Date: 24 Jul 2000
Time: 21:21:39
Can we step into this story for a moment? Are you like David? Know someone like David? How many times have we allowed our "self" to get in the way, then tried to cover it up? THE Great CoverUP - I am reminded that all things will be brought into the light. Some thoughts to get started with. revtlm in Sac
Date: 25 Jul 2000
Time: 03:39:57
One commentary refers to this as "David's Watergate."
dave k. in ohio <><
Date: 25 Jul 2000
Time: 13:35:37
It seems I remember a few commentaries beginning with the opening phrase of the 2nd verse "It happened." The point was made that things like this don't "just happen" even though we would like to believe so. Then, as now, deliberate choices are made. In addition, it is often pointed out that David put himself into this situation. All the kings had gone out to war (v 1), but David chose to stay behind in Jerusalem. Had David been where he was supposed to be, it would never have "happened." CSS
Date: 25 Jul 2000
Time: 14:56:40
This is children Sunday at church, and the children are leading the service. They automatically went to the gospel lesson, but as a worshipping community we had committed to preaching from the old Testament lection. We have solved the problem, but how would some of you approach this lection from a children's point of view? Shalom
Pasthersyl
Date: 25 Jul 2000
Time: 15:48:00
At the root of this story is David's abuse of power to get what he wants, which here is Bathsheba. He was not treating her as a person but as something to be possessed. He was using her to meet his own needs. In this story, Bathsheba is voiceless. We do not know what she was thinking or feeling, or even if she protested.
Unfortunately this type of abuse happens over and over again in our culture. Twice I have gone to minister to congregations where the pastor has abused his power and become sexually involved with a parishioner/s. The cost of the betrayal of trust cannot be calculated.
One really needs to expand the lectionary reading through chapter 12:10 to get the full story, for it is David who condemns his own actions when confronted by Nathan's story. What wonderful irony.
Pasthersyl raises the question about how to approach this lection when directing it toward children. A difficult dilemma. Sometimes I think our sermons need to be rated for parental supervision if we are truly going to get to the nitty gritty of the passage (Judges 19 for example which should be at least R rated). Most children can understand that we are not supposed to take something that doesn't belong to us. David took the wife of another (although it may be difficult for children to understand that wives were considered property). Perhaps focusing more on Nathan's story of the rich man taking the poor man's sheep would be easier for the children to relate to, yet would still get to the heart of the teaching.
Rev. Sophia
Date: 25 Jul 2000
Time: 18:35:40
The Spring is a good time for war; a time when kings go out to lead their men. Had David been where he was suppose to be, instead of using his power as king to avoid it, he would not have been there gazing at another man's wife. Too often we get too busy tending the administration and send someone else to do the ministering, because we have the power....prehaps David's problem was an abuse of power in many situations. KSK, Texas
Date: 25 Jul 2000
Time: 20:52:20
I'm gonna call my sermon "King George and the Ducky," which also happens to be the name of the brand new "Veggie Tales" video, which just happens to be (loosely) based on this story of David and Bathsheba. I got the video for my wife a couple weeks ago -- not realizing this story was just a couple weeks away in the lectionary!
dave k. in ohio <jadekepple@aol.com>
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 00:25:04
I choose this scripture to preach from because when I was being interviewed for my new appointment I was asked if I would ever preach on sin, "We need to hear some sermons naming and talking about sin." What I always want to say to people when they say this is who's sin do you want me to preach against, to name, yours or mine. So, I have titled my sermon your's mine and ours, lets talk about sin.
A couple of ideas I am working with are 1) even though David committed these aweful sins that are directly named in the 10 Commanments he was still used mightly by God. Is has been said that David is a man after God's own heart. Why is this. could it be because David does not continue to grow in sin, but goes to God with a repentent heart and asks for forgiveness. 2)the next idea is that we all have sin; "For we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" That image in which were created. I think it is a risky thing for me to criticize and point out others sin. My task as a Christian, one who has decided to follow Jesus, is to look to my own sin and deal with it! So called Christians are often lifted up as hippocrits because we are so quick to point out and condemn anothers sin and ingnore our own.
