In 2004, Michelangelo’s famous sculpture, David, went through an extensive cleaning and restoration process in celebration of its five-hundredth birthday. Half a millennium of grime has been removed to once again reveal the majestic splendor with which the masterpiece sparkled when it was first placed in the Piazza Signoria in Florence. This famous marble statue has often been noted as a most perfect depiction of the human body. And we often think of its subject—the biblical David—as being perfect as well. However, the wonderful thing about the Bible is that it tells the truth—even about its greatest heroes. They are presented to us as uncovered as Michelangelo’s subject, with the only difference being that the Bible depicts its subjects with all their warts, mid-rib bulges, scars, and other defects. A careful reading of David’s story as God has had it preserved for us gives us a picture of a man who was far from perfect. Actually, this is quite a relief for all of us imperfect humans—now we have a model of a man who, though as imperfect as we are, was still favored by God. Though David was as human as the rest of us, he maintained the testimony that he was a man after God’s own heart. (Acts 13:22)
Though we want to be cautious not to err on the side of trying to be too honest and focusing too strongly on his defects, I think that we can benefit substantially by reviewing David’s faults as well as his triumphs.
The one failure that comes to mind immediately when we think of King David is his moral failure with Bathsheba. The eleventh chapter of II Samuel records the story of how David spied her one evening as she bathed on the roof of the neighboring villa. Some students of the scripture and history have suggested that there might be more to the story than we notice on the first reading. They have suggested that this was not just her regular evening bath but was rather a special monthly ceremony she practiced to cleanse herself after her menstrual period. Assuming this to be the case, these scholars go on to surmise that David may have noticed this practice and even made a mental note of when to expect her next “performance.” These students of the ancient culture then go on to suggest that David had actually planned to be there for the next “curtain call.” They offer this as the explanation as to why David did not go out to battle with his men as was the custom of the kings (II Samuel 11:1) and the practice he followed until the very last days of his life when his men insisted that he remain behind for his own protection (II Samuel 21:17). Regardless as to whether this was a monthly or a nightly ritual with Bathsheba, the possibility remains that the fateful evening that has become a part of history was not the first time the king had noticed his neighbor’s beauty. If this is the case, we see that the trap into which the king fell was one of his own making. Jesus taught us that looking upon a woman to lust after her is as great a sin as actually committing adultery with her. (Matthew 5:28) Notice that He didn’t say “look upon a woman and lust after her,” rather He said, “look upon a woman to lust after her.” The implication in His wording is that there is a difference between premeditated lust and instantaneous lustful thoughts that come when caught in a surprise situation. Did David know what he could expect to see when he looked over his portico that evening? Did he schedule his evening walk just so that the timing would be right for the opening act? Did he stay home from the battle because he wanted to be in town for the next scheduled performance? We will never know for sure; however, if this is what happened, we see that the king was subject to a premeditated lust that destroyed him.
Yet even if the lust was not something that the king had scheduled into his life, the episode exposes a serious flaw in David’s moral fiber. An old saying tells us that we can’t stop the birds from flying above our heads, but we can stop them from building a nest in our hair. Even if this was the first time he had ever noticed his voluptuous neighbor and this was the first time he had ever had wondering eyes, he was still guilty of not shooing away the birds of lustful thoughts before they had a chance to build a nest in his heart. James 1:14-15 tells us that sin is the result of temptation that is the product of lust. He adds that we are “drawn away by our own lust,” suggesting that lust is not an external temptation as much as it is an internal motivation. At first sighting of the maiden washing herself, he could have quickly turned away and gone back to bed; however, he chose rather to take a second glance, then a longer more intense look, then a stare, then a gaze before he returned to bed—unfortunately, he was not alone when he finally fell asleep again. David had followed the predictable pattern of allowing a temptation to take root inside his heart and develop into a lustful attitude that eventually resulted in acted out sin. David’s most famous flaw was his moral failure with Bathsheba—the outgrowth of his lack of personal discipline over his thought life.
