David and Bathsheba

Video Statistics and Information

Video
Captions Word Cloud
Reddit Comments
Captions
The following message by Alistair Begg is  made available by Truth For Life. For   more information visit  us online at truthforlife.org. And having sung of the Word of  God, I invite you to turn now to it   and to 2 Samuel and to chapter 11,   and to follow along as I read from  the first verse. Two Samuel 11:1:  “In the spring of the year, the time when  kings go out to battle, David sent Joab,   and his servants with him, and all Israel. And  they ravaged the Ammonites and besieged Rabbah.   But David remained at Jerusalem. “It happened, late one afternoon,   when David arose from his couch and was walking  on the roof of the king’s house, that he saw from   the roof a woman bathing; and the woman was very  beautiful. And David sent and inquired about the   woman. And one said, ‘Is not this Bathsheba, the  daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite?’   So David sent messengers and took her,  and she came to him, and he lay with her.   (Now she had been purifying herself from  her uncleanness.) Then she returned to her   house. And the woman conceived, and she  sent and told David, ‘I am pregnant.’”  Thanks be to God for his Word. Gracious God, we come now to the Bible,   and as always, we come in need of the divine  work of the Holy Spirit, enabling us to listen   together, helping me as I seek to speak,  and taking up this offering, as it were,   to be used according to your eternal  purpose. And we pray in Jesus’ name. Amen.  These words in relationship to King Uzziah  fit, I think, very much with the passage of   Scripture to which we begin to turn this  morning; and the Chronicler said of him,   “His fame spread far, for he was marvelously  helped”—“marvelously helped [until] he was strong.   But when he was strong, he grew proud, to his  destruction. For he was unfaithful to the LORD   his God.” Now, I say to you that that was written  concerning King Uzziah. You know King Uzziah.   You know Isaiah 6: “In the year that King Uzziah  died I saw the Lord.” That’s the Uzziah. But this   is not Uzziah we’re considering. This is the great  king of Israel. This is this man of exemplary   character thus far, this one to whom we have  been looking over a period of weeks and months.   And we find ourselves coming to material that  for many of us is familiar, but nevertheless   coming to it and saying to ourselves, “What  are we to make of this collapse? What are   we to make of this?” Because we have followed  David from shepherd boy to God’s anointed king.  And it’s safe to say that recently, at least,  things have been going very, very well for him.   He has built a magnificent reputation. We have  found him triumphing over the enemies of God;   showing kindness to those who are undeserving  of it; ruling with justice and with equity,   or with righteousness; in chapter 9, extending  the hesed love of God to the descendants of his   archenemy Saul; in chapter 10, doing the same on a  foreign basis, reaching out with kindness to Hanun   on the strength of his father, Nahash. And in  all of this we have found ourselves able to say,   “Here we have it: the promise of God to  King David. Look at David, and look at   how he points us forward to none other than his  great greater Son—namely, Jesus Christ himself.”  But now this. Here he is at the pinnacle  of his power. He is able to command and to   control everyone and everything, it would  seem—everyone and everything, of course,   except himself. The adjectives concerning David  that we’ve been employing are routine for us now.   He was good. He was brave. He was kind. He was  faithful. He was generous. He was righteous. But   now the adjectives have to change. Now, the  words are bad, willful, cowardly, corrupt.  This is surely one of the most  embarrassing pieces of Old Testament   history, because it is an account—an unalloyed  account—of lust, adultery, treachery, and murder.   Frankly, we would prefer not to discuss it.  Actually, it would be good if we could have   cast a veil of silence over it and been  done with it and moved on somewhere else,   but here we have it. The Bible has recorded  for us the whole sorry, sordid affair.   And I’ve been living with this now for some time,  delaying to come to it, as you would have noticed,   by two weeks, to try and pluck up sufficient  courage. Because the narrative provides us   with more than we want to know about David and  far more than we want to face about ourselves.  Aye, there’s the rub:   Is it possible—is it actually possible—to erase a  life of usefulness in the space of an afternoon?   