Bathsheba

The word “take” (laqakh) has been used in several forms to give different meanings as presented in various verses from the books of 1st Samuel 8 and 2nd Samuel 12 as shown below:

1 Samuel 8

Verse 3: “Yet his sons did not follow in his ways, but turned aside after gain; they took bribes and perverted justice.” In this verse, the Bible offers insight of the kind of life that Samuel’s sons lived that was opposite to his. The word “take” has been used to show that Samuel’s sons married as opposed to what Samuel did.
Verse 11: “He said, ‘These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen, and to run before his chariots.” Samuel presents the adverse effects of having a king to rule over the Israelites by saying that he will force their sons into a compulsory military service.
Verse 13: “He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. The word “take” in this verse implies that kings will introduce forced labor to the Israelites’ daughters.
Verse 14: He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his courtiers.” Verse 15: “He will take one-tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and his courtiers.” The Hebrew word laqakh in verse 14 and 15 has been used to show the king’s confiscation of property.
Verse 16: “He will take your male and female slaves, and the best of your cattle and donkeys, and put them to his work.” Samuel uses the word “take” to imply that the Israelites sons will be enslaved in case they chose to have a king.
Verse 17: “He will take one-tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves.” This verse uses the word “take” to show the king’s unapproved usage of their property.

2 Samuel 12

In 2 Samuel Chapter 12, the word “take” has been utilized in different contexts to with different meanings: Verse 4: “Now there came a traveler to the rich man, and he was loath to take one of his own flock or herd to prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him…” In this context, Nathan displays the unwillingness of the rich man to slaughter one of his flocks for his visitor.
Verse 9: “…. You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites.”
Verse 3: “Now, therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, for you have despised me, and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.” The word “take” in this verse shows David’s illegitimate courtship of Uriah’s wife.
Verse 11: “...and I will take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this very sun.” Nathan uses the word “take” to show that just as David dishonored a different man’s spouse, another man will, therefore, violate his. This was accomplished in 2 Samuel 16:21-22.
Verse 30: “He took the crown of Milcom from his head” The word “take” has been used in this verse to mean the act of conquering.

Discussion

According to Renn, the act of taking is done by David in both 1 Samuel 8 and 2 Samuel 12. The repetitive usage of the Hebrew word “take” (Ladakh) is considerable. At the hub of the repetitive sections is an extensive itemization associated with the "ways of the king" (1 Samuel 8: 11-17). The Lord's ascent towards the needs of the Israelites came with the purvey in which Samuel cautions them concerning the risks linked to having a king. These incorporated: confiscation of property, forced labor, conscription into military service, taxation, as well as unapproved usage of property, even enslavement.