Immediately linked with his moral failure with Bathsheba was his gross failure in the arena of loyalty as demonstrated in his dealings with Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband. Uriah, one of David’s most able and dependable warriors, was away at battle at the time of the incident between his wife and the king. When David learned that Bathsheba was pregnant, he called her husband home from the front in order to make it appear that he was the father of the child. The scriptures record a remarkable story of Uriah’s loyalty to the troops when he refused repeated offers to be with his wife, stating that he could not enjoy privileges that his men were being denied. What a picture of contrast between Uriah who refused his legitimate benefits in respect for his suffering troops and the king who indulged in not only his legitimate privileges but extended into illegitimate pleasures while his men suffer deprivation at the front. The end of the story is that David can think of no other solution than to have Uriah killed and marry Bathsheba with the hopes that no one would count to see if there were nine months between the royal wedding and the birth of the baby. In the most heinous deed of his career, David sent his loyal servant back to the front bearing his own death warrant.
An old song says that we only hurt the ones we love. I’m not sure if there is much validity to that analysis, but I’m certain that there is a lot of truth in the reverse of the saying: we seriously hurt the ones who love us. It is in betrayal of those who are loyal to us that we can inflict the deepest wounds. In David’s dealing—or misdealings—with Uriah, we see one of his deepest flaws and most serious defects: his lack of loyalty.
Closely tied to his loyalty failure is David’s failure with all his men. As we have already noticed, this episode in the life of David occurred at one point when he did not lead them into battle. These were the men whom he had taken when they were the misfits of society and had turned them into mighty warriors. They were ones whom he had personally transformed into heroes, yet this time their mentor was showing an example of a man who was more interested in his own personal leisure than their need for leadership. He had tragically failed them by abdicating his position of personal leadership before them at the front.
On top of all this, we see a failure against his position as king, his entire constituency, and himself in that he dishonestly tried to cover up the whole event. It was only when the prophet Nathan exposed the sin (II Samuel 12:7) that David was willing to admit and address his flaws.
Yet, his faults against Bathsheba, Uriah, and his troops were not nearly as serious as his failure toward God. David himself realized this when he framed his prayer recorded in Psalm fifty-one in which he repented for these atrocities. In verse four, David says, “Against You and You alone have I sinned,” indicating that he realized that the incidents involving adultery with Bathsheba, the murder of Uriah, and his disloyalty to the troops were only outward manifestations of the inward sin he had committed against God Himself. Apparently, David had slipped away from the intensity in his fellowship with and worship of God. He ends the psalm with a renewal in his commitment to worship, suggesting that he realized that his basic flaw was failing to pursue after the heart of God. When he spoke of his sin against God, David’s word for “sin” can be interpreted with either meaning—“to miss the mark” or “to rebel.” In essence, he had missed the mark by failing to intently follow after God’s presence resulting in a rebellion against His ways.
But David’s failure toward God can also be seen as a failure toward himself. In another of the Psalms, he seems to have realized where he had gone wrong and requested divine protection to guard him against being trapped by the same pitfalls again. The Living Bible translation of Psalm 25:21 reads, “Assign me Godliness and Integrity as my bodyguards, for I expect you to protect me.” Having a bodyguard means the difference between life and death. When President Abraham Lincoln’s bodyguard stepped out of the box in the Ford Theater, our sixteenth President was vulnerable and soon lay on the floor subject to John Wilkes Booth’s bullet. President Ronald Reagan, on the other hand, survived an assassination attempt upon his life in 1981 when James Brady bravely threw his body as a human shield in front of John Hinckley Jr.’s bullet. When Godliness and Integrity were lacking, David was subject to the enemy’s attacks.
The term “integrity” means “completeness.” It implies a harmony or complete relationship with oneself. A person of integrity is one who is in harmony throughout his total personality. He doesn’t think one thing and say another. He doesn’t act one way and feel another. Integrity doesn’t allow you to be dishonest or compromising. The term “godliness” may better be translated “uprightness,” meaning equity. It means to be truthful and fair to all men. Godliness demands that you live like God in front of your fellowmen, not treat them like the devil. Integrity is being honest with yourself. Godliness is being honest with others. These two traits in David’s lifestyle would have kept him safe from the assassination attempts of the world, the flesh, and the devil. In Psalm 119:11, he adds that the way he intends to ensure his protection against future sin is to hide the Word of God in his heart. Certainly, the engrafted Word of God produces integrity and uprightness.