For that’s what happens here. Here  in this incident, a defining moment,   a dark shadow is cast over his life. No matter  what anybody said about him from that point on,   they could never actually say it without  mentioning this. So, for example, the Chronicler,   the one who keeps the chronicles and the records  of the kings, in 1 [Kings] 15, this is what it   says: “David did what was right in the eyes of  the LORD and did not turn aside from anything that   [the Lord had] commanded him all the days of his  life, except in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.”   A dark blot, a defining moment. The Context  So, to the text. In verse 1 we have the context.  Actually, in verse 1 and the beginning of verse 2   we have the context: “In the spring of the year…”  “In the spring of the year…” Winter is over,   the rainy season has passed, it’s not time for  harvest, and this is the time when battle would   be resumed. It is, if you like, in the  words of Ecclesiastes, “a time for war.”   And as we’ve already noted, the  Ammonite war, or the war against Ammon,   has set the bigger context in which this  incident is found. And the Ammonites have   already had a pounding, but it hasn’t been enough  to silence them or to send them home entirely.  Back in 10:14, I think you will remember that  Joab, after he had led the troops, returned from   fighting against the Ammonites, and he came  to Jerusalem. By the end of that chapter, the   Syrians had had enough. They were mercenaries in  any case, and they decided to leave the Ammonites   on their own. The Ammonites then shored themselves  up in their capital city of Rabbah, which is   contemporary Ammon, and they represented still  a threat. So, we’re told, “in the spring of the   year, the time when [the] kings go out to battle,  David sent Joab.” Joab was one of his mighty men.   He sent him with his team, the tough fellows,  who were then the leaders of the army   of Israel. And we’re told that they “ravaged the  Ammonites” and they besieged the city of Rabbah.  Now, that is, if you like, looking through the  long lens. That is the long lens and looking and   seeing what’s going on in the big picture.  In the beginning of verse 2, the context   is more focused for us. Now we have a  closeup. The long lens gives us a picture   of a military battle: a battle that was  being waged by the armies of Israel,   and a battle that was successful. Now the camera  changes and brings us up close to another battle,   but not a military battle; a moral battle. And  in this battle, the king is about to collapse.  Now, it’s customary when we read this to make  much of the fact that it says that David remained   at Jerusalem in the time that kings go out  to war. And I think it is put in this way   in order that we might be forced to say to  ourselves as we’re reading it, “I wonder, is   that going to prove significant?” Even in English,  the way it’s translated and given to us there:   the Ammonites were besieged at Rabbah, “but David  remained at Jerusalem.” But we need to say as   well that this wasn’t the first occasion in which  David had not gone out to battle. It was entirely   legitimate for him to be able to do what he did.  After all, he was the king; he had a lot on his   plate and so on. And so, to make more of it than  that, I think, is probably somewhat irrelevant.  But we need to recognize that the picture that we  are given here is of the king who is the chosen of   God—the one, remember, way back in 1 Samuel  [13], where “the LORD has sought out a man   after his own heart.” That’s him. It  wasn’t that his heart was so full of God;   it was that God’s heart was so full  of David. Samuel had been sent by God:   “I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I  have provided for myself a king among his sons.”  Now, David knew this. He knew this. He knew  exactly that God had reached into his life and   had taken hold of him. If you’re turning pages,  you can just look at what I’m telling you in 7:8,   where “Now, therefore, thus [shall  you] say to my servant David,”   and then Nathan’s oracle to David reinforces  these things: “I took you from the pasture—you   were a shepherd—that you should be the prince  over my people.” Verse 9: “And I’ve been with   you wherever you went. I’ve gone before you.  I’ve come behind you. I’ve provided for you.   I will make of you a great name like the name of  the great ones of the earth. David, you’re gonna   be one of the most famous people in the entire  history of the world.” That’s what he’s saying.   “Because I have set my heart upon you.  And I have chosen you to be my king.”  