2 SAMUEL 11,12
2 SAMUEL 11,12
2 Samuel [p. 90] 11:14-27; 2 Samuel 12:1-23
JT In chapter 9 we have the kingdom, seen in David, expressing grace toward Mephibosheth. In chapter 10, we have grace extended to the Ammonites, and despised. Now we are to consider the teaching of chapters 11 and 12, as to whether they are simply instruction for each individual as such, or whether they also teach us something further of the kingdom. If so, they must be regarded collectively as well as individually, bringing out the history of the public testimony particularly in its bearing towards man. They teach us the public breakdown and how it is met.
Ques Would that side of it lead on to David’s leaving Jerusalem?
JT The beginning of the 11th chapter shows, I think, the failure in the kingly side, though not in Christ, of course, for David does not represent Christ personally here, he represents the authoritative side in the public body.
Ques I would like some more help on the collective setting. Would you say a little as to the cause of the breakdown? What was the root of the trouble?
JT In the history of the public body it would seem that the kingly or responsible side gave way. We are told in the book of Proverbs what a king should do and what he should avoid. Lemuel’s mother enjoins him as to what would save him, and David represents that side in chapters 9 and 10. Grace is exhibited. In chapter 9 it is appreciated by Mephibosheth and in chapter 10 it is not appreciated, yet still the position is unimpaired; David retains his attitude of grace in spite of the unfair and inexcusable attitude of the king of Ammon. Now in chapter 11 it is “the time when kings go forth”, “at the return of the year”, and David fails. It is a changeover in the course of things, but a change implying that kings go forth. When there is a change we need [p. 91] those in authority to hold the ground, and not to let it slip.
Rem Perhaps a reference to the letter to Ephesus would fit, “To the angel of the assembly” (Revelation 2:1).
JT It fits all the way through, there particularly. Here it would seem that the responsible element failed at a time when it was most needed. “When kings go forth”, David was wanting. He committed things over into the hands of others. That is the secret of the whole position, he did not hold his ground.
Rem The thought of slackness of outlook would mean that the authority of Christ has not the weight it should. It often happens with us that the first cause of deflection is slackness of spiritual outlook.
JT If we fail in that, the authority of Christ is no longer in evidence and we drop down to the level of men.
Ques When that takes place does the prophetic word come in?
JT That is the next thing to see after the failure, how it is met. I think we shall see that it is a very extraordinary prophetic word.
Rem According to Psalm 51 the effect of David’s self-judgment seems to be much wider than merely on himself personally, does it not?
JT You feel that it must go beyond the individual; it must be an allusion to the public history of the testimony, as this whole book is, David at times representing Christ and at times the responsible element in humiliating failure. In this latter aspect the authority of Christ is out of view, and Joab, an untrustworthy man, is conniving at wickedness.
According to Deuteronomy 17 the king was not to multiply wives and horses.
Rem Nor was he to go to the right hand or the left; verse 20.
Ques Is there an allusion to the Nazarite in the [p. 92] chapter referred to in Proverbs? The king was not to take wives or to drink wine; chapter 31:3, 4.
JT That is good. It is a question of what would excite.
Rem The allusion in that chapter, “Give not thy strength unto women”, (Proverbs 31:3) applies to what we have here. It appears to refer back to the injunction to a Nazarite, Numbers 6.
JT It seems to be a basis for authority in the assembly. All these allusions would seem to enter into this section for the instruction of the responsible or kingly element, represented in men, elder brothers.
“The shout of a king” ought to be amongst the brethren, but it is stifled here by the state of David; when he should have been standing out at the turn of the year, he failed.
Rem Say more about the authority side. We are likely to look at the idea of a king as an abstract thought rather than as the authority in us by the Spirit.
JT “A king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment”, Isaiah 32:1. That feature is not in evidence here because David is sitting at home when he should go forth, and is handing the thing over to an untrustworthy man who ultimately connived at the wickedness that developed. Over against that the characters that come into view are: Urijah, the overcomer, who represents loyalty to the truth in the whole position, and Nathan, who comes in from God’s side on the prophetic line to convict.