In II Samuel chapter six, we read the enigmatic story of David’s attempt to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem. At first reading, it may seem that God unjustly took the life of Uzzah who tried to steady the Ark when it seemed to be tipping over as the oxcart jostled along the unpaved roadway. Yet, careful study of the passage will reveal that it was not a random, senseless act on God’s part; rather, it was another of David’s flaws that resulted in this innocent man’s death. David had failed to understand the anointing of God. Just as Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, had been struck dead because they presented strange fire in the Tabernacle (Leviticus 10:1, Numbers 3:4, 26:61) and just as the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain because they desecrated the altar (I Samuel chapters one through four) and just as the Philistines had suffered severely when they held the Ark in their pagan temple and cities (I Samuel chapter five), David should have understood that he was endangering himself and anyone with him who would improperly approach God’s sacred presence manifest in the Ark. Instead of taking precaution and showing holy reverence for the sacred object, David handled it much like any other piece of furniture, resulting in the tragic loss of a well-intentioned bystander. David’s lack of recognition of and respect for the anointing of God certainly hurt him personally but more seriously hurt those for whom he was responsible.
Here again we see that David’s failure could have been avoided if only he had the Word of God hidden in his heart. Had he remembered Deuteronomy 10:8, he would have never placed the Ark on an oxcart as did the pagan Philistines but on the shoulders of the priests as did Moses. The surprising truth is that Deuteronomy 17:18 commanded that the kings of Israel handwrite their own personal copy of the Law. Had he been diligent to put it in his heart as he was committing it to paper, he would have diverted his own failure and the death of an innocent citizen.
Toward the end of his life, David demonstrated that he had a failure in the area of his faith life. This same king who had once penned the words of Psalm 20:7 declaring that he would not trust in military might but in the name of the Lord decided to take a census in order to determine the strength of his army. (II Samuel 24) This act of self-reliance rather than dependence upon the Lord made a major blotch on the record of his final days in office in that the judgment for this act brought a plague that took the lives of seventy thousand innocent civilians.
Possibly the greatest area of failure in David’s life was in his failures as a parent. Though we do not know the stories—or even the names of most of David’s offspring—the ones we do read about are full of tragedy and sadness. The baby born from the illegitimate relationship with Bathsheba died when only a few days old. Because of the immoral nature of relationship between the parents, this unnamed soul was not covered by the divine blessing upon a covenant family. This child suffered because it was unconnected.
Tamar suffered because she was unprotected. Though her father knew all the details of the incestuous rape she had suffered in the tent of her half-brother, he did nothing to defend her honor or restore her dignity. Although David was very angry with Amnon, the young man who violated Tamar, the father never corrected the errant son for his crime. When Tamar’s full-brother Absalom eventually took the life of the offender, he was punished by being estranged from his father; however, David never specifically addressed the need for correction for the homicide. In Amnon’s case, David did nothing. Although he did measure out a form of punishment in the case of Absalom, he failed to correct him in the sense of imposing a punishment that would result in his rehabilitation. David failed these two sons in that they were uncorrected.
He failed two other sons in that they were left undirected. Although it was David’s intention to establish Solomon as his successor, it seems that explicit directions to this effect were never given. The result was that Adonijah made an unsuccessful attempt to ascend to the throne when his father was no longer able to fulfill his royal duties. Bathsheba and the prophet Nathan who knew the king’s intent rushed into the king’s bedroom and informed him of Adonijah’s move and motivated him to make a public announcement that Solomon was to succeed him as king. When I think of the scene of this bed-ridden monarch mustering enough energy to decree the next ruler of his nation, I think of how close this old man came to losing his chance to set things in order. Had he died before this announcement, a civil war could have been sparked. As it was, there was still unnecessary bloodshed and civil unrest that could have easily been avoided had he only taken time during his good years to direct his sons and present them with goals for their futures and strategies with which to accomplish these goals. David did use the closing days of his life to instruct his successor concerning his role as king; unfortunately, this should have been a lifelong lesson rather than a last-minute cram session. Perhaps it was because of the very conditions under which Solomon received his tutelage that he decided to do things differently for his son. He actually wrote him a manual on how to serve in his role as king—the book of Proverbs.