Interpretation

In 2 Samuel 11‐12 the reader gets focused on David all through both of these chapters; to emphasize the individual who sinned and subsequently repented; the person who failed the requirements as God's anointed one and then reconciled. Nonetheless, it is, more importantly, to view what these chapters uncover regarding the Lord's nature: the way He reacts to David’s transgression and after that His reaction to the repentance of David. Through first analyzing the person along with his circumstance, we can subsequently make several theological findings. These chapters disclose beyond the well-known theme of repentance. The Lord had the situation under control, and no level of transgression can alter that. However, there still has to be implications considering the nature of God. He is a God of immeasurable depths, but we can understand glimpses via experiences like the one in 2 Samuel 11‐12.
Several commentaries have outlined the likelihood that Uriah had been conscious of something taking place involving his wife as well as the king. It is probable that this kind of relationship did not stay secret and he might have discovered it when he went back to Jerusalem. Whether or not he knew it, his personality demonstrates a significant distinction towards that of David. Uriah's expressions of responsibility display a person with a “consciousness [that] ought to animate one who was fighting for the cause of God.” God is in control in every circumstance, and thus it is feasible the Lord is making use of Uriah to depict to the anointed king the kind of morality he ought to have been adhering to in this scenario. God understands the wicked aspect of His people, and if not convicted of our transgressions we can fall headfirst into the prolongation of those evil means. It is crucial to keep in mind that David is nevertheless the person He selected to be the leader of His people; God continues to have plans for his chosen one. First, David has to be corrected and brought back to serving God. Moreover, as the Lord prudently understands, “the best way to expose David’s hypocrisy is to have him condemn himself.” It is remarkable how fast people can be in judging other people in the same way David did for the person presented in Nathan's parable. Matthew 5:7 reflects these truths; people tend to overlook their folly but are incredibly swift at discovering the imperfections of other people. God is merely able to lead us to confession and to get back together with Him via exposing to us our particular hypocrisy. Psalm 51 is typically considered to be David’s plea after his confrontation with Nathan. However, his prayer does a lot more than uncovering his repentance as well as the need for forgiveness. The chapter shows something of human sin as well as our God too. Verse 4 shows David proclaiming that he has committed a transgression against God only. This might seem unusual taking into consideration the atrocities David has done against his loyal soldier Uriah. Nonetheless, this verse gives out a sensation “that all sin is ultimately against God. For this reason, God is justified in bringing down the full force of divine judgment on David.” This song moreover blatantly highlights our sinful temperament as fallen creatures; humanity's nature is extremely far from what the Lord desires. As this damaged king becomes aware of the risks of what lurks within, he asks God to give him a new heart. David is undoubtedly recalled for his violations in 2 Samuel 11, however “his response to the prophetic word in 12:13 is why David became known as Israel’s ideal king.”
God's promise that was made with David did not rest on the concept that David would not execute a mortal sin, but that even in the more serious situations he would come back to God and look for forgiveness. This is what makes him different from Saul; he does not ask for forgiveness to dissuade the approaching punishment or because he has to. As Lennox explains, “This new heart would bring him the fellowship with God for which he longs.” He wants to be close to the Lord. When his admission and repentance is likened to Saul’s in 1 Samuel 15 the varying determination along with truthfulness is pretty clear. The God of the Israelites is described as a loving and compassionate, and although “an animal with a broken leg is unfit for sacrifices, a heart that is crushed and contrite is what God desires.” It is essential to be cautious and not put a lot of focus on David in his forgiveness aspect. Regardless of how ardent his repentance, David was not genuinely worthy of forgiveness considering our human criteria. It is the Lord's grace, empathy, in addition to faithfulness towards the assurance He once made which eventually ended up saving David from a warranted fatality. Despite the fact that Nathan has declared that the Lord has removed David’s wickedness, and he is not going to die, “the aftermath of sin remains; the child will die.” Getting our transgressions forgiven does not necessarily follow we do not get to experience the implications on this world. For David, he was going to suffer a loss of the son he fathered with Uriah's wife. After the infant fell ill every day, David prayed to God to spare his life. A gentleman referred to as Gerlach had an intriguing perception into his reasons for praying to the Lord to get rid of this punishment. He affirms “[David’s] great desire was to avert the stroke, as a sign of the wrath of God, in the hope that he might be able to discern a proof of divine favor consequent upon the restoration of his fellowship with God. However, when the child was dead, he humbled himself under the mighty hand of God, and rested satisfied with His grace, without giving himself up to fruitless pain. David possessed a huge name to uphold: God's anointed king, the king of the Israelites and a person after God’s heart. It ought not to be overlooked that David was a human, Adam's descendant, and therefore, he is vulnerable to a sinful conduct. Nevertheless, the Lord is presented to be the ruler over everything which includes sin. He is greater than murder as well as adultery. In addition to that, He does not have to work on these kinds of sins, but in reality, He works through them. In Psalm 51, David states he is going to “teach transgressors your ways, and sinners will turn back to you” as soon as God has shown mercy to him and forgiven his sin. Being so convicted of his despicable condition, David turns to the Lord a humbler person, readier to praise and exalt Him than any other time. Through the sins of David, God is glorified even more, and His merciful nature stands out brilliantly through. The implications in which David has to withstand demonstrate that God is fair and doesn't permit evil to go unpunished. Through every little occasion which resulted in one of the most notorious scandals in the scriptures, God’s nature and real character are what deserves our total attention.

Theological Relevance of 1 Samuel 13 and 15

Within these passages of the Bible, Saul as the Israelite's king is granted a specific order from the Lord (1 Sam. 15:3) to execute regarding the Amalekites. Through Saul's actions, it is evident that a typical lesson that the scripture presents concerns obedience. 1 Samuel 13:5-18 displays what the results are whenever we go against the Lord's command. Saul had been informed to wait and allow the Samuel carry out the task of offering the burnt sacrifices to the Lord but instead, Saul executed it himself. We as Christians, we ought to anticipate the Lord's corrective willpower whenever we go against His command. Our fellowship's quality with God is firmly connected to our compliance to the Lord. The degree of our closeness with the Almighty is conditional. Traditional Israel’s peacefulness, as well as success, was continuously connected to their obedience to the commandments of the Lord. We ought not to be concerned or shocked by the discipline of the Lord, but accept it. Throughout the scriptures, the recurring request from God is for our obedience to Him. He does not care about our right actions or the abilities we may display socially or professionally. All that the Lord truly desires from us is our obedience. He wants us to do whatever He tells us to do since behaviors associated with obedience demonstrate our trust in Him. In fact, trust, as well as faith, are the elements He appreciates most and the attributes He most passionately reacts to, and they equally originate from obedience.

Bibliography

Arnold, Bill T. the NIV Application