David's Parable- 2 Sam 12

While recently re-watching the third "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie, I was struck by the role that deceit played in the film. Every character moved about with secret motives and was constantly trying to manipulate others around them to accomplish those hidden goals. Yet, deceit is not simply something that pirates take part in, but it also plays a significant role in the Old Testament. From Jacob to Tamar, Simeon to Absalom, many of Israel's ancestors rely on trickery from time to time.

Most of us have heard the story about David and Bathsheba. David sees her bathing one day and his lust leads him to kill her husband and take Bathsheba as his own wife. However, David does not get away. Instead, the prophet Nathan tells David a parable and then points out that David is the villain in the story whom David had condemned himself.

While popular interpretations of this story argue that David believed Nathan's story was an actual legal case and that David foolishly missed the point or was tricked, Jeremy Schipper offers a different interpretation. Schipper argues that David recognized the story as a parable, but misinterpreted (either accidentally or intentionally) the different parts of the parable. Nathan's intention and David's interpretations according to Schipper are given below:

NATHAN                                                   DAVID
Lamb- Bathsheba                                       Lamb- Uriah
Poor man- Uriah                                        Poor man- Bathsheba
Traveler- n/a (perhaps David's lust)            Traveler- David
Rich man- David                                        Rich man- Joab

This misinterpretation by David seems plausible because Nathan does not address the identity of the traveler and because both Uriah and the lamb are the ones killed. According to Schipper, David attempted to use Nathan's parable as a means of shifting the blame for Uriah's murder to someone else. In particular, David used the story to denounce Joab, his general, as a "son of death" who kills on behalf of another (the traveler/David). Thus, David condemns this action in an attempt to prove that his reign is not built upon assassination plots. However, as Nathan quickly corrects, the point goes beyond the murder to the adultery with Bathsheba.

Whether we accept Schipper's proposal or not remains a matter of debate. However, it does cast David in a new light. Instead of a fool who gets tricked, David is a continued schemer in the likeness of ancestors like Jacob. Unfortunately, his scheming here is an attempt to continue covering his sins.

That's a Nice Shirt: Clothes and the story of David

"Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was on him and gave it to David, with his armor, including his sword and his bow and his belt. So David went out wherever Saul sent him, and prospered..." (1 Sam. 18:3-5a, NASB)

"Then David arose and cut off the edge of Saul's robe secretly. It came about afterward that David's conscience bothered him because he had cut off the edge of Saul's robe." (1 Sam. 24:4b-5, NASB)

As 21st century, Westerners, we miss a lot of the significance of stories about robes and clothes in the Bible. For many of us, there is nothing super special about our clothes. They're something that we put on and off, but are also something that we can just as easily put in a give-away box. However, in the ancient near east, your clothes were also you're identity. They symbolized status in a way much more poignant than today. Oh sure our clothes signify role or wealth somewhat today. A person walking down the street in an Armani suit is likely making more than minimum wage. However, just because you manage to try on an Armani suit does not give you the privileges or wealth that a powerful businessperson might have.

Yet, for the ancients, clothes were part of your identity. If you are stripped of you clothes, you lose the identity that those clothes symbolized. Thus, it is extremely significant when Jonathon (a prince) strips off his royal robes and gives them a shepherd boy. It was essentially an abdication of the throne. Likewise, David feels guilt over cutting part of Saul robe because it was like making a premature grab at the royal throne. David was not just cutting a robe, he was attacking Saul's identity as king.


Passages like this serve as a poignant reminder that we cannot simply overlook details in Biblical narrative. Even things like the clothes that people wear (or don't wear) can have a major affect on interpretation.

The End in the Middle

"Saul was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel forty-two years."- 1 Samuel 13:1 (TNIV)

This summary of the reign of king Saul comes at the beginning of chapter 13 in 1 Samuel. However, it's placement in the story is odd. One expects to find such a summary either at the end of a story or perhaps at the beginning. Indeed, both David and Solomon have similar summaries of their reigns, but in both of their cases the summary comes after the death of the king. However, in the case of Saul, this statement appears in the middle of Saul's story. A similar thing occurs with Ish-bosheth and David in 2 Sam. 2:10-11 and 4:4-5. Here, Saul was crowned king 3 chapters earlier and had led a successful campaign against Israel's enemies. However, there is still plenty of Saul's story to go. In fact, Saul does not die until the very end of 1 Samuel.

In thinking about the placement of this statement, perhaps it is significant that, unlike David or Solomon, there is no summary statement at the end of Saul's life. Furthermore, it appears just before Saul's first major mistake as king. While waiting at Gilgal for Samuel, Saul becomes impatient and ends up disobeying God's command. Instead off waiting for Samuel to come and offer a sacrifice, Saul chooses to offer the sacrifice himself. Samuel then rebukes Saul with the harrowing claim that Saul's "kingdom will not endure" (13:14 TNIV). Indeed, things continue to go downhill for Saul as he slowly loses touch with God and slowly loses his kingdom to David.

In some ways this narrative device works lie an extended flashback in movies. There are many movies that provide you with a scene and then go back to explain how that scene came about. For example, a bomb goes off in the opening scene and then the movies flashes back to the events leading up to that bombing. We already know the ending, the question is just how did we get there. Thus, whether it is Saul or David, we get a peak at the end and must await the details that are to come. However, in Saul's case, the author is signaling that this is the beginning of the end for Saul. With no second summary at the end of his reign (unlike David and Solomon), Saul's life is a steady downhill event. After chapter 13, Saul's reign is a good as done, so one might as well only summarize the totality of Saul reign here. Thus, in chapter 13, we know that the end of Saul is coming, but the reader soon discovers that the 42 years of Saul's reign were not all good years..