Rem The turn of the year would correspond to every new phase in the testimony, and there is a danger with us of giving up the idea of warfare and succumbing to ease and the indulgence of the flesh. We must always quit ourselves like men and engage in the conflict. One feels how easy it is to get slack in one’s spiritual outlook and really to forget that [p. 93] the testimony is in conflict, and will be so long as we are here. It is not time to ease off because the Lord has given us a victory, but to be ready for the next phase, for there will always be a next phase.
JT So that in a crisis a brother may stay at home from a care meeting, but he is needed there. Kings are needed there. We are not to let the matter go and allow someone else to take the responsibility.
Rem The leaders at Corinth were reigning as kings. I suppose those of the house of Chloe were more royal than the leaders at Corinth.
JT Quite so. The leaders were not princes, the princely element was missing.
Ques In chapter 3, when Abner wanted to turn the kingdom over to David, David said, “Thou shall not see my face except thou first bring Michal, Saul’s daughter”, 2 Samuel 3:13. Does that also enter into this section?
JT You mean that a woman like Michal could not help the situation?
Rem You said, when we were dwelling on that passage, that David’s mind was running on those things.
JT Yes. Why did he want Michal there, a person who had so manifestly failed? The history here shows that she was a source of weakness throughout.
Rem I suppose at Corinth Paul was a king going forth.
JT And some in the house of Chloe and the house of Stephanas were princely men, ready for things, not reigning but going forth.
Rem Anything less than manhood is surrendering ground and would be disastrous.
JT In a crisis you will observe that a point is reached, a real victory is reached, but what then? As someone said of a great military leader, “What did he do the day after?” The enemy gets in [p. 94] immediately because he is skilful in military affairs, so that the need is to keep on the line in which God has given us victory. There is always sure to be a reactionary spirit.
Rem If, after a victory, we become slack, we often succumb to something much less.
Ques Do you mean to convey that if we have had a victory today we need to put on our military uniform to-morrow?
JT ‘Consolidate’ is a good word, because there is sure to be a counter-attack. There is a reaction, and the position is weakened. Much had happened during the year, victories had been won and grace shown; now there is another year coming in and “David sent Joab, and his servants with him! And all Israel”. You might say, “What more could he do?” But the king was not there! It is said of Josiah that “the king stood in his place”, (2 Chronicles 34:31) that is one of the great features of Josiah’s revival. Everybody was in his place. Here the king is not in his place, strikingly so, because the year required that he should go forth.
Rem A reference to the Song of Solomon would fit in: “Behold his couch, Solomon’s own: three-score mighty men are about it, of the mighty of Israel. They all hold the sword, experts in war”,
(Song of Songs 3: 7, 8). Does this not show that the position, even while we are enjoying what is greatest, is to be held abstractly? We are not on the battlefield but still the military idea is there.
JT These expert men are there on the alert, “because of alarm in the nights”. (Song of Songs 3:8) As surely as possible there will be a counter-attack and the king is needed then more than ever. “Three-score mighty men are about it”; but then, there is a palanquin there, and that is most precious. The reference is to a portable chair as used in the east: “King Solomon made himself a palanquin of the wood of Lebanon.
[p. 95] Its pillars he made of silver, its support of gold, its seat of purple; the midst thereof was paved with love”, Song of Songs 3:9,10. That is a beautiful touch coming in after the military watchfulness. And the threescore mighty men are there, each having his sword upon his thigh, where it should be for alertness.
Ques Whom did you say Urijah represents?
JT I think he is an overcomer. His speech is very beautiful. In the first paragraph David failed to carry out his kingship. The time had come for it, the turn of the year, but be fell into indolence. Then there is the effort to conceal his guilt by sending for Urijah, an effort that would have succeeded ordinarily, but God is meeting the thing in ambush unexpectedly. Urijah stands out as a man who has concern for the testimony, he speaks about the ark and Joab and Israel. Why should I be enjoying every comfort of life when all this is going on? he says in effect. That is what David was doing, and worse. Urijah’s word was really a sword-thrust from God to the king, and therefore the king does his utmost to conceal his guilt; but this man is an overcomer, he stands out and dies. He is a martyr, like Antipas, he is against what David is doing and is slain for his faithfulness.
Ques Why is David so slow in getting back to self-judgment about this matter?
