Post Mortem of a Mistake

When we sin, it is always wise to examine the reasons we fell. Reflection is part of the lesson. The Bible gives us several hints at why David failed...let's take a look.

Remember that David's armies had defeated Nahash of Ammon, who insulted David's messengers, and his alliance which included the Syrians. Now, the following year, Joab leads a campaign against them that reaches into the heart of their kingdom, besieging their very capital city. (Remember the Ammonites descended from the son/grandson of Lot. When Israel took the Promised Land God told them to respect Ammon's borders. The two nations had an uneasy brotherhood that was on and off again...mostly off...throughout their history. Now they had openly insulted David and David's army retaliated.)

Joab broke through the strength of their capital city. Just before the military victory was complete, Joab sent to David saying almost sarcastically, ""Come over here and at least take credit for this, if that's not too much to ask. Otherwise they'll name the city after me." Joab was a lot of things that were despicable, but he did seem to have a real investment in David's interests.

David came with the rest of the army, and they finished off the capital city, taking their kings' crown that weighed 131 pounds! (And more amazingly, setting it on his head...I wonder if there is something I am missing here? Perhaps the weight was "weight worth in gold?") He also claimed the spoil of the city, and made the Ammonites slaves.

So why, again, was David not fighting with his army?

Uriah proved himself a far better man when he refused to be comfortable while his comrades suffered in the field. He would not even go home at night...so dedicated was he to the cause. David, it seems, was happy to stay at home in comfort, even carefree enough to think of indulging his lusts. He had been sleeping all day when he saw Bathsheba.

Perhaps he was indulging in self-pity because of the recent snafu with Nahash, to whom he tried to show kindness. Now embittered about the situation and the messy war that had ensued, he wanted no more to do with it. Maybe also he felt he just needed a break from fighting every year. This would be his season to take a break and recharge. His self-indulgence left him weakened to temptation. Caught "without his armor," he was easy prey to his own lusts.

Far from despising David, I recognize too much of my own heart in him. I often become desensitized to my responsibilities in favor of self-gratification, discouragement, and self-pity!

Back

It's been almost a year since I posted last. My excuse is pretty pathetic...we moved, I lost track of my old notebook, and really wanted to list my posts in chronological order! So, now that we've moved again & the notebook is relocated, I'll continue where I left off.

II Sam. 12

David's child died because of his sin. David wept, fasted and prayed while it was still alive, but ceased after he died, going into the tabernacle to worship. He "quieted himself as a weaned child." He accepted God's will and did not question it.

God's punishment of David hit on his vulnerable spot...his children, whom he loved very much. God said because of his sin with Bathsheba, his child would die and there would be no peace in his household. We later see the heartache his children caused him, from Amnon's rape of Tamar to Absalom's betrayal and death. The consequences continued for David's own good...to keep him dependent on God and to rein in his wandering heart.

But yet God showed he had forgiven David and Bathsheba by giving them a son--Solomon, whom "the Lord loved." If I were God, I would probably make the couple barren for the rest of their lives, just out of decency if nothing else! But God, being Who He is, delights in bringing good out of evil. Solomon's reign would become a glorious picture of Christ's wise and righteous reign on earth. And through the "unholy union" of David and Bathsheba, would come, in the fullness of time, the Messiah.*

How different God's ways are from mine! He used a union that never should have been, a broken man and woman, as a key element in his plan to save all mankind.

David & Bathsheba's sin reminds me of Adam and Eve's. The same hiding from God. The same guilt, the same brokenness. And yet there is the same fact that God turns their failure into something epic, something good, a tool for redemption.

* Joseph, the assumed father of Jesus, came from Solomon. Mary's genealogy springs from Nathan, a younger, barely-mentioned son of Bathsheba and David. Any real son of Joseph would be prohibited from being a king because of the curse pronounced on one of the last Hebrew kings, Jeconiah. So the "root of David" was necessary, since the main line of kings had been cut off. Yet the Messiah still came from David and Bathsheba's union.

