Sermon Tone Analysis

I.

About Bathsheba

The record is purely factual, and there’s very little treatment of her thoughts

The commonest type of house was the “four-room” house.

There was an open courtyard, with two rooms on either side, and two more on either end, in a rectangle.

The average house was about 900-1000 sf, with a quarter of it being the courtyard.

So if her house was an average house, it might have been a single story, whereas David’s lavish house of cedar was almost certainly two large stories, at least.

So he would be considerably above her home, and could have seen right into the back wall, depending on how it was arranged.

(

The image shown is the best preserved house in the City of David during Israel’s Monarchy.

Houses really didn’t change over the 500 years.

It belonged to a man named Ahiel.

This home had a partial second story.

Not all homes had this.

Because there were few windows on the ground floor, the middle room was often just a courtyard with no roof.

Obviously no one from the ground could see inside, but David, high up in his palace, might be able to.

There’s no statement of her motives or thinking of any of the matter.

Therefore, she could have been careless, or she could have been callously using her body to advance her social standing by seducing the king.

Or in the middle - she knew the King would see, but things got out of hand.

At any rate, she uses the situation after the fact to her advantage.

Why else would she contact the King to let him know she was pregnant?

She clearly intends him to do something about it, but what, exactly, isn’t clear.

Did she want a payoff?

Is she condemning him for using her against her will?

Does she want him to knock her husband off?

But whenever you find yourself asking questions of the story that don’t have an answer, then you are probably not talking about what the story is focusing on.

David is culpable in any case.

He had all the power, and he knew it was wrong.

Whatever Bathsheba intended impacts her culpability, but not his.

II.

About Temptation

We begin with most short term ideas, extending to the long term/big picture

First, David did not turn away his eyes.

He can’t help having seen something he shouldn’t have, but he can help the lingering look.

To dally with temptation is to give it an opportunity to breed sin.

David has already committed adultery in his heart at this point.

The rest is just the working out of his sinful desires (Matt 5:27-28) You can’t stop the birds from flying over your head, but you can prevent them from making a nest in your hair.

Joseph, in contrast, ran immediately (Gen 39:11-12).

Second, David was not where he ought to have been.

It is “when kings go to battle”, but David stays home.

It’s the job of the King to go out before his army into battle 1 Samuel 8:20, yet David isn’t there.

A job God has called him to do.

But this is not just a one time failure.

It’s the beginning of a pattern.

In the early days, David always went out with his men, it’s part of why they were so loyal to him.

But in the last chapter, he starts sending other people to do it, instead of doing it himself.

Now that David has achieved everything he wants, he has started to become disengaged from the position God has called him to do.

He is less and less focused on the daily tasks that a King ought to be doing, and is taking life easy.

Israelites usually took a rest at midday, as it was too hot to work.

But David’s siesta doesn’t end until late into the evening.

The danger of growing lazy is that it gives the Devil an opportunity to work.

Joseph, by contrast, never took life easy, despite reaching comparable levels of power and influence.

In Potipher’s house, he continued diligent work through the whole thing.

Third, David has consistently not practiced godliness in the area of marriage and sex.

He has conscientiously worked at justice and mercy as King.

He has gradually chosen to practice several virtues that help him become Israel’s greatest king

He practiced courage - starting with lions and bears with his father’s flock, moving to the Giant in one moment of bravery, then continued courage as a commander in Saul’s army, then greater courage as a fugitive.

He practiced mercy - as Saul spun further and further into madness, David suffers more and more at his hand, yet consistently chooses mercy.

Thus when he needs to show lovingkindness/loyalty later, he chooses loyalty with Jonathan, which is easier as he loves him.

Then with Mephibosheth, which is harder because he doesn’t know him.

He practiced worship - composing many songs, and consoling himself in God to sustain his difficult life in many circumstances.

As his life got more difficult it was more difficult to practice an attitude of worship because he could no longer go to the temple.

But he never practiced restraint in his sexual life.

He chose to act as an oriental King and gather political marriages.

He is on his seventh wife already, so he has already developed the habit of having any woman he really wants.

Up until now, he has been prevented by circumstances from actively sinning in a visible way in that respect, except with his polygamy.

But polygamy is not nearly as bad a sin as adultery.

Godliness is not usually attained in an instantaneous zap, or by working up great emotion in one crisis event.

Sometimes God uses that, but most often, godliness is very much like building muscles.

You get stronger by lifting heavier and heavier weights.

You gain godliness by choosing to do the right thing in harder and harder situations.

The situations might be harder because it is harder to figure out the right thing to do, or harder because it is more difficult to do what is right.

Either way, as you consistently practice godliness, you will develop “godliness” muscles.

But unlike physical muscles, you can’t lose them to old age. 1 Tim 4:8 This is the doctrine of progressive sanctification.

III.

About the Coverup

First plan was exploded by Bathsheba herself - her only speech in the chapter is extremely laconic.

Only phrase - I’m Pregnant.

The subtext is clearly - “so, what are you going to do about it, big boy?”

I think David initially thought he would just be able to get away with it, as no one would believer her anyway, and if her husband got mad, what was he going to do?

Uriah was not an Israelite.

He was a Hittite, though with a Jewish name.

Furthermore, his wife clearly follows Jewish practices.

So Uriah is a follower of Yahweh, but because he is not a native, he lacks the protections in the Law available to natives.

He cannot own property, as only Israelites get to do that.

So he is totally beholden to David himself for his entire wealth.

The Hittite Empire collapsed in the previous century, so there were a fair number of Hittite refugees.

Uriah was probably not a mercenary in the traditional sense, but a refugee that had made his home in Israel, and had thrown his lot in with David.

He has fought for David, and trusts him.

The New Kingdom came to an end around 1180 B.C., in the period of the migrations of the so-called “Sea Peoples.”

Ḫattuša was captured, plundered, and razed, a fate which—with the likely exception of Carchemish—also befell towns in other parts of the empire.

That the “Sea Peoples” should be held responsible for the destruction of the Hittite capital is not thought to be very probable; the Hittite Empire was too much of a continental power and most of the important settlements lay far away from the coast.

Disastrous occurrences within Anatolia itself are likely to have played an important role in this downfall.

Philo H. J. Houwink ten Cate, “Hittite History,” ed.

David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 222.

But with the pregnancy, there’s no doubt that the child is David’s.

The author informs us that she has had a monthly cycle already, since her husband has been gone, so the only possible father of the child is David.

Since the child will be indisputable evidence of his wrongdoing, now it doesn’t matter what Uriah thinks, the public opinion will turn against David big time, for Israel was moral enough that this action would be widely condemned.

God had told Israel that adultery was punishable by death.

So David’s first coverup is actually Plan B already.

It’s a great plan with just one flaw - it didn’t work.