Now, when you follow on in that chapter, where  you have David’s prayer of gratitude in chapter 7,   where he responds to God, then you realize that he  understood this. And so, “David went in,” 2 Samuel   7:18: “King David went in and sat before the  LORD.” And as he sat there, he said, “Who am I?   Who am I? What is my house, that you’ve brought  me thus far? What more can I say to you?   You know your servant, Lord God.” And then this:   “It happened, late one afternoon…” So let’s keep this in mind:   that this is God’s designated king,  through whom the promises have been given   and through whom the purposes of God  for his people are being set forward.   And I say to you again: Is it really  possible that God’s purpose in history   can be set forward with this man, now  so unlike Jesus and so much like us?  Now, it’s important to think this out.  Because throughout the Old Testament   and even in the New Testament, in Hebrews, where  you have the hall of fame, or the “hall of faith,”   in Hebrews 11, when you read those names, you’re  not reading the names of the squeaky clean.   You’re not reading the names of the people who  had a perfect background, did it perfectly,   and were always the top of their class. No,  in actual fact, it’s a motley crew—starting   with Abraham, “the man of faith.” Remember  Abraham, “the man of faith,” who passed his wife   off as his sister because he was chicken? And  we’re supposed to emulate the faith of Abraham?   What about Jacob? What a conniving rascal he was!   Rahab, a Jericho prostitute. Samson, a  meathead—with long hair!—and a lecher.  This is what John Bright says of this—and  I found this so wonderfully helpful; that’s   why I’m quoting it for you: “If we[’re] going  to take the [Bible] witness at all seriously,   we must [acknowledge] that it was in  this history, and through these very   human and often clay-footed [characters],  that God worked his redemptive history;   and it was to this history, and to  no other, that he sent his Christ.   And in this history ambiguous David played an  essential part.” “In this history,” the “ambiguous   David played a central part.” The Incident  Now, let’s just look at this briefly, because  it doesn’t really need elaboration, does it?   Any child here can see what’s going on.  They may want to talk about it at lunchtime,   and I do pray that my words will be  sufficiently sensible and guarded as to   prevent any undue considerations of parental  matters. You will notice that this—if we might   say, this regrettable incident—is recorded  in a rather matter-of-fact way, isn’t it?   “It happened, late one afternoon, when [he] arose  from his couch…” He’s allowed to take a siesta;   so are you. He’s been relaxing; that’s  legitimate. Perhaps up there on the roof   he’s saying to himself, “Life is good.” It was.  “I’m so glad that I’ve got such a great team.   Joab is a tough man. He’ll take  care of things down in Rabbah.”  Now, what is interesting, when you read this  narrative, is that there is no editorial on   the part of the writer. There is no explanation  given by the writer. It’s just the straightforward   facts. He doesn’t allow us to go behind the  scenes in the way that almost inevitably we   do. I’ve already alluded to that by beginning  with King Uzziah. Because I think it is at least   legitimate for us to say or to ask: Is  it possible—is it possible—that David’s   undeserved success, his prosperity and his  position, his position as king of the hill,   was actually beginning to go to his head?   After all, it would be pretty hard for him not to  be at least a little bit intoxicated by this—all   those songs sung about him,  all these military battles,   all the word that is out concerning  him. And after all, here he is!  Now, as I say to you, there is no background  provided by the writer, just the unvarnished   verbs. He is “walking on the roof”  of his house—flat-roofed house,   clearly, in case the children are  going, “How do you do that, Dad?” “Well,   don’t go up there. It’s  like this.” No, it was flat.  Now, you’ll forgive me for this, won’t you?  When this old world starts getting me down And people are just too much for me to face,  I climb way up to the top of the stairs, And all my cares just drift right into space. On the roof it’s peaceful as can be, And there the world below can’t bother me. Let me tell you now …. On the roof’s the only place I know Where you just have to wish   to make it so. … Let’s go up on the roof. At night the stars put on a show for free, And darling, you can share it all with me. …  Right smack dab in the middle of [the] town I found a paradise that’s trouble-proof,  Up on the roof. That’s Carole King. The   Drifters had a hit with it; James Taylor sings it  as well. He didn’t know anything about that song.   