Off Topic Meme

Ok, now that I know what a "meme" is...no, I'm not up on blog lingo... I decided my OT blog could tolerate a little off-topic something or other occasionally.

In response to being tagged by Jeff's book meme:

One book that changed your life:
Heaven, by Randy Alcorn

One book that you’ve read more than once:
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

One book you’d want on a desert island:
The Bible, or Heaven by Randy Alcorn. (Or maybe Dan Miller's 48 Days to the Work You Love? ha)

One book that made you laugh:
James Herriot's All Creatures Great and Small

One book that made you cry:
Reading Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert depressed me for several days, if that counts.

One book that you wish had been written:
Decorating Using Stuff From Your Back Yard

One book you wish had never been written:
The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin

One book you’re currently reading:
Under the Greenwood Tree by Thomas Hardy, one of the few books he's written that has a happy ending.

One book you’ve been meaning to read:
There are a couple... the Faery Queen by Spenser, Beowulf, Milton's Paradise Lost (again)

Nathan, the Tactful Prophet

Two words we need to see together more often. :) Nathan strikes the perfect balance between hellfire and brimstone and respectful suggestion. The point of his story hits hard, but the way he tells it gives David a chance to draw his own conclusions and make his own decision.

Nathan respects David's intelligence and right to make a choice. He doesn't go to him and lecture him as if he were a child. God does the same thing to us. He gives us time and space to make our own decision--He doesn't beat us over the head.

I am so bad at this. When people don't respond to truth, I want to bang them over the head with LOUDER truth. It just doesn't work that way. According to Proverbs, "a soft word breaketh the bone..."

Correction: Painful Proof of Love

II Sam. 12
"Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth betimes." I never really noticed the bit that says "And the Lord sent Nathan unto David." Nathan didn't just get it into his head that he needed to tell David off. Never should I assume that correction comes only from the whim of an authority. God has a hand in my life, and often uses authority to correct. This is a great comfort, that God cares enough about my being out of fellowship with Him to send another Christian to confront me. Now if only I responded as well and as quickly as David did.
My prayer is that I would learn to value holiness above looking good. My pride leads me to respond badly to criticism and to authority. I must trust God's goodness enough to know that chastening is proof of His love.

The Cover-Up

David makes the quick, coldhearted decision that Uriah should be killed in battle. He joins ranks with that practical, calculating man, Joab, who is willing to do his dirty work for him.
There will always be a "way out" of our sin's consequences, but using it leads to worse consequences. "He that covers his sin shall not prosper, but whoso confesseth and forsaketh shall find mercy." (rough paraphrase)
But, it is so much easier to at least forestall painful consequences. Who wants to voluntarily humiliate himself and confess his wickedness or stupidity? Yes, what David did was horrible, killing an innocent man to cover his sin, but haven't we all covered things up before? It is human nature...we see it in the Garden when Adam and Eve hide from God.
Sin shames us, loads us with guilt that is so burdensome it is easier to deny it. Thank God He seeks us out in our hiding...as He did Adam and Eve and as He does David.

Bathsheba, Vixen or Victim?

I promised to get back around to this. My thinking is that she was mostly a victim...mostly. Here's why I think so. She had a godly upbringing, if her brother's character is any indication. Her family probably held the Abrahamic covenant dear to their hearts, since her name means "daughter of the oath." Her grandfather was a man noted for his wisdom in counsel. She was given in marriage to a good man of high character.

If her later actions show her basic character, they paint a favorable picture as well. Most Bible scholars think she is the mother of "Lemuel," probably another name for Solomon. Her prophecy is recorded in Proverbs 31.

That fact makes me laugh out loud at the irony. Bathsheba is a woman we think of as badly messed up, ruined, tragically fallen, in the middle of a huge mess of adultery, lies, and murder. She writes a chapter about the PERFECT WOMAN who has intimidated females for centuries! (Think of that line "the heart of her husband doth safely trust in her." That must have hurt to write.) Scholars believe she is the woman who uttered these words because it is addressed to a king, the name "Lemuel" may be a nickname for Solomon, and she warns her son about the main weaknesses Solomon had....wine and women. She warns him not to drink, lest he pervert judgement. She then goes on to describe a suitable wife for him. (Alas, even with all his 700 wives and 300 concubines, I bet Solomon couldn't find one who fit the bill.) If Bathsheba described this Proverbs 31 woman, chances are she shared, or at least valued, some of her characteristics.