JT That would show that it is a wider thought in the type than the mere person. And now we see the skilfully arranged prophetic approach to it. There is no escape for this man, he is too valuable a man, he must be compelled to judge himself; and through the skill of God, the prophetic skill of God, he is made to judge himself before he knows it. “Then David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man”.
God had stirred up his anger against himself. He does not deny it. It is wonderful skill and it is really grace on God’s part not to let the man escape but to help him to judge himself.
[p. 96] Ques Do you think that where the kingly thought has been given up disaster always follows its trail? Where there is a lack of transparency the kingly thought has been given up, it is the natural sequence.
Rem In Ecclesiastes the king and the preacher seem to go together, there is moral authority to go with the official side.
JT I think what has been said about Proverbs is good — the last two chapters — the words of Agur and King Lemuel. Universal conditions are brought to the surface in chapter 30, and then we have the kingly responsibility in chapter 31 which is so needed. The words of Lemuel which his mother taught him would suggest, I think, the general thought of the assembly being brought to bear by the Spirit’s power on those who are in responsibility. We are on the alert at the turn of the year and we are not turned aside by the influence of self-indulgence. But then if failure does come in we see the wonderful plan of God, a designed matter. We do not get details as to how Nathan came to use this parable, but we may be sure he was with God about it. How are we going to secure this man? God would say, because he is a clever man and he may escape us. God is determined that he shall not escape. He loves him too well. The thing must be exposed. He is doing his utmost to conceal his guilt, but God makes him judge himself before he knows it. Many a time one may bring a man’s guilt home to him in this way: if he does not think he is the one referred to he will condemn the wrong-doer, but if he knows he is being aimed at he will cover the matter up.
Rem That is innate in us, that principle of covering up. The other side comes out when God takes the matter in hand. He makes His own work shine in us in self-judgment.
JT It is a wonderful victory for grace. David is the sinner and God has set Himself to get him. He [p. 97] does not escape, he is not allowed to carry on his concealment, he is forced to expose himself. “Thou art the man”.
Rem Paul really uses strategy in writing to the Corinthians to get the saints judicially-minded. It was not just the man who had sinned so flagrantly that he had in mind, but to get the saints judicially- minded so that they could deal with more serious things.
Ques Do you think that when we are not able to define and discern matters clearly and we find ourselves moving on wrong lines, it is due possibly to the fact that there is a background of immorality with us?
JT Well, some darkening influence. So that when the moral state of the brethren is right it brings about recovery. The general state of the saints clears the matter so that evil is exposed. The New Testament shows that the system set up in Christ in heaven involves intercession on behalf of the sinner and also of the whole assembly. The Lord institutes a means to bring about recovery. All the addresses to the assemblies have that in view, so that they might be overcomers. It is a wonderful system that God has established in Christ. As soon as sin occurs, whether it be the sin of a prince or of a common person or of the whole assembly in type, the High Priest is ready as Advocate. He is looking after our affairs, and He brings conviction into the heart of the sinner. The Advocate is here tonight, in this meeting, to bring about conviction if it is needed, so that there might be self-judgment.
Rem Nathan must have been a well-qualified, well-furnished man, because it simply says, “Jehovah sent Nathan to David”. What did Jehovah tell him to say? It does not mention that here. He just sent him.
JT We may be sure that Nathan took counsel [p. 98] with God. What a sorrow the matter would be to Nathan! Samuel cried all night about Saul. This parable was a skilful matter. Where did Nathan get it? He got it from God.
Ques With reference to the parable, is it an indication as to how matters should be handled among us? Grace is carried on by God through prophetic ministry. Is grace reigning in that sense?
JT It was reigning in David in chapters 9 and 10 and well maintained, but now God has to come in. When the leading brothers give way God has to come in and take the thing in hand Himself, and of course it is grace. The Lord’s very last word to the churches is that He is still on His Father’s throne. It is grace. It is in relation to the testimony that characterises our dispensation, the grace period. And here all is grace; what a beautiful word this is from Nathan! David listens to the prophet telling about the poor man with one little ewe lamb which he was nourishing, and about the man on the journey. How that would touch David! What one feels is the skill of Nathan, the prophetic skill that often comes in in the gospel to get at consciences. David must have had great confidence in Nathan.
