This topic contains 35 replies, has 18 voices, and was last updated by 
Tim WB 1 year, 5 months ago.
-
Posts
-
Anonymous7 Then Nathan said to David, “You are that man! The Lord, the God of Israel, says: I anointed you king of Israel and saved you from the power of Saul. 8 I gave you your master’s house and his wives and the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. And if that had not been enough, I would have given you much, much more. 9 Why, then, have you despised the word of the Lord and done this horrible deed? For you have murdered Uriah the Hittite with the sword of the Ammonites and stolen his wife. 10 From this time on, your family will live by the sword because you have despised me by taking Uriah’s wife to be your own.” 11 “This is what the Lord says: Because of what you have done, I will cause your own household to rebel against you. I will give your wives to another man before your very eyes, and he will go to bed with them in public view. 12 You did it secretly, but I will make this happen to you openly in the sight of all Israel.” (2 Sam 12:7-12)
So, maybe you know the story? Boy meets girl, boy has sex with girl and gets girl pregnant, boy deliberately has girl’s husband placed in harm’s way in a war zone, and husband dies. Well, that was certainly the case with King David back in the day. This “man after God’s own heart” (Acts 13:22) chose to do something heinous – something that today would be punishable by death, at least. But, let’s examine the words that Nathan (the prophet) speaks to David afterwards, that are from the mouth of God Himself.
“Why, then, have you despised the word of the Lord and done this horrible deed? For you have murdered Uriah the Hittite with the sword of the Ammonites and stolen his wife.” (2 Sam 12:9)
That is what God was pissed about? God had full opportunity to blast David for all of the crimes he had committed against “God’s law,” but He chose to focus on the murder of Uriah the Hittite and the subsequent theft of his wife-property? God chooses to condemn David’s family to the sword because David wrongfully took one man’s life? God chose to pimp out David’s wives because David admittedly took one man’s wife? Maybe you are not tracking what I am saying here. Maybe I am not being very clear. What I am more curious about is why God does not mention the very obvious infractions that David has committed.
Adultery
Why for instance is the word “Adultery” never used? I mean that culture and our culture and Jesus’ culture was BIG on using that word to describe the sin behind David’s actions. God could have easily pointed out to David that what he had done by committing adultery was more than enough to get him stoned in even a more contemporary society, let alone the one he lived in. God could have called him out on the mere fact that David slept with another man’s wife, or the fact that David was married and was sleeping around period. Each of those infractions ARE adultery. Jesus lists adultery as the reason why someone may divorce another in the Sermon on the Mount. (Matt 5) This alone was a heinous crime to the culture of that day.Wives, not Wife
Oh yeah did I mention that David had wives, not just one wife? Wait a second. Seriously? Yes, count them:Michal
Ahinoam
Abigail
Maacah
Haggith
Abital
Eglah
Bathsheba (2 Sam 3:2-5)
(Yeah David, I’d be dancing too…)So that, by all accounts makes him a polygamist. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that assessment.
Co-habitating with Sex Slaves
David also had at least ten concubines. What’s that? 10. (1 Chronicles 1:1-9; 2 Samuel 6:23; 20:3) What is a concubine one might ask?Wikepedia defines it thusly: “A concubine is generally a woman in an ongoing, marriage-like relationship with a man whom she cannot marry for a specific reason. It may be because she is of lower social rank than the man (including slave status) or because the man is already married. Generally, only men of high economic and social status have concubines. Many historical rulers maintained concubines as well as wives.”
Concubines were basically there to pleasure the King, when the wives were not in the mood. Likewise, if for some reason the wives were not producing enough sons, then the King would impregnate a concubine in hopes of increasing his lineage with a son. So basically this is a formal kind of Adultery (remember that word). David was regularly having sex out of wed-lock with these women, thus committing adultery and also having what we hip evangelicals like to term as “pre-marital sex,” but also “co-habitating.” 2 Samuel 5:13-15 says that David took on more wives and concubines in Jerusalem, but it fails to say how many, and it only names the sons born to him there.
