrity comes at too high a price? If you think integrity is easy, wait until you see the dilemma King David faced on his way to the throne. Listen in as Vicki Hitzges, Kent Edwards and Nathan Norman look and learn about the cost of integrity from the opening of the book of 2 Samuel. Welcome to CrossTalk, a Christian podcast whose goal is for us to encourage each other to not only increase our knowledge of the Bible, but to take the next step beyond information into transformation. Our goal is to bring the Bible to life, into all our lives. I'm Brian French. Today, Dr. Kent Edwards and Vicki Hitzges and Nathan Norman begin our new journey through the book of 2 Samuel. If you have a Bible handy, turn to 2 Samuel, chapter 1, verse 1, to chapter 5, verse 5. As we join their discussion.
Kent: I think leadership is a lot easier in the abstract than reality. Would you agree?
Vicki: I think most things are easier in the abstract than the reality.
Nathan: Oh, absolutely. We talked last week about people who sideline quarterback all of their leaders and past. Well, I would have done this. Yeah, of course it's easier.
Kent: Yeah. I think having high ethics in leadership is harder than it looks, isn't it?
Vicki: Oh, yeah. Without even knowing what you're talking about, I'd say, oh, yeah.
Nathan: Oh, yeah, yeah.
Vicki: Doing the right thing's always easier to think about than do.
Kent: Well, don't we see that even in our own leaders?
Nathan: Where do we want to go with this?
Vicki: Yeah.
Kent: It's not unusual for us to hear of some member of the US Government to be under examination because they used insider trading to buy stocks, or they voted for one bill instead of another one because it would benefit their particular district and help their election chances.
Nathan: They accepted gifts above the normal legal limit, which. That one boggles my mind. I don't know how much it is. It's a lot of money, though. I think it's like something over 5, $600. So you can bribe me up to $600 and that's just fine.
Kent: Or they used money that was given for campaign funds for personal use. It's so tempting, because if there's so much there and you have a personal need. Ethics are easy to have when life is easy, and it's hard when life is harder. I think we see that in the life even of King David. We are resuming our series in Samuel by looking at the first chapters of 2 Samuel. And I've got to admit, as you look from chapter one through to the first part of chapter five, this is not only a long, natural unit of Scripture, it's a little bit complicated, but I find it helpful to know that it's bookended at the beginning and the end by almost identical stories. In chapter one, we have David being able to operate with no longer being in the shadow of Saul. Saul has died. He took his own life on Mount Gilboa. And now David, who was anointed years and years ago, is finally able to take steps unencumbered in order to become king. And what happens in two Samuel one here? Nathan, could you summarize that for me?
Nathan: A couple of Amalekites come and they bring some of King Saul's items to David. And they're trying to gain his favor. And they say, hey, we came across King Saul and we killed him because we know that you're the rightful king. And so they're trying to gain favor with David and they lie about what happened. I remember reading this as a kid. I'm like, wait a minute. But didn't King Saul kill himself? That's the point of the story. Because we as good readers know that Saul took his own life. But they're thinking, well, he's not going to know they came across his dead body. We'll just say, we killed his enemy and now we're his friends.
Kent: Right. So they're trying to gain his favor by saying, we are helping you get to the throne by removing your enemy. And that wasn't uncommon in the ancient world. Assassinations for political advancement would be not uncommon in the secular world. But how does David respond?
Nathan: He has him executed as enemies of the state because they killed the crown king.
Kent: He identifies that as. It's just murder, people. Right?
Nathan: Yeah. He sees it for what it is.
Kent: Right.
Nathan: He has no reason to disbelieve their story. You killed the king. And I had many opportunities to kill him before I chose not to because he was still God's king. He was still God's Anointed. And you chose to murder the king of this land. So you are guilty of regicide.
Vicki: Is that a word?
Nathan: Yes. Yeah. Killing a king or killing royalty, rather. And you deserve the death penalty. And he has him executed.
Vicki: Oh, don't you know? They were like, bummer.
Nathan: Well, we messed up on this gamble.