David and Bathshebba is a "soap" in our own scripture who says that the bible is not relavent to today?
just some thoughts. Any ideas to help me along?
jmj in WI
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 05:39:40
Two weeks ago I retold the story from Michah's point of view. This week I have been pondering Uriah's point of view. This is clearly not a story about David and Bathsheba, but a story about honor and dishonor, loyalty and disloyalty between men. There is a battle on the field, a battle in the home, and a battle of the heart. All of them are lost. I was looking at a movie yesterday called, The Best Man, which may give insite to brother to brother relationships and the struggle to be true to each other. Uriah stated as Your soul lives, and at that statement of professed loyalty to David, Uriah lost his life. All of that in mind, Wednesday morning and I still don't know where to go with this text. Might use those three battles for structure.
Rev. PJ
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 10:54:43
Wednesday morning, I am still working this one, It seems David has forgotten where he came from. The man who was a fierce leader and fighter, led by GOD, is now at home while all of Israel is fighting the battles. He sleeps very late, and then takes a woman that belongs to another. I think we all at some point in our Christian walk tend to forget where we came from and must be led back to that place that drives us down the narrow path, that place.....the cross.
Pastor Keith
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 12:07:27
Our Vacation Bible School will use a Market Place approach to the period of Saul, David, and Solomon. This coming Sunday concludes our VBS but preaching from Samuel is still a challenge. VBS leaves this story out of their study. I will preach on the topic "In Hot Water." We all sometimes get into hot water and make foolish mistakes. The important question is what do we do about it. Fred in NC
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 12:21:43
I know that I will likely be drawn and quarteredfor evensuggesting this but was Bethsheba as "innocent" as "no voice, no choice" represents. David had the responsibility not to be seduced, but he was (Are we to over look the possibility that Bethsheba had designs on David's power?) David's sin was to forget his responsibility, at least that is the way I see it).
Secondly, maybe we don't have to preach this story to children. The Bible isn't particularly a Children's book. We are even selective about that which we read to adults. Even having said that, there is a lot here to be preached, but lets not put Bethsheba into the role of victim. I think Uriah was that, not his "wife". Deke of the North
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 13:01:31
Deke I would rather view them all as having responsibility for the situation. Uriah could have at some point have suspicion of why David is asking him to sleep with Bathsheba. As far as being victims, even David is a victim of his people's need for a great king. To me it is an interplay between peoples and as Paul would later suggest, both Jew and Gentile, yes everyone sin and fall short of God's glory. Each one of these characters represent actions within my life: David's misuse of power, Bathsheba's Acquiescence, and Uriah's uninformed allegience. Each one of these need the voice and guidance of Nathan. Although I will not preach on this pericope, next Sunday will be a followup. Shalom
Pasthersyl
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 15:05:31
It is interesting to contrast David, who abuses power and takes, with the little boy who gave his loaves and fish. The boy reminds me of David, years before, when he fought Goliath.
DR
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 15:07:01
It is interesting to contrast David, who has so much and yet with the little boy who just has a few loaves and fishes and yet gives. The boy reminds me of David, years before, when he fought Goliath. SOmewhere along the way, something went badly wrong...
DR
Date: 26 Jul 2000
Time: 20:34:54
This passage is intriguing because of David's cold and calculated sin. It may not have been such an unusual thing for David to stay at home while his army was in battle, especially if his military leaders were eager to prove themselves in battle. They could have seen this as a great opportunity. It is possible that David seeing Bathsheba was an innocent occurance, but he willfully sinned by getting involved with her after being told that she was married. I am amazed at the number of people that David includes as accomplices. He sends messengers to bring Bathsheba to him. Bathsheba sent word to David about her being pregnant so another person knows what is going on. "They" told David that Uriah had not gone home for the night, so even more people were aware of David's dealings. Finally, Joab becomes an accomplice in getting rid of Uriah and solving David's problem. It is ironic that Uriah is the one with integrity and he is cheated and killed by David, the one who is the object of his faithfulness. It is also ironic that Uriah carries the letter that seals his fate back to Joab. (As a child I remember the humiliation of my mother sending me to get the switch that would be used to punish me.) This story clearly defines the human predicament. On one hand, David is clearly a sinner. He willfully defies God's law to gratify his own desires. On the other hand, Uriah is good, faithful, and true, yet he is the victim of a terrible injustice. Both David and Uriah are in need of that which only God can accomplish. David needs to be convicted of his sin, repentance, and forgiveness. Uriah needs to be vindicated and he needs to experience justice, i.e. he needs to have his life restored. These needs are the result of the human predicament and they are a reality for all of us today. David's and Uriah's hope lies in their future with the advent of the kingdom of God. The good news is that having all our needs met is a real possibility with God. This is what the kingdom of God is all about. The good news of Jesus is that, as sinners we can be made right with God and our neighbors; and as victims of sin we can receive vindication and restitution. WS in GA.