But who’s counting
Well obviously I am counting. You should be counting too. Really, I have a point, stay with me. Check it out, here is a list of things that God should have nabbed David for: Adultery (multiple counts) Polygamy (multiple counts) Sex before marriage (multiple counts) Co-habitation (multiple counts) Murder (one count) Theft (one count) Coveting his neighbor’s wife (one count) Being a Dick (I added this one. It should be a crime)
The Law of Moses
But who am I to second guess God? Right? I mean God in all his wisdom saw fit to formally charge David with crimes against His “Law” otherwise known as the Law of Moses, or the Ten Commandments.
So that is truly what God nabs David for, Murder, and Coveting, and Theft and in an indirect way Adultery. God does get him, and in the end David pays dearly. But what about the other law of Moses?
One Man, One Woman
It’s in the Bible, I read it, I believe it. Moses wrote in Genesis about the fact that marriage is a union between just one man and just one woman. You remember the whole man will leave Mom and Dad and cleave to his wife? (Gen 2:24) Haven’t you heard this argument before? I mean, we have to obey the commands of God as passed down through Moses in Genesis right? I mean the atrocities of David ala Adultery, Polygamy, Co-habitation and pre-marital sex cannot go unanswered. How could we possibly justify blasting homosexuals with the abomination of gay marriage?How could we dare to pound them over the head with the Bible for being against Godly marriage if God does not seem to care at all about the abomination that is David? But, no, David will forever go down as a “man after God’s own heart.” He will forever be listed as an ancestor to Jesus, and in fact so will Bathsheba, the adulteress turned mother of Solomon (an author in the Bible).
We Care a Hell of a Lot More About This Stuff Than God Seems to
So, this is one of the reasons I have arrived at the above conclusion. In fact humans have traditionally always had more laws than God could come up with on His own. We do it to ourselves, folks. In being absolutely clear about David’s abject offensive behavior, god is also clear about what he is NOT angry about. So why do we get so excited about things like gay marriage, or gay Christians, or people living together and not married, or young lovers safely experimenting with sex? What has got our panties in a bunch? It isn’t God, so don’t blame Him.-
This topic was modified 2 months, 4 weeks ago by
David Hayward.
Plus it was prophesied to David that his seed would sit on the throne BEFORE he did all that bad stuff.
You ask some interesting questions.
From my understanding, God was upset that David stole Uriah’s only wife when he had more than enough of his own. And he had a man killed so it wouldn’t look quite so bad. So it was simple theft.
In my experience, most Christians do not know that most versions of the books of the Old Testament do not date from the time they purport to be about. This is especially true for the historical books which were known to have been edited during the time of the Exile – and often with considerable editorial bias – into more-or-less the forms we have today. So there is some doubt that what we now call the Mosaic Law was even extant during the times of the kings. But we just don’t really know.
Wade.
The whole situation with David illustrates the inconsistency of the bible. A person has to become an adept contortionist to remain an inerrantist, IMO. However many life lessons can be drawn from bible stories depending on interpretation. Those who take the bible as the literal word of God tend to become rigid and judgmental and have fewer options when it comes to exercising grace to others in real life situations. When God has spoken what more is there to say??!
Why have we got our panties in a knot indeed John. Clearly the church version of sexual morality does not have a clear biblical foundation. God cares about the heart first and foremost. Sexuality has always been something to be respected and treasured, a beautiful gift from our maker. It does not need to be bottled up and shunned as an evil result of the fall as seems to be the position of so many.
(Disclosure statement…My wife and I are a polyamorists in an exclusive and very committed 4 way blended marriage with another couple)
Anonymous@Admin Clearly you are not suggesting that God made a mistake?