Kent: They got convicted for a crime that they invented.
Vicki: Yeah.
Kent: They didn't even commit it. So, Vicki, help me. Is David in this story acting with integrity?
Vicki: Yes.
Kent: Yes, he is. I agree. Okay, let's skip over to chapter four, because at the bookend of this natural unit, we end up with a similar story here. This is regarding Ish Bosheth. So Ish Bosheth was the only remaining heir of King Saul. So he was a rival to David for the throne of the United Tribes of Israel. And in this case, well, it's kind of similar. I mean, it turns out that Recab and Binah and chapter four, verse five, the sons of Rimmon the Bethrite set out for the house of Ish Bosheth. And they arrived there, and what did they do?
Nathan: They killed him.
Kent: Yes.
Nathan: Stabbed him and killed him while he was lying in his bed. So they killed him in his sleep.
Kent: And cut off his head.
Nathan: Right.
Kent: You know, just so it's particularly gruesome, they wanted evidence that they had killed David's rival. And what did they do? Similarly to chapter one, in verse eight.
Nathan: It says they brought Ishbosheth's head to David at Hebron and said to the king, here's the head of Ishbosheth, son of Saul, your enemy, who intended to take your life. Today. The Lord has granted vengeance to my lord, the king, against Saul and his offspring.
Kent: So politically, this was. You could see this as a coup for David, right? Yeah. There is no longer anyone who can challenge his right to the throne.
Nathan: Your political rival is gone.
Vicki: Did they. Did they know about the guy who claimed to kill Saul?
Nathan: I hope that they did. I hope that they did, because it just shows how stupid people are.
Vicki: Yeah. So what happened? I don't know these stories. What happened?
Kent: So how did David respond?
Vicki: If he's consistent, he'd have them put to death, too.
Kent: Yeah, he sure did.
Nathan: He sure did.
Kent: He reminds them of what he did in chapter one. He tells the guys, don't you remember what I did in chapter one then? That was the reward I gave them. I put them to death. How much more when wicked men have killed an innocent man in his own house and on his own bed, should I now demand his blood from your hand? And rid the earth of you, as he says in verse 11 of chapter 4. And what does he do? He gives the order to do what?
Nathan: Yeah, I don't know if he did this before or after, but he cuts off their hands and feet and then hangs their bodies by the pool in Hebron. So you know you're going down and saying, I need a shower, right? I need a bath, I stink. Oh, there's a couple dismembered bodies.
Kent: I think there's some symbolism, of course, because they murdered Ish Bosheth with their hands, right.
Nathan: And their feet carried them to Ish Bosheth and to David. And so this was symbolic. So again, I don't know if they tortured him and cut off their hands and feet beforehand or afterwards, but it certainly was to be a visual reminder to Israel what they did was wrong.
Vicki: Don't be killing kings.
Nathan: Hey, what do they do? Right. And everybody knew, right. The gossip travels quickly so they can tell you and it's an immediate lesson.
Kent: So. And Vicki, your assessment here, was David ethically correct in executing these men?
Vicki: Well, it's gruesome, but eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth? Yeah, I think so, yeah.
Kent: I mean, murder, you pay with your life. He did it in chapter one, he does it in chapter four.
Nathan: Right. And it's important to note that this is correct use of judicial power. Right. He is the king. The job in the Old and New Testament and today of government is to restrain evil. And they're given the sword in order able to do that. And certainly they don't have long term prisons like they did back then or like they do now. So this is really the only option and opportunity to stop and restrain evil. So he's functioning not in a sense of vengeance. I'm going to take my vengeance on you. He's functioning in the place of the royal judiciary.
Kent: Right. But it's interesting to note additional similarities of these two stories that he executed men who were non Israelites. These are foreigners. So there was no political repercussion of their families or anything on David, which doesn't mean what David did was wrong. I think it was perfectly right and just for him to administer justice the way he did. But it was easier, it was easy because there was no political blowback for.