Ques Would there not be a wonderment in David’s mind as to how Nathan knew about all this? When we come to our prophetic ministry meetings someone may come in from another locality, and the brethren say, “Why should he speak like this? How does he know about conditions in this locality?”
JT As a prophet God may have given him a message.
Ques Would you say that one of the marks of the true prophetic word is that it leaves nothing to be said on the other side? True repentance never comes without true conviction. Is that not a reason why true repentance is not reached sometimes, because there has not been [p. 99] conviction?
JT Does it not strike you that this scheme designed in heaven and carried out through Nathan was masterful? — as much as to say to David, You cannot go one way or the other. He might shuffle, as we often do, but he has already condemned this thing himself, the judgment is passed. David has pronounced the verdict himself.
Rem He was caught off guard. When we are attacked personally we immediately defend ourselves.
Rem “Considering thyself lest thou also be tempted”, Galatians 6:1. If that were followed out would not every case be a means of helping us to judge ourselves? I was thinking of matters that come up in a meeting about which we arrive at a judgment; we are apt to forget the side of “consider thyself”, that the thing we have judged resides in ourselves. Each difficulty should be a means of house-cleaning.
JT Many in Corinth, guilty themselves, acquiesced in the judgment of the man, forgetting that there were many others that should be dealt with. David here has given a verdict against the culprit. The culprit is not named, he is called “a rich man”. Nathan is pleading his cause and the judge passes sentence. To me it seems a wonderful scheme.
Rem The result of the conviction was: “I have sinned against Jehovah”, not against Urijah, but “against Jehovah”. Is that going the whole way?
JT Nathan had said to him: “Wherefore hast thou despised the word of Jehovah?”
Rem How wonderfully too God brings home to him afterwards that he was a rich man. It is very touching! I was thinking that the first thing we would have said would have been about Urijah or Urijah’s wife or the person who suffered most. But true repentance is always linked with God. And so the whole attitude of David in connection with his repentance and the death of the child, his mourning [p. 100] and subsequent rising up from the ground, is not what would be expected in the ordinary way; but it is true repentance.
JT He is worth getting — this man — because he is so skilful in concealing his guilt, but God is not baffled.
Rem There is the assurance that God will take care of everything else. Urijah the Hittite was really an honoured man. God is really the only One with whom we have to do.
JT Urijah is honoured now, he is a martyr for what is right. His speech in answer to David’s overtures is beautiful! “The ark, and Israel, and Judah abide in booths; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open fields: shall I then go into my house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? As thou livest, and as thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing”, chapter 11:11. I do not want to be in any way different from that, I want to be in thorough accord with that position. It does not mean that the ark was on the battlefield, but it was under curtains; David himself had said that it was not suitable. But Urijah holds to the circumstances under which the ark and the army were. He was an overcomer, a martyr, so that his glory is assured, he has got his crown.
Rem Verse 13 is very conclusive: “I have sinned against Jehovah. And Nathan said to David; Jehovah has also put away thy sin: thou shall not die”. It is unconditional grace in so far as it went. Then afterward we come to discipline. God’s way is perfect.
JT You see that Nathan was ready. He was fully furnished as if he were told. Now when confession is made, do not be behind in speaking about forgiveness, “thou shalt not die”. The whole scene is grace, God doing the very best in the circumstances.
[p. 101] Rem Urijah dies and the child dies, but David goes on living.
JT The responsible element goes on; we shall take it up again to see what the result is of all the pains God has taken to secure response.
Ques Is that the idea of the last letter to the responsible church?
JT We have to see the result, how the Lord never leaves the throne of grace. He has not left that throne yet. He is acting in a disciplinary way but His attitude is grace. We have a worshipper in the chief sinner himself, and then we shall see how Solomon comes in at the end.
Rem The governmental side goes through.
JT It is the position of Christendom, the actual history. Solomon coming in at the end here is very suggestive. The government of God goes on, it is one sorrowful history right through this book. It is the testimony, I think, in the hands of David and a type of the whole Christian history, but still the kingdom goes through. So that in the last chapter but one he tells what a king should be in spite of all the failure and Absalom’s rebellion; thus the kingdom goes through. We have all this that would rob us of the idea of it but God is asserting the thought of the kingdom and of rule more and more, and He will bring us into accord with it.