Though we have seen a number of flaws in David’s character, we must graciously look beyond them to the positive qualities in this great leader. One outstanding area of David’s life was his ability to establish and maintain godly relationships. His life illustrates how we should relate to the people with whom we live and work.
The first illustration has to do with the people who are above us. David had what could have been a major challenge in his life in dealing with the person who was above him: King Saul. Although David had done nothing to oppose the king, the young man became the target of the older man’s violent hostilities. In addition to being an officer in the king’s army and the king’s personal musician who played calming music when tormenting spirits harassed Saul, David was also the king’s son-in-law and the closest friend of the king’s son. In each of these relationships, Saul lashed out against his servant. As an officer, David found himself under the king’s ire because the people celebrated his victories more than they did those of Saul. As the minstrel, he found himself the target of the king’s javelin when the spirit enraged him. As the son-in-law and friend of the king’s son, David found that the king used both his wife and friend in attempts to capture and kill him. Even though Saul acted irrationally and unjustly toward his loyal servant, David committed to never retaliate or take vengeance into his own hands.
On at least two occasions, David had opportunity to take Saul’s life and ascend to his throne. Once when Saul had pursued him into the wilderness, David happened upon Saul in a cave. He stealthily slipped behind the king and cut off a strip of his garment. On another occasion, he happened upon him and his bodyguards as they all slept. This time he took his javelin (perhaps the same one that had been hurled at him previously) and his water bottle. Rather than taking his life, David simply took a token to prove to Saul that he actually had the king within his power. On both of these encounters, Saul was forced to acknowledge that David was acting righteously toward him while he was acting out of unjustified anger.
When David was only a little shepherd boy, the prophet Samuel had anointed him as the next king of the nation. Even though he lived for many years with this promise from God burning in his heart, David knew that it was not his place to try to take the throne by climbing the corporate ladder, as we would say in our modern society. We think that to get up the ladder, we must pull down the one who is above us. David, on the other hand, had apparently learned early in life the principle that he later recorded in the book of Psalms, “Promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south, but God is the judge; He puts down one, and sets up another.” (verses 75:6-7) Even though, the Spirit of God had departed from Saul and had anointed him, David determined to continue to show total respect and loyalty to the man as long as he sat on the throne where God had originally placed him.
The next relationship that we must understand is how to deal with the people who are below us. This principle is illustrated in the lives of the men who came seeking refuge with David when he had to flee from the king’s court. These men were described in the Bible as “everyone who was in distress, every one who was in debt, and everyone who was discontented.” (I Samuel 22:2) In our modern vernacular, they were riffraff, outcasts, never-do-wells—in general, square pegs in a society made up of round holes. It is incredible what David did with these square pegs; he whittled them into shape so that they not only fit into society, but also actually stood out as superior to their peers. Chapter twenty-three of II Samuel recounts how this band of riffraff became notable warriors who accomplished feats of strength, valor, and cunning that would easily win them recognition by Guinness and Ripley. Unlike the contemporary philosophy that I look tall when everyone around me is small, David knew that it was his responsibility to help those under him to become all they could be. As he tried to pull them up the ladder, he had to step up to the next rung himself. Without focusing on climbing the corporate ladder, he found himself getting closer and closer to the top each time he tried to help those under him achieve.
David’s relationship with Jonathan illustrates the relationship we must develop with those who are beside us—our peers. Jonathan and David were apparently about the same age, they were both accomplished warriors; and it seems that they shared many of the same interests. There was, however, one possible bone of contention between them: Jonathan, who was captain over one third of the army while Saul’s two other sons were not given positions of leadership (I Samuel 13:2, I Chronicles 10:6), was the heir apparent for the throne while David was the one anointed by the prophet to ascend to the royal seat—these two young men could have seen each other as rivals rather than friends. David and Jonathan, however, determined to support rather than challenge each other. They both seemed to know that God would ultimately decide who would be the next to wear the crown and that there was no purpose in their contending with each other for it.