But it’s “up on the roof.”  Here’s a question: Where was his  wife? One of his wives, at least!   Surely he could have had one with him? Uh-uh.  Apparently not. So his vantage proves to be   his great disadvantage. He’s safe from the street,  but he’s not safe from himself. Look at the verbs:   “saw,” “sent,” “took,” “lay.” Look at how  Bathsheba’s described: “the woman.” “The woman.”   There’s almost an objective perspective  in the way it is unfolded for us.  And the progression is a downward spiral. First of  all, “he saw.” “He saw.” Well, he had this vantage   point. “He saw from the roof a woman bathing.”  And we’re told that she “was very beautiful.”   There’s a number of times in the Old Testament  where somebody, a lady, is described in that way,   and two of them you would know. One is Rebecca, in  Genesis, and the other, some of you will remember,   who were in the honors class, is Esther. And  remember that the king couldn’t believe his… I was   gonna say his luck, but, I mean, he just couldn’t  believe it, because Esther “had a beautiful figure   and was lovely to look at.” And so was this lady. Now, it would appear that David knew nothing   about a covenant with his eyes. You remember Job?  Job 31:1: “I have made a covenant with my eyes   so that I don’t get myself in a major problem.”  Apparently, he didn’t know anything about that.   He couldn’t help seeing her, but he could  prevent himself from staring at her.   It wasn’t a problem that he caught a  glimpse; the problem was when he started   to gaze. I’m not gonna expand on this right  now, but let’s just state facts as facts:   Men are sexually attracted and  stimulated by the female body. Fact.   If you doubt that, then just pay  attention to the multi-billion-dollar   pornography industry, which bears testimony to  that reality. God has made us as he’s made us.   And so it is that in this case, the eye is the  point of entry through which temptation comes,   as it is so often for us—hence legitimate concerns  in terms of our lives, our viewing, our reading,   our gazing, our children, our children’s viewing,  our cell phones, our iPads, our everything.   Facts are facts. “He saw.” He “sent.” He “sent.” You see,   again, he’s powerful. He doesn’t have to go down  himself. He gets somebody else to do this for him:   “I’d like you to inquire about her.” You see, you sow a thought, you reap an action.   It all starts in your head. He saw  her and began to think about it.   He could have put it away at that point. No,  he says, “I’ve gotta just see who she is.”   Really? “Well, who is this woman?” And then the  report comes back, and he finds out that her name   is Bathsheba, that she actually is married to  somebody who is a very close part of his life.   And he realizes, as we discover,  that her husband is out of town.  Now, that should have been enough, shouldn’t it?  “I was just wondering… I saw a lady down there.   Could you just check out who she is?” The guy  comes by and he says, “Yeah. That’s Uriah’s wife.”   Well, that should be the end of the conversation.  Why? Because David knew the commandments of God.   You don’t commit adultery. You  don’t covet your neighbor’s wife.   God made it in such a way—Genesis 2:24—that  it would be one man, one woman, together,   forever, “till death do us part.” David knew all  of that! So what in the world is he doing? Well,   you see, it’s what happens, isn’t it? You  see, when lust gets you, conscience goes.   When lust gets you, reason is obliterated. And  you can see it here. The temptation has been   presented; a way of escape is there for him in  the discovery that she is someone else’s wife. But   he doesn’t stop. And so he “took her.” Well, it actually says, doesn’t it—verse 4—that   again he sent the messengers to take her? “And she  came.” Now, I’m not gonna get caught up on this,   but it’s a conversation for some of you later  on, if you choose. You know, who is culpable in   this? Is it just David, or has she got a little  bit of the action as well? We’re not gonna have   a conversation about it, okay? The commentators  vary. Calvin is pretty well down on her, as you   might expect. He says she would know that you  shouldn’t be standing around in a situation like   that with all your clothes off, because it would  be obvious to her that anybody could see her,   and therefore, that would be an indication  of the fact that either she thought she was   really good looking or that she didn’t care if  anybody saw her. And he said that’s not a very   wholesome way to approach life. Somebody  else says, “Oh, leave her alone. She was just   doing what she normally does, and David, he was  climbing up a lamppost” or whatever it might be.  