My third reason for believing her mostly the victim, not the seductress: her actions in interceding for Adonijah (this was soon after Solomon gained the throne). Adonijah was already on "probation," you might say, for trying to take the throne as David lay dying. Solomon graciously gave him a second chance. In a political move, Adonijah went to Bathsheba, asking her to intercede on his behalf and allow him to marry David's concubine. Bathsheba innocently did it. She just was not a "machinations" kinda gal. She just didn't get all the intrigues. She didn't understand that Adonijah was only doing this to gain an edge to the throne. Solomon saw through it and had him killed.

So, given her parentage, writings, and somewhat naive, ready-to-please character, I believe she was a victim in this matter. When David called for her, how could she refuse him? She was not like Abigail, who with a few deftly-wielded words kept David from sin, even in the white-heat of his anger. But I said she was "mostly" a victim.

She may have averted disaster if she had tried--if she had thought in that moment of her faithful husband, who loved her "like a ewe lamb" and "cherished her in his bosom" (Nathan's description). If she had only thought of the reputation of the king of Israel. If only she had thought of the consequences that must come to the nation and to David. If she had even thought of her own family, or her own reputation...

But I feel so for her. What a horrible burden to carry, for someone who was not hardened in sin. She had to keep the adultery secret...and those months must have been torture, once she knew she was going to have a child. She must have known that her husband was murdered, not killed in battle. She knew why her child died. She did suffer, indeed.

Her story is a warning to me, and to all women. God has made women vulnerable. This is not a weakness (or should not be). Beauty invites. God has given women this characteristic. In a way they picture Christ. He became vulnerable, risking openness when he came to earth, ministering and opening his heart to others. But there is great strength in his vulnerability and openness, because he submits to his Father. He does not close himself off to protect Himself or lash out in self-defense. He remains soft, open, submissive, yet He directs this openness and submission to God. Therein lies His glory and his strength.

The Family of Bathsheba

The more I dig for info concerning Bathsheba, the more interesting it gets! The Bible actually has quite a bit to say about her family. Remember the "unsung hero," Machir of Lodebar, who harbored Mephibosheth and aided David? He was none other than her brother. And her grandfather was David's chief advisor, Ahithophel, whose advice was "like the oracles of God," who later betrayed David in Absalom's uprising, and who hung himself when his counsel was defeated by Hushai. So, Bathsheba had connections, and was no stranger to David or to the palace. (Her nationality is still not certain, though her name may give us some clues...it means "daughter of an oath," referring to Abraham's covenant.)
More info on Uriah. It is possible he may have been a second-generation converted Jew, since his name contains the suffix for "Jehovah." Uriah is presented as a noble character, more devoted to Israel's causes than David himself (at this time.) His loyalty to a nation that, by blood, was not his own, is amazing, and makes his murder all the more heinous.
Bathsheba was no doubt a cherished prize to Uriah. She was of noble birth, was endowed with unusual beauty, and was valued by her family. Her name at birth was "Bathshua," "daughter of my prosperity." Later it was changed by her father to "daughter of an oath." (Names were often changed to reflect a child's character when the child came of age.) This, by the way, was a prophetic name, as she does figure in the Abrahamic covenant as an ancestor of Christ. It also shows her father's growing assessment of her worth.

Bathsheba, Hittites, and Genealogies

Now, you gotta see the irony in that...BATHsheba!

We aren't told much about this woman. She was married to a Hittite, one of David's mighty men. (Warning: Beginning rabbit trail here) The Hittites were a powerful nation that, though they'd been chased back and discouraged from settling near the Israelites, ruled a vast tract of land in the mountains of Turkey. They were not a literary society, so for many years archeologists knew little about them. In the early 1900s, archeologists (particularly the Germans, who believed the Hittites to be their ancestors) deciphered their language and discovered that the Hittites, far from being minor players, were a world power that rivaled Egypt and conquered Babylon.