Too often, we fail to see our peers as conveyors of God’s blessings; instead, we tend to see them as contenders for the blessings of the Lord. The story of two local pastors illustrates this point dramatically. One pastor had a very large, exploding congregation; the other had a small, struggling group of followers. When the pastor with the growing congregation was forced to relocate to a larger facility, he bought a plot of ground just a few blocks from the other pastor’s church. As soon as the construction began, the pastor of the smaller church began to feel very threatened by the fact that the larger congregation was moving into his “turf.” He was afraid that the larger church would suck all the members out of his church and swallow him up. When the new pastor learned of the other pastor’s concerns, he graciously asked him out to lunch. He reached across the restaurant table and reassured the troubled pastor, “Please don’t view me as an opponent. See me as a partner together with you on the same team doing the same task of bringing the gospel to this community. You know that every Sunday there are going to be thousands of people who will drive past your church on their way to visit my service. The thing you may not know is that when they get there, there will be hundreds who do not want to come back again. Some won’t like my sermon; some won’t like our music; some won’t like worshipping in such a large group—but for one reason or another, they will not be happy at my church. Many of them will remember seeing your building as they came to mine and will decide to try visiting your service the next Sunday. And many of them will stay after they visit with you once.” With this little pep talk, the young pastor won the older pastor’s confidence and they became partners rather than opponents. The result was that, the smaller church doubled in size within the first year that the big new church was open! I always tell pastors and Bible college students to view other churches in the community as seedbeds. If someone from their church decides to move to another church, consider him as a seed planted into the other church’s ministry. Claim God’s promise of a multiplied harvest of thirty-, sixty-, or a hundred-fold increase on his membership and the tithes and offerings that he is now giving to the other church. Instantly, that other pastor will become an avenue of increase rather than a drain!
David also had winning relationships with his supporters, those who were behind him. We often use the expressions like, “I’m behind you all the way,” or “I’m behind you on this one,” to register our support of a person and his projects. In David’s life, it was the ones who had started out under him who became the ones who were so powerfully behind him. One story from the chronicles of David’s might men poignantly illustrates the relationship between the king and his men. In the heat of battle one day, David made one of those wistful comments we often make when we long for the better times we remember of the past, “If only I could have a drink of water from the well at Bethlehem!” I’m certain that any water would have served to slake his thirst, but his soul cried out for the cool, clean waters of the community well outside the village gates because of the association with the blissful days of his childhood when as a shepherd he would draw deeply from that well to refresh himself and his sheep. When his bodyguards heard his sigh, they secretly broke from their ranks and fought their way through the enemy lines to get to the well. Once they had filled their flasks with the precious water, they again fought their way through the thick of the battle to bring the offering to their commander and chief. When David was offered the flask, he was surprised that his men had risked their lives to push through the fray in order to satisfy his whimsical request. Awestruck by their bravery and sacrifice, he refused to drink but poured the water on the ground as a libation before the Lord. The key principle in this lesson is that he understood the love and dedication of his men as being inspired, not by him, but by the life of God they saw in him. Therefore, he presented the water as an offering to God—the one who really deserved it. For those who are behind us, we must learn to recognize that any good they are attracted to in us is not of ourselves, but of Christ who lives inside us.
In the same fashion that we have supporters behind us, we will likely have opponents in front of us—the “in your face” sort people who challenge and accuse us. The classic example in David’s life was Shimei who openly accosted and ridiculed David as he fled Jerusalem during the attack by his son Absalom. On what was already likely the most humiliating day of David’s life, this rogue scoundrel made the most unthinkable spectacle of the king by chasing along side him as he fled before the advancing army and slandered him publicly, calling him every nasty name imaginable. Later, when David returned to Jerusalem in triumph, Shimei came bowing before the king to apologize for his foolishness and unwarranted
accusations. Although David’s men wanted to kill him, David spared the culprit’s life. The king knew that, just as his supporters favored the life of God they saw in him, it was the manifestation of God inside him that had stirred up a manifestation of the demonic forces within Shimei.
For those who affront us with an “in your face” challenge, we must learn to realize that they are not so much attacking us but are fighting the Spirit of God inside us. At that point, we must remember Ephesians 6:12, “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” For the individuals we must pray as Jesus did for those who drove the nails into His flesh, “Father, forgive them for they don’t even know what they are doing.”