The fact of the matter is, neither of them  should be viewed as victims of circumstance.   Neither. There is a willfulness about the  sending, there is a willfulness about the taking,   there is a willfulness about the coming. I mean, what did he say to his friends,   to his messengers? “Could you bring her here?” “Well, why?”  “Well, I thought I might like to  have coffee with her. I mean, she…   She looked like an interesting person.” “What? Give me a break!” None of his   messengers would have bought that. And what about her? What was she doing?   “Oh,” you say, “well, he’s the king. If the king  sends, you have to go.” Women are a lot stronger   than that. They’re a lot smarter than that. So is  it really that she fancied a fling with a king?   Or did she say, “What’s to be a problem  having coffee? I mean, it’s not a problem.”   No, it’s never a problem, is it? Not  when you’re on track to disaster.  The fourth verb is there: “And he  lay with her.” “He lay with her.”   And “then she returned to her house.” He  saw, he sent, he took, he slept, she left.   It’s horrible, isn’t it? “The  woman.” “The woman” is gone.  You read C. S. Lewis on the monstrosity of sexual  intercourse outside the framework of marriage, and   it will help you immensely. I’m not going to quote  it now. But as a child of the ’60s, where sexual   incontinence became absolutely rampant and the  boundaries were broken apart—and I was a teenager   at the time, and some of you were too—and the  poets and the songwriters, certainly in the UK,   were very, very quick to fasten on this, and in  certain cases to describe it in a way that made   it wonderfully appealing, and in other cases,  as in the one I’m about to quote for you now,   to point out the absolute, horrible emptiness  of the entire thing. And this is Roger McGough,   who was one of the Liverpool poets. And  he wrote a poem that goes as follows:  The Act of Love lies somewhere between the belly and the mind  I lost the love sometime ago Now I’ve only the act to grind. Brought her home from a party don’t bother swapping names  identity’s not needed when you’re only playing games. High on [the] bedroom darkness we endure the pantomime  ships that go bang in the night run aground on the [sand] of time. Saved in the nick of [time] it’s cornflakes then goodbye  another notch on the headboard another day wondering why. The Act of Love lies somewhere between the belly and the mind  [And] I lost the love sometime ago Now I’ve only the act to grind.  David had a problem with women. We’ve  tried to point it out as we’re going along.   Michal was number one.   Abigail, Ahinoam. Go to chapter 3 and see the list  that is there. What did he think he was doing?   Did he think that somehow or another God was  only interested in everybody else except him?   He knew in Deuteronomy the great concern about  the establishing of a kingdom and a king: that   the king should not be always taking to himself,  and certainly not taking to himself many wives.   Actually, it’s a mystery, isn’t it, that so  soon after Genesis 2—“For this reason a man   will leave his father and mother and be joined to  his wife, and the two will become one flesh,” and   so on, right—almost immediately after that, it  goes into polygamy. It goes into multiple wives.  God somehow or another permits this,   presumably to show the absolute disaster  that is represented when anybody steps out   of the perfect framework that he has given for  marital love, for sexual fulfillment, and so on.   What other reason could there be? It’s not there  to attract us. And David, if you like, was part of   that milieu, in the same way that we are part of  a contemporary milieu that pays scant attention to   the law of God, to the idea of marriage itself, to  the sense of sexual continence and so on. And if   we have been marinated in that kind of thinking,  it won’t be very difficult for us to find   ourselves on this downward spiral to disaster. “Well,” you say, “we should stop.”   Yeah, we will stop now. The problem is, you see,   that David is not saved in the nick of time. No,  the word comes, sent back to him: “I’m pregnant.”  Points of Connection Now, we’ll pick it up, but let me   make just a couple of points of connection as we  close. Because here is the question: How, then,   are we to make application of this and  all that is about to follow to our lives?  