Quote:
Originally Posted by toddpedlar  It seems to me that this is a case of letting the weight of Scripture bear on a hard-to-understand part of Scripture, as opposed to resting a case on a single text. Statements that seem clear on the face often have to be interpreted carefully (and perhaps in a way different than first blush - e.g. "The Lord repented that he had made man", which about as clear as day sounds like the Lord thinks He was in error for making man! We interpret that differently given that the rest of Scripture speaks differently of God with respect to making mistakes.) in the light of the whole Bible. Clarity of expression is not the only thing we have to consider (though I agree it is a factor).
Don't you think another reading is possible, and more likely, given the weight of the rest of Scripture? Perhaps what is meant is that David legitimately (as successor) could have chosen any of the wives of Saul (how many were there, anyway? I'm only aware of one, in addition to his concubine(s)... perhaps the word translated "wives" there should be interpreted as "women" of his household?) to be his own. Instead, what he did was choose an illegitimate route of adultery. |
The trouble with the "Lord repented" example - though it's a good one - is there is Scripture that can be set in stark contrast to it. IOW, if your cited verse is literally true, then these
other verses must be false:
Num. 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind."
1 Sam. 15:29 "He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind."
Barring the injunction against elders having more than one wife, though, there is no similar clear statement that can be set against 2 Sam. 12:8.
The "LORD repented/He does not change His mind" couplings simply
are difficult. One
must be given greater weight and significance than the other.
I don't think the same can be truly said for 2 Sam. 12:8. That's difficult if one
makes it difficult.
There's no doubt but that all of the LORD's favored people still sinned. David committed adultery then arranged for the woman's husband to be placed in harm's way so as to cover up his crime. Adultery, murder, deceit. There are verses in Scripture explicitly condemning each of these.
Jacob deceived his father so as to receive the blessing. Deception and lying, explicitly condemned in Scripture.
There's no similar condemnation of polygamy. There's a general sense that it's not wise, nor fitting, nor recommended, but that's not the same thing, I don't believe.
Think about Deut. 21:13-14: "If a man has two wives, the one loved and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him sons, if the firstborn son belongs to the unloved, then it shall be in the day he wills what he has to his sons, he cannot make the son of the loved the firstborn before the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn." And there is another passage wherein the LORD instructs men as to how they are to treat their first wife, not shortchanging her in favor of new wives, but I
cannot find it now. Most annoying.
Are there other examples of the LORD giving instructions about an innately sinful activity in this way? Along the lines of, if you
must steal, well, at least steal from someone who can afford to lose what's stolen. If you
do defile the Sabbath day, at least don't do it like this, or make sure you do it like that.
I can't think of any, but might be overlooking something.