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 01:27:50
One way I'd approach this story for children is to talk about how one sin adds to another. After David followed through on the sin of lust, he had to lie and murder to cover it up, and his acts led to the death of the baby. One could talk about how telling one lie leads to having to tell another to back it up, or how trying to hide somethig broken just gets you into more trouble. The best way to deal with sin is to confess it and start over.
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 03:35:10
Good discussion on a rather complex passage. Regarding the question as to whether Bathsheba was voiceless and choiceless, I think the answer has to be "yes." How can a woman with no status and standing in society stand up to the king? It is as much as power issue as anything else. David has all the power; Bathsheba has none. David shows himself to be willing to lie and murder to cover his actions; what would he have done if Bathsheba had protested? It would have been his word against hers, and to whom would the people listen: the (male) king or the (female) Bathsheba? I also find it ironic that we tend to clean up the story by hastening to say that David repented. I would suggest that we look carefully at David's "confession." He's willing to admit that he has sinned "against God", but does he ever accept really accept responsibility for what he did to Uriah and Bathsheba? (Just playing the devil's advocate).
CSS
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 04:37:56
Some say that if David had just gone off to war, none of the bad stuff would have happened. I live in a place where a number of men do leave town for two weeks at a time to go to work. One man came back and told his wife (I performed their marriage last year) that he had an affair. What am I to say about David this Sunday? That if he had been off fighting with the rest of the men, there would have been no adultery and no killing? Soldiers never have affairs? Or that he could have stayed home without incident if he hadn't felt lonely or aroused? Men have affairs, not just the kings. And some women do it too. Is this the source of my anger and confusion directed towards David? How will that woman in the pew feel when she hears about David's adultery? This story doesn't pull any punches does it! Perhaps this is the time to think about cybersex and all the stuff on the internet, and chat rooms that encourage leering without peering from a real rooftop (there is a man in my congregation, a former preacher whose wife has left him because of his use of the internet for pornography). Perhaps the good news of this story is the sense of the covenant promise that God can bring something good out of an evil situation. Jesus can rise after Good Friday. He can feed people who are concerned that there won't be enough. And God can bring a wise man (who had hundreds of wives and concubines) to the throne of Israel out of this not-so-clandestine affair.
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 14:27:48
Wow. Great discussion. Several uncorrelated points.
Check out Psalm 14. It won't take long since as of yet, there are only three contributions. But please add your thoughts as it provides some interesting angles on this story.
At seminary I heard a Korean American preach on this story. When his family moved to the US, they allowed him to choose his "American" name. He chose the name Uriah. Even at a young age he recognized the challenge of being loyal to a country that at the same time was oppressing you. Uriah, remember, was also an alien, yet he remained true to his adopted king, even when this king had slept with his wife. (The contemporary Uriah believes that his namesake had suspected all along what David was up to.)
Joab did help kill Uriah, but not the way David planned. David commanded that Uriah's men withdraw and leave him vulnerable on the battlefield, but no soldier would leave his commander alone on the front. Moreover, this would be a bad precedent, for officers would ever after be looking over their shoulders to see if they had been double-crossed. So, Joab is willing to sacrifice Uriah's entire unit.
David may still have sinned had he gone into battle, but verses 1 and 2 make it clear that he would rather stay on his couch than go to battle. Mind you, David is not yet an old man; he commits many other daring exploits later on. I believe the writer wants us to notice this, especially in contrast with Uriah's faithfulness.
DSS
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 15:22:46
Wonderful comments from everyone. This is my second time visiting the website. This problem with King David is very indepth indeed! But consider this - where did David come from? He came from the people, as a lowly shepherd boy. When the ark came to Jerusalem, he danced (in a loin cloth) in the streets - an act somewhat unusual for a King. David was ordained and called to be King by God, despite his character, despite his poor status. Draw some parallels to US. It's hard to imagine extreme wealth and power- but yet, here was a man who is "one of us". He came from our fold to lead (draw a parallel to our vows and ordinations as ministers/ pastors/ priests). The main point here is that - David is not perfect, David is sinful - just like all of us! Just because he is King didn't give him a higher/ more holy status. This can be expanded easily.