Nathan: Him, there was no cost to this decision for him. These were nobodies. I mean, even today their names are in the Bible. We don't know who they are. We just read it. I don't remember them. I'd have to look at the text to recite their names to you again. Right, Right. So like you said, there's no personal cost involved. If he makes one decision or the other, it doesn't cost him anything.
Kent: Right. So keep those two bookend stories in mind. They have very much. They're very, very similar. But let's look at the chapters in between, because this is entirely different. Because David is entrusted. His challenge now is to bring together all 12 tribes and unite them. 10 in the north, who were under the control of Saul, and then the two, including Judah, in the south, that were under David's control.
Nathan: And by Saul, you mean Saul's house.
Kent: Right, the house of Saul. In this conflict between the northern part of the kingdom and the southern part, there were different leaders and different generals. So Abner was in the north, and he served under the king, Ishbosheth. David was in the south, and he had Joab as his general. And David's job is to bring them together. And there was tension. There was tension between Abner and Joab because both of them wanted the job of being general over a combined kingdom. You can see that in chapter two. I know it's gruesome, but it's kind of a funny story. At least I find it funny. We read in chapter 2, verse 10, that Ishbosheth son of Saul, was 40 years old and he became king over Israel. And. And he reigned only two years. And by the way, we just saw how that came to an end. But we read in verse 12 that Abner son of Ner, together with the men of Ish Bosheth the son of Saul, went to Gibeon, and Joab and David's men went out to meet them at the pool of Gibeon. One group sat down on one side of the pool and one group gathered on the other side of the pool. Abner had a great idea. What was his idea? In verse 14 and following, he said.
Vicki: Let'S have some of the young men get up and fight hand to hand in front of us. And Joab said, all right, let them do it.
Kent: So they counted off 12 and 12. Somebody said, go. And was there hand to hand combat? No, this was not a wrestling match. What does it say in verse 16?
Nathan: Then each man grabbed his opponent by the head and thrust his sword into the opponent's side so that they all died together.
Kent: So the bad blood is so strong that they got up to have a wrestling match. None of them intended to wrestle. All of them were prepared to be an assassin. I mean, you talk about bad blood, right? You talk about Tension, because they're battling for who gets to be in the highest position of the army, who's going to be the general over the whole unified nation. And the battle breaks out. And verse 18, the three sons of Zeruah were there. Joab, Abishai, and Asael. And in the text, Asael had wings on his feet. I mean, that kid could run. And who was he chasing?
Nathan: Abner. Who was running away.
Kent: Yeah. So Abner is trying to get away, and Asael wants to kill him. Well, Abner didn't want to kill him. Why? Why wouldn't he want to kill Joab's brother?
Nathan: Because then Joab's going to want to kill him back.
Kent: Yeah. It's got to cause bad blood for life. Right? Right. And you can see that because in the text, in verse 21, Abner cried out to him, turn aside to the right or the left. But Asael would not stop chasing him. Verse 22, he says very explicitly for him to stop. What does he say?
Vicki: He says, stop chasing me. Why would I strike you down? How can I look your brother Joab.
Kent: In the face and Asael listen.
Vicki: Nope.
Kent: No. It says very clearly, Asael refused to give up his pursuit, so Abner dispatched him rather quickly. The image here is of them both running at full speed, and Abner just puts the pointy end of the spear into the ground so it would stay place. And Asael ran right into the butt of the spear and skewered himself. Yeah. And that is not good. Joab got mad. Right. Joab's really upset that Abner did that. He's even more upset in chapter three when David makes a wise political move to appoint not Joab, but Abner as the commander of the combined armies of the north and south of Israel. Politically, that's genius. Right?
Nathan: Well, of course, now he's taken his rival's top guy, and he's made him his top guy. So everyone who is following his enemy is now like, oh, well, the number two is now on his side, so I guess it's okay. He's essentially married the. The two factions.
Kent: Right. I mean, it's not wrong for David to do that. I thought. I think it's genius for him to do that. It brings unity faster than anything you could imagine. But when Joab heard about the shift, he was not happy. He didn't like Abner because he had killed his brother. He didn't like Abner because he was now taking his place as commander of chief. And we read in chapter three, verse 26, and following what happened Joab left.