Well, there’s two immediate dangers in this  passage. There’s many, but these two I want   to point out. And that is—and I hear this  frequently—the danger of using this incident   as a shelter behind which men  and women seek to hide, to excuse   our offenses. And it’s most  horrible prospectively,   when you meet with somebody and you say to them,  “You must not do this. She is not your territory.   He is beyond your program.” And in a warped way,  it comes back like this: “Well, David did it,   and he was okay in the end.” That’s the one wrong  way. And the other way is to find in this incident   the accusations of the Evil One to the  point that we find ourselves completely   perplexed and bewildered and upset.  Because the Evil One comes to us when   we study a passage like this, and he says,  “Now, let me just remind you of something.”   And he wants you to rummage around in the  garbage can of sin that has been long forgiven,   that has been cast into the sea of God’s  forgetfulness. So, on the one hand,   we’re not gonna use it as a mechanism to  excuse ourselves. On the other hand, we’re   not gonna allow the Evil One to use it as a tool  to uncover that which has already been covered.  Secondly, we need to see it as illustrating  horribly the fact that the heart of   an individual is “deceitful above all  things.” “Deceitful above all things.”   That’s why we have to learn to be skeptical. Not  cynical, but skeptical! Skeptical about ourselves,   first of all. Why do you want to meet  her? I tell the guys on my pastoral team,   “If you’ve got a lady coming to see  you for counseling in some context,   and you’re looking forward to it, and  she’s not your wife or your daughter,   then ask somebody else to see her. Why  would you be looking forward to this?   What, did you catch her perfume in the  hallway when she asked if she could see you?”   The heart is deceitful above all things. It is so  deceitful that we don’t know how deceived we are.  Thirdly, to see this as a solemn warning—a  solemn warning about saying to ourselves,   “Hey, I’ve done pretty well. I’m doing  pretty good. I like it up here on the roof.   This is nice! I’ve got people who can do this  for me. They can go.” Look out! Look out.   So often, success becomes  the occasion of collapse.  And then to recognize in this the necessity of  making sure that we deal with sin in its infancy,   that we learn to heed the warnings,  that we don’t try and jump the hedges.   To recognize, too, how hard our heart becomes  when we ignore the stirrings of our conscience,   when we find ourselves saying, “Well, this must  be very useful for somebody else, but not me.”  And then finally—finally—to recognize that God,   in the mystery of his providence,  overcomes the effects of sin and shame,   that he never abandons his people, that  he never loses control of his purposes.   That was the question, wasn’t it? Is it possible  that God, who made these promises to this man,   would yet fulfill his promises through this man?  And the answer, of course, as we’re going to see,   is yes. “Well,” you say to  yourself, “that’s amazing!”   This is amazing grace. This is amazing grace. Listen to this as we close:   “Since then [in Jesus] we have a great high priest   who has passed through the heavens, … the  Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.   For we do[n’t] have a high priest who[’s]  unable to sympathize with our weaknesses,   but one who in every respect has been  tempted as we are, yet without sin.”   Well, “let us then with confidence draw near to  the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy   and find grace to help in time of need.” So, we heed the warning: “Let him or her,   she, who thinks she stands take heed lest she  falls.” And then, when we find ourselves saying,   “I wonder if I’m ever going to make it to the  end,” we hear this benediction: “Now to him   who is able to keep you from stumbling and to  present you blameless before the presence of   his glory with great joy, to the only God, our  Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory,   majesty, dominion, and authority, before  all time and now and forever. Amen.” This message was brought to you from Truth  For Life where the learning is for living.   To learn more about Truth For Life with Alistair  Begg visit us online at truthforlife.org.
Info
Channel: Alistair Begg
Views: 10,428
Rating: 4.8980169 out of 5
Keywords: Adultery, Biblical Figures, Lust, Sin, Temptation, Warnings
Id: P1Dd7yaBYyI
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 39min 2sec (2342 seconds)
Published: Wed Jun 02 2021
Related Videos
Note
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.