Next idea: David was an adulteror! Yes - no doubt. But God calls all of us - all sinners to priesthood and ministry. Despite our sexual sins - God loves us, and wants to hold us close. This thought can be used to help those pastorally who have committed adultery - as they work through their repentence and turning back to God! They are not to be shunned and cast out. God embraced David - if God did not want David there (as we saw with Saul, where God took his spirit from him) God would've removed him. Use this passage to nurture and comfort those who have committed similar acts and are looking for that vast, redeeeming love of Christ and God.
Next thought: Since I'm not American I don't know too much about all of this - but draw a parallel between Bill Clinton and King David. Some comments I heard about Clinton, that after his Monica scandal - people felt that he was more "human", not perfect, not some higher than thou leader - but a man who makes errors.
In the end, despite the unfortunate circumstances that David committed against Bathsheba and Uriah - he can still be an example of "God's love to the Sinner - a love that surpasses the judgement of humans" "Judge not lest you be judged". David continued to be married to her in the end and had a son (who lived), and apparently their marriaged continued to work out for them.
I'm thinking of using this story of David as a connecting point with us, and the immense wealth of God's love?
Any comments?
DW Bos - London, Ontario Canada
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 17:19:44
I'm titling my sermon "What the Bible has to say about: Sexual Harassment," and I thought about titling it "So call me a Feminist." That may give other readers some insight as to where I come out on this text. To me it is clear that Bathsheba is powerless next to a powerful King. God does not condone those kind of relationships. Like another writer mentioned. I do think we rush a little quickly to repentence on this one. We are inclined to offer cheap grace, but we must remember that David actually experienced quite costly grace.
I do believe firmly in God's forgiveness even for those who cross the line in murderous ways. However, I think this story can be a good teaching tool for women and girls who are still struggling with issues of identity and equality. We can use Bathsheba's lack of power to show them how they can use their power to stand up for themselves.
Pastor Kerra
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Time: 23:30:22
Kerra, I appreciate where you are going with this and wonder if part of the problem in human relationships is that of making sure our own needs are met -- at whatever cost to others. Being made in the image of God means to me that we are not whole, complete, or perfect. It does mean that we are by nature, active, creative, relational creatures that have the possibility for certain capacities (loyalty, forgiveness, love, etc.) which are part of God's nature. We are made for a relationship with God and the rest of God's created order. If we were complete in and of ourselves, there would be no compelling reason to reach out, to seek others. But the individual is not complete. Each is partial. And alwasy there is the deep longing to transcend the partialness. This leads us in a search for wholeness which can only be found in relationship with God. It is our relationship with God that sets us on the road to freedom, wholeness, and joy. Relationship also brings responsibility. Our relationship with God includes our relationship with each other. God's will is for the well-being of all. The well-being of one is connected to the well-being of others. We cannot be reconciled to God if we're at strife with others (men or women). Full stomachs can't really be more than a momentary solace as long as others starve. There cannot be much dignity or worth of ourselves when we lose sight of the dignity and respect and worth of all creation. The key is relationship. We are not created to dominate and control, (attributes often mistakenly applied to God). Being made in the image of God is not being made God. Since we as human being are not created perfect or whole, we are always in danger of making unwise choices, of using and manipulating things & people for our own ends. . . .evil results...havoc breaks loose in us and in the world. That which is contrary to the will of God, which is against life, health, freedom, peace, joy and wholeness leaves in its wake: violence, death, destruction, brokeness, sickness, and sorrow. When this happens, we who have been made for communion with God, are alienated. The responsibility for relationship between God and us is not destroyed when we turn away, for God remains faithful. In order to be restored into relationship, we need to repent, turn around, and change the direction of our action. Repentance is more than admitting wrongdoing, more than confessing that we have become separated from God. Being repentant is more than being sorry, more than ascribing to a new way of thinking -- although it may include all of these things. To repent is to change those areas we have been separating our lives from God, where we have been avoiding relationship, we are called upon to change those patterns of behavior. And we cannot merely say after this, "Thanks God,-- now I can take over again" and resume business as usual or the cycle starts all over again. People who abuse others need to recognize their weakness and turn to God. And God's forgiveness isn't going to wipe the slate clean, cancelling the effects of our greed, anxiety, idolatry -- and whatever is alienating us from God. All of what we have been and now done is part of our personal history as well as part of the cumulative history of all. Even God cannot change the past. Forgiveness is God's gift of strength to face the future and its challenges without being overwhelmed. Accepting forgiveness means accepting the fact that God gives meaning to all of life's relationships--and sometimes the courage to trust and love another once again when we've been abused.