Vicki: David and sent messengers after Abner, and they brought him back from the cistern at Sira. But David did not know it. And now, when Abner returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside into an inner chamber as if to speak to him privately. And there, to avenge the blood of his brother Eshael, David stabbed him in the stomach and he died. And later, when David heard about this, he said, I and my kingdom are forever innocent before the Lord concerning the blood of Abner, son of Nervous. May his blood fall on the head of Joab and on his whole family. May Joab's family never be without someone who has a running sore or leprosy or who leans on a crutch, or who falls by the sword or who lacks food. Joab and his brother Abishai murdered Abner because he had killed their brother Eshaal in the battle of Gibeon.
Kent: Right.
Vicki: Then David said to Joab and all the people with him, tear your clothes and put on sackcloth and walk in mourning in front of Abner. King David himself walked behind the bier. They buried Abner and Hebron, and the king wept aloud at Abner's tomb. All the people wept also.
Kent: So was sin committed in this scene? Oh, yeah.
Nathan: He assassinated David's new general.
Kent: So Abner did not murder Asael because that was in the form of self defense in battle.
Nathan: Correct.
Kent: In fact, he warned him multiple times that was not murder.
Nathan: The text goes to pains to show us that Abner was just defending himself.
Kent: But in this case, what Joab did to Abner was that sin.
Nathan: Oh, yeah. It was premeditated.
Kent: It was premeditated, deliberate murder and against.
Nathan: The orders of the king. And it threatened to divide the political alliance that was just made.
Kent: So is David innocent in this murder?
Nathan: Yeah. He's not complicit.
Kent: Yeah, not at all. So when he says, there's no blood on my house, it's true. And he says there should be guilt on Joab's house, Right? He says there should be. And they go on and have this great funeral that. You read the beginning parts for us, Vicki. But the king also wrote a song. He's a psalmist, right? So he wrote a psalm, and it says, should Abner have died as the lawless do? Your hands were not bound, your feet were not fettered. You fell as one falls before wicked men. And the people are, as you read the following verses, they're impressed with the remorse that David shows. They knew that he was not responsible for the death of Abner. That's wise politically. That's very wise. And it's not wrong. It's not unethical for him to say that. That was true. But what did David fail to do?
Nathan: Punished Joab.
Kent: In the first story, he punished people who were murderers to advance the kingdom, his rise to the throne. In the last story, he punished people who committed murder to help his rise to the throne. But when it comes to Joab, he does not punish him, he does not execute him when he knows it is murder. He knows that, and he does not do that. Why not?
Nathan: Oh, the cost is too high. Joab is the guy who was his right hand man, his second in command while he was on the run from King Saul. Joab's the guy who rallied the troops to David's side. Joab's the guy who David would tell, hey, get the troops to go out and protect this location, fortify this area. Joab would go and tell them to do it, and they would do it. They had so much respect for him and they followed him, second only to David himself. And for him to go and condemn Joab to death, he would likely lose a good chunk of his support.
Kent: It would be politically uncomfortable. That would be a polite way of putting it.
Nathan: Oh, it'd be disastrous. This is what happens when you follow David. There's no leeway and you get executed.
Kent: So Joab has such stature and such reputation that David is afraid to execute justice. It was easy to do in the first story, in the last story, because they were foreigners. But now you've got a high profile part of the kingdom of the south, and he doesn't want to alienate them. In fact, I'm not making this up. This is exactly what the narrator wants us to know because we read in verse 37 and following, what does he say?
Nathan: On that day, all the troops in all Israel were convinced that the king had no part in the killing of Abner son of ner. Then the king said to his soldiers, you must know that a great leader has fallen in Israel today. As for me, even though I am the anointed king, I have little power today. These mens, the sons of Zeruah, are too fierce for me. May the Lord repay the evildoer according to his evil.
Kent: Hmm. His men knew that he had not acted properly, ethically in allowing Joab to escape the consequences of his sin of the murder of Abner. The men knew it. He had to explain himself. And what does he say? It was not politically expedient. I would not do what I should have done because they have too much influence in the kingdom. Vicki, how does David do now on the ethical scale?