Or was Uriah’s death all in God’s good and perfect plan? OKay, I will stop now… 
@Staticsan yes, I was thinking theft as well, since women were property back then. I agree with your assessment about Mosaic Law as well, but when writing these kinds of articles, I try to stick with the Bible as-is. What I find interesting is that most “Christians” gloss over these simple truths as if they are not even there.
@Hugh “A person has to become an adept contortionist to remain an inerrantist.” I like this statement. I have heard it applied to being a believer in general (from my atheist friend). I tend to prefer Brian McLaren’s view of the Bible over others. He has a very practical view of the work as a library of books written over time by various people regarding their understanding about god at the time. He makes assertions that the closer in chronological order these books get to the life of Jesus, the more truth we may be able to glean from them.
@Gary I also agree with you. I think that we as people have always dealt with such insecurities. The whole concept of the “fall of man” for instance seems to be a construct by people who saw God as a fixer, rather than as a benevolent and proud creator. I respect your relationship with your 3 loved ones by the way. Thanks for sharing that.
Hey @john… no… i’m not implying God made a mistake… but somehow the writers integrated the smaller sin story into their larger salvation story. Know what I mean?
Anonymous@Admin yes I do.
I was just kidding by the way. And for the record, I think God does make mistakes, or better put God doesn’t know future outcomes like so many folks seem to suspect.And keeping with the theme of Bible narratives reflecting the norms of the time in which they were written, if I recall correctly (it’s been a while since I’ve thought about this stuff) it’s not surprising that a prophecy/promise to David from God would trump what would otherwise have called for a death penalty. (Well, there’s the whole piss-off-the-king-with-righteous-anger-but-not-enough-to-get-yourself-executed angle, too, from Nathan – but that’s a whole other rationalization.)
As you all know, God is not portrayed as omniscient in anything remotely resembling a consistent manner in the OT. He’s often repenting of things he did because of unforeseen consequences which he, well, didn’t foresee. So, he made a promise – went public with it, for goodness sake (no sense of discretion being the better part of valor or not counting chickens before they hatch) – and then David went all macho, acquired Bathsheba and dispatched Uriah. Somebody’s got to pay, but OMG, nothing can be allowed to trump a contractual promise from the big guy. After all, a man’s word was, if not his honor, his manhood or in this case, godhood. So with a teaberry shuffle, David’s heirs pay a goodly portion of the price (there’s that “sin of the father” thing – although I think folks tended to see learned disfunctional behavior and its consequences as God’s judgement rather than screwed up human psychology.)
Anyway, I just went through this whole thinking outloud exercise just to do a brain dump and jot down a bit of the “uh, huh – way more about human cultural expectations, rationalizations, just-so stories, and other assorted wants/needs/hopes/desires than anything resembling the divine” thoughts that were starting to clutter my brain-space. Don’t know anywhere else I could even begin to do this or anyone else who’d understand without going ballistic on me…
Considering David’s sexual exploits, I think perhaps he was the “adept contortionist”!
Somebody’s got to pay indeed. So let the baby die.
I appreciate the freedom to speak in this place.
AnonymousGood post!
Anonymous@KimT Thanks!
AnonymousI had never thought about how David was already committing fornication and adultery on a regular basis with the concubines.
I think David was also guilty of rape. We don’t know if he had to coerce/force Bathsheba or if she was an enthusiastic participant, but he was the king, and nobody could defy a king’s wishes without risking serious consequences, so it was impossible for Bathsheba to give meaningful consent. And if I understand correctly, the concubines were slaves so they had even less say in the matter. Of course, the OT law didn’t give a damn about consent since it saw women as property.
The idea of God orchestrating the rape of the wives is sickening. God killing the baby for its parents’ sin was terrible enough, and I wonder how pro-lifers would react to that.
Getting all hung up on sexual purity and rules and regulations sucked the life right out of my religious faith. So, I left it. Thanks for all of these insights. WOW! I’m so happy to know all of you and hear your thoughts.
-
This topic was modified 2 months, 4 weeks ago by
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.