Date: 28 Jul 2000
Time: 12:04:32
I really like the last unsigned posting about relationship. It is truly what this scripture is all about. Kerra, I too believe in the equality and the like, but to use this story as a teaching tool might be a misuse. How would parallel Bethsheba with Ruth. She had no power as a woman, but knew how to use the power she had. Do you condone that behaviour. I am not trying to get David off the hook. But let us not hang all men and victimize all women. Deke of the North
Date: 28 Jul 2000
Time: 15:38:48
If this story had happened today, it might begin. In the spring of the year while everyone else in the office was working, David began to fool around on the internet and ... rbNnc
Date: 28 Jul 2000
Time: 17:07:56
To the unsigned writer who responded to my posting, Thank you. You said more clearly than I was thinking where I wanted to go with this. I'm playing with the idea of relationship as God's solution to the problem of "Sexual Harassment" whereas we try to get at it with laws, seminars, punishments, etc., when what we really need is to strengthen our relationships with God and with one another.
To Deke of the North - Strengthening women does not mean victimizing men. Not to be critical, but this sermon is as much to our sons as our daughters. There is a wonderful theory from African-American theology that the oppressor is as much a victim as the oppressed. To make sexual harassment a "women's issue" only is to minimize the consequences of sin. Your comment is certainly one that the people in the pews will be thinking about - thus all the more important to come out and say that brokenness is a problem for ALL of us. However, women need to hear words from the pulpit that strengthen them, because they've heard far too much that scandalizes them. Should we NOT call this a scandal on David's part - it tells them that it's ok for someone else to take advantage of them. I hope for my son's benefit as well as for all our daughters' benefits that we begin to preach equal footing in relationships as part of God's ultimate plan.
Date: 28 Jul 2000
Time: 17:56:24
I was glad to see that someone mentioned "King George and the Ducky." My seven-year-old son saw the connection immediately.
And then there is the point of King David being the victim. King David the victim of a "puritanical" religious group who refuse to embrace ideas like "open" marriages. Consider the benefits that would have accrued to Uriah if David could have admitted the affair with his wife. But no! The stubborn people wouldn't allow that, would they? They forced David into his cover-up and murder. How different the story would have been if only the people (like Nathan) had lightened up a little and realized that it's not wise to dump a leader just because he has sex outside their narrow confines of morality. Heck, it might wreck the economy!
BroKen
Date: 29 Jul 2000
Time: 13:51:10
Greetings all This is a great discussion on a difficult topic. Six years ago when this appeared in the lectionary - we were all glued to our TV's watching OJ in his Ford Explorer. Interesting how today the man is still using his power and control to deny any responsibility in abusing his wife (I won't go to the murder question). I also think we are tempted want to let David off the hook too easily - saying he repented or God embraced him. In this story- i don't see God embracing David at all - and if we read on God get's angry. Sure God doesn't give up on David or us yet - i think at times we need to live in the tension of this story - what is the Good news? that we in teh church must deter the perpretrator, protect the victim and live out and articulate God's undending commitmentto the powerless.
Steve Carmel IN as in carmel corn - not Car-mel is in California.. ;)
Date: 29 Jul 2000
Time: 18:30:10
I have to side with Kerra on the Bathsheba issue. First, we must remember the relationship of David ("King") to Bathsheba ("commoner female"). Even if she "acquiesced" to David, consider the position she found herself in! Second, the very construction of the story is designed to show David as a creature in a trap, & a trap of his own design! This point is emphasized in Nathan's approach to David and his revelation that David's sin is known. There is no softening there of David's transgression or responsibility! Concerning the kids: they understand more than we realize, which serves as a warning and indicates opportunity in this story. They may not understand all David does, but they can comprehend that he's done wrong. I think we have to be careful how much we lead thm to understand, but I think they could understand and relate to a good story of how a kid gets buried in trouble (especially if you have a true example from your own childhood!). This could be a powerful lesson for them. Ken in WV
Date: 23 Sep 2000
Time: 06:42:28
When your in power, you began to think the world is in you hands, and have anything you so desire, even if it's forbidden fruit.
2 Pearls
Date: 23 Sep 2000
Time: 06:49:27
When your in power, you think your above the law and can break the law at any given time. King David took his eyes off of GOD and began to follow the flesh.
2 pearls