Vicki: Not well. He even told him, this is what I should do, but I'm not going to do it.
Kent: Yeah. In this case, he failed.
Nathan: It's amazing. He's king and he says, I have no power. You can't have any more human power than what you currently have.
Kent: In chapter five, in the first paragraph, David becomes king. He is king now, but he has a problem. His problem is Joab. This problem will haunt him the rest of his life. By the way, if you're wondering why, with his sin with Bathsheba, we'll come to later, why Joab was willing to commit murder to cover up his crime. It's because David is saying implicitly, I let you off with murder. You have to let me off with murder. At the end of his life, he will say to Solomon, discipline Joab for his sin. Punish him for his sin. On his deathbed, he knows that he made a mistake and he never had the courage to discipline, to punish Joab for the sin that. That he had done. Look, the Bible is a wonderful book because it's an honest book. It shows people at their best, and it also shows them at their worst. It is not trying to sugarcoat anything. In this case, David fails to act with ethical integrity because it's not politically expedient. It's easy to be ethical when it's easy. It's hard to do the right thing when it may come from with a cost. David wounds his leadership ability to lead God's people by his failure to do what he knew, what was right, what he did on other occasions when it was easy, but he wouldn't do here. That's what David did, how he responded. In this time of pressure, are there times when we could make similarly poor decisions?
Nathan: Yeah. For me as a pastor, I think the COVID situation of the last two years is a great example of this. I mean, the pressure was so incredible. I mean, there were states and provinces where you just had to shut your church down. Right. You weren't allowed to meet present in Michigan with me and my colleagues as we're talking this through. We were exempted from any and all of those things. We weren't. We could do whatever we wanted. And that was horrible because the pressure was turned up.
Kent: Right.
Nathan: Because now you have people who are concerned about the virus and they want you to take every possible precaution and never meet again.
Kent: Right.
Nathan: You have people on the far side of that. And then you had people who are like, oh, this is all, you know, this is nothing. We can just lick the floors. And you had people on that side, and you had people, you know, on either side, towards the middle, but just kind of contending with. With what you should do or what you shouldn't do, and to make a decision and stick with that decision based on personal convictions was incredibly hard and shattering because, frankly, no matter what decision you made, people are going to be upset and people would probably leave.
Kent: Yeah, well, we're more likely to Le Miz. We're more likely to steal when we're hungry. John Valjean was an ethical person, but in the midst of that, he got thrown into prison because he stole a loaf of bread. When we are about to lose our house, when we are facing bankruptcy, that's when people are more likely to steal from their company. When a marriage is under pressure, there's more of a tendency to break our vows. It's when we're late for an appointment that we're most likely to speed. I think there are times as leaders when we will face a similar situation, when there are significant people in our churches, in our ministries that can cross the line, and it will be politically expedient for us to close our eyes, but it will not honor God in the process. And like David, it'll create a weight and a burden that can follow us the rest of our ministries. Yeah. Some people say the test of a man's character is what they do when no one's looking. I think that's stupid. I think the test of our character has shown what we do when the pressure is on. We don't have to fail, as David failed in this passage. When the pressure is on, it is always right. It is always right to do what is right, even when it's dangerous to do so. May God give us the courage to learn from David and do what is right, even when it's costly.
Brian: The test of our character is what we do when the pressure is on. It is always right to do what is right, even when it is hard. But this story with David teaches us that even when it's dangerous, we are called to do the right thing. I trust that today's discussion of God's Word has been helpful and served as an encouragement to not just be hearers of the Word, but doers together. Let's bring God's word to life, to our lives. This week, the crosstalk podcast is a production of crosstalk Global, equipping biblical communicators so every culture hears God's voice. To find out more about this educational nonprofit organization, please visit www.crosstalkglobal.org. you can also support this show by rating it on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Play, or wherever you're enjoying it. Be sure to listen next Friday as we continue our discussion of 2 Samuel. You won't want to miss.
Kent: SA.