2 Samuel 6 Footnotes

6:6-7 Uzzah was only trying to stabilize the ark of the covenant; why did God kill him? The ark was the earthly throne of the living God (Ex 25:22; Nm 7:89; 1Sm 4:4; 2Sm 6:2; 2Kg 19:15), or more properly, the footstool of his invisible throne. It was the holiest object in Israelite religion. As with ancient Asian kings (Est 4:11), the Lord promised death to any unauthorized person who closely approached his throne (Nm 4:15). Uzzah was not an Aaronic priest and had no authority to touch the ark. He was not slain for his good intentions, but because he violated a command and trespassed into “territory” reserved for consecrated priests.

The tragedy could have been avoided if Uzzah and Ahio had insisted that David move the ark in the way the law of Moses required. It was to be carried by the Levites, not transported on a cart (Nm 4:15; 7:9; 2Sm 6:13).

6:14 Within Israelite society the linen ephod was worn only by priests (Ex 28:6; 1Sm 2:18; 22:18). David was of the tribe of Judah, not the priestly tribe of Levi, yet he wore the ephod on this ceremonial occasion. In so doing he was placing himself in a priestly role, but not that of a Levitical priest. Having recently conquered Jerusalem, he assumed all the titles and offices held by its previous kings, including those of Melchizedek, ancient king of Salem (Jerusalem) who was also a priest of God Most High (Gn 14:18). In this sense David could be considered a priest, though not one that could perform the duties reserved only for Levitical priests.

6:20 Did David expose his nakedness while dancing before the Lord? Though Michal accused David of this, she was probably exaggerating in her anger. David was wearing a linen ephod, a garment worn by priests of the Lord (Ex 28:4). If he was properly dressed as a priest, he would also have worn a linen undergarment (Ex 28:42-43). His modesty would have been preserved even while he was dancing exuberantly. Michal despised David (2Sm 7:16) and, moreover, seemed to have not fully committed herself to the worship of the Lord; she avoided the religious ceremony, even though other women attended (vv. 19-22). Her spurious charges against David were only symptomatic of her deeper spiritual problems.

6:23 This passage indicates that Michal remained childless, whereas the Hebrew MT of 21:8 ascribes five sons to her. An ancient scribal error in the Hebrew text of 21:8, followed by some English versions, seems to be responsible for the discrepancy. The ancient Greek and Syriac (Aramaic) manuscripts, and English translations that follow them, preserve the correct reading.