2 Samuel 11

Chap. XI. Ver. 1—27. David being tempted to commit adultery with Bath-sheba, is led on to plan the murder of Uriah.—Alas! what is man! How often have we seen that men who have conquered nations, and destroyed armies, have not been able to resist a single lust. In the heathen world, we are not surprised at this; but to see the champion of Israel—‘the man after God’s own heart—the sweet Psalmist of Israel’—thus drawn aside, is a matter of bitter and extreme regret. From this history, however, melancholy as it is, we may draw a strong argument in favour of the truth and impartiality of the sacred writers. Had this event been recorded by a court sycophant, circumstances would no doubt have been thrown in to excuse the king’s conduct; instead of which, in fact, every circumstance is enumerated that could render it detestable before men, or criminal in the sight of God.

i With respect to the conduct of Bath-sheba, in the first instance she is been severely censured for the indecent exposure of her person; but whether she was aware of being likely to be overlooked, we know not. Neither are we informed whether she was indulging in the luxuries of a bath, or washing herself in an ordinary way; the original text, which speaks only of “the beauty of her countenance,” inclines us to the not more guilty than the Scriptures represent, which lay all the criminality on David. As to her going to the palace when sent for, it was not optional: and in that age and country, it is probable no woman could suppose that she had a right to refuse to see the king, however arbitrary or unjustifiable his demand. As it respects David, there is no palliating circumstance.

He took advantage of the casual sight of a handsome woman, to draw her into sin; and to aggravate his guilt, we are told she was a married woman, whose husband was in the king’s service, and risking his life in defence of his country. One crime leads on to another; David, when he sent for Bath-sheba, to commit adultery with her, had no design, we may believe, to murder her husband; and therefore his first plan was to send for Uriah, and urge him to go home; he even made him intoxicated, in hopes that he might be induced to cohabit with her, that he might cover his own guilt. But it soon becomes necessary to plot another and a deeper crime, to conceal the former; and to execute this, he finds it necessary to put on the mask of friendship, and to make Uriah the bearer of his own death warrant.

And when the crime was perpetrated, now hypocritically does he speak of it, as a matter of mere chance! “Let not this thing displease thee, the sword devoureth one as well as another.” We must not however pass by the discovery we here have, tells crime to an accomplice, who was ready to assist in any crime that might gratify his royal master, though it might cost the life of one of his bravest soldiers. Nor can it be pretended that he was afraid of David; for David, as we have seen, ((2 Samuel 3:39).) was rather afraid of him, whose desperate valour had made him the idol of the army and of the people. To return to David. Having, after a very short interval of mourning for her husband, (perhaps a few days only,) made Bath-sheba his wife, the child is born in wedlock, and David was no doubt pleased, to think how well he had got through his difficulties, and avoided public shame: “But the thing which he had done displeased the Lord.”

Notes on the verses

It was therefore a suitable place for the men to tarry in till their beards were grown. The injury to their clothes was much slighter, and sooner remedied,: Ver. 18. The men of seven hundred chariots.—As the first words of this sentence (“the men of”) are an evident supplement, Dr. Chandler applies the destruction to the chariots only; but this does not seem to harmonize with the following member of the sentence, “forty thousand horsemen.” Nor does it agree with the parallel passage, (1 Chronicles 19:18). which says, “David slew of the Syrians seven thousand men that fought in chariots, and forty thousand footmen.” Perhaps the Hebrew word for chariots should, in these and other places, be rendered charioteers; including not only the drivers, but the men who fought in them; these war-chariots being a sort of open carriages, as represented in ancient sculptures, and in modern paintings.

_CHap. XI. Ver. 1. After the year was expired.—{The sacred historian seems to intimate that there was one particular time of the year to which military operations were limited: and Josephus informs us that this took place in the beginning of spring. In another part of his works, he says, that as soon as Spring was begun, Adad levied and led forth his army against the Hebrews. Antiochus also prepared to invade Judea at the first appearance of spring; and Vespasian marched to Antipatris at the commencement of the same season. The kings and armies of the East, says Chardin, do not march but when there is grass, and when they can encamp, which is April. This rule, however, seems to be disregarded in modern times.]—Bagster.

_: Ver. 3. The wife of Uriah the Hittite.—It is probable that Uriah was a proselyte to Judaism, and therefore married to a Jewess. Ver. 9. Uriah slept at the door, &c.—This was customary, both to honour and to guard the king’s person. See Orient. Lit. No. 495. i Ver. 14. Wrote a letter, &c.—(This was the sum of treachery and villainy. He made this most noble and gallant man the bearer of letters which prescribed the mode in which he was to be murdered. This case has been supposed to have given rise to the classical story of Belles Pretus, and Antia. But there seems to be scarcely any correspondence between them, but in the simple circumstance that both Uriah and Belen carried those letters which contained their own condemnation.

The following history is a more accurate counterpart; and shows the despotic and unjust conduct of Asiatic princes, which David imitated on this occasion. ‘‘Nour Jehan, the light of the world; she was also called sens Mahl, or the light of the seraglio; she was wife to one Sher Afkan Khan, of a Turkoman family, who came from Persia to Hindostan in very indifferent circumstances. As she was exquisitely beautiful, of great wit, and an elegant poetess, J re, sultan, was resolved to take her to himself. He sent her husband, who was esteemed the bravest man in his service, with some troops, to command in Bengal, and afterwards sent another with a greater force to cut him off. When he was killed, Nour Jehan was soon prevailed upon to become an empress.”’— Frazer’s History of Nadir Shah, |—Bagster.

4 i Ver. 16. Observed.—In our military phrase, “reconnoitered;” i. e. surveyed the battle with a view to attack, that he might place Uriah in the post of greatest danger. Ver. 8, ‘Some of the king’s servants be dead.—It is probable that some officers of great distinction were slain, but the death of Uriah was to comfort David. [What abominable hypocrisy was here! He well knew that the death of this noble and gallant man was no chance medley; he was, by his own order thrust on the sword.]—Bagster Ver. 27. Mourning.—{The whole of her conduct indicates that she observed the form, without feeling the power of sorrow. She lost a captain, and got a king for her husband: and therefore, “She shed reluctant tears; and forced out groans from a joyful breast.”}—Bagster.

4; P