Their language bears similarities to German--some words are nearly identical. For example, their word for "water" (vaser) is nearly the same. Probably of European origin, they may have migrated south through the Balkans.

The Hittite culture, in my mind at least, bears some similarities to American culture. Masters of chariot-making and iron work, they were most interested in government and laws, not poetry and art. Their laws were admirable, even by modern standards. Though inherited from the Old Babylonians (think Hammurabi), they were an improvement as far as fairness and reasonableness. They were not into despotic central authority. Only a handful of crimes were capital crimes (unlike Hammurabi's code, where you could be executed for getting rowdy drunk). They were non-dogmatic when it came to religion, tolerating any and all gods. (Sounds a bit like America too.) Their interests included colonies in far corners of the Mediterranean and trade. They spread Mesopotamian culture all over the ancient world through commerce. (Again, like America...the great cultural definer for most of the world.) They were sheep raisers and grain growers, who also had rich natural resources of silver, copper, and lead ore. They were the earliest makers of iron. You might say they were on the cutting edge of technology.

So, Uriah the Hittite was from no small tribe...he was a member of a powerful nation. What was he doing fighting for David? We're not sure. David attracted several foreign "mighty men," though. An outcast and renegade couldn't be picky about his friends. Any ally was a welcome ally.

The question is, was Bathsheba Hittite, or Jewish? We don't know that, either. She was the "daughter of Ammiel." (She is mentioned in the genealogy of I Chron. 3:5 as the mother of 4 sons...apparently remaining a favorite wife with David.) She is in the line of Christ, amazingly enough. She is even mentioned in the genealogy of Matthew, along with three other women...Tamar, Ruth, and Rahab. (Interesting...Tamar was an adulteress, Rahab a Canaanite harlot, Ruth a Moabitess.)

This alone--the fact that these four women of dubious repute were mentioned in Christ's genealogy--shows that God mercifully works through "sinners," and through unlikely people, non-Jewish people. It also shows that Christ was no "pure-blood" Jew by any means. God is not a racist.

Better stop here since I'm running the risk of information overload...but that genealogy really speaks to me. Bathsheba, a woman whose very name brings up shameful associations, and who was involved in the moral downfall of Israel's most beloved king, is honored (along with three other "strange women") with a place in the predominately male genealogy of Christ. Instead of covering up Christ's "less acceptable" roots, Matthew highlights them by mentioning these four women of ill-repute. That gives us all a lot of hope. It's God's righteousness, not ours, that brings about His perfect plan.

Messing Up Royally

II Sam. 11
Probably the biggest threat to Israel's existence had been successfully dealt with. David probably breathed a big sigh of relief. Finally he could get some R&R....and we all know what happens next.

I really do not like reading this chapter. No one likes seeing someone mess up...royally. It is painful reading.

I'm not sure what to focus on here in this story of David and Bathsheba, but, considering my gender, perhaps I should take a look at Bathsheba. What was she like? Siren, or simpleton? Vixen, or victim? More to come on this later...

A Big Nasty War

II Sam. 10

The insult to David's men caused a war. When Hanun and the Ammonites were thrashed by David's army, you'd have thought it was over. But no. The Ammonites had brought along their buddies, the proud Syrians, and they didn't take the loss very well. The Syrian king (who was probably just waiting for an excuse to fight Israel, anyway, and jumped at the chance) rallied a huge army and renewed the conflict. This high king of the Syrians, Hadradezer, called out all the vassal Syrian kings to fight.

David in turn called out all the host of Israel. David's men won again! After this second defeat, the Syrians made peace with Israel, and served them, and "feared to help the Ammonites any more."

Just proof that history repeats itself. Palestine takes unwarranted offense at Israel, stirs up a bunch of neighboring countries who likewise hate Israel, and tries to wipe it off the face of the earth.

Israel existed only by the grace of God. It still exists only by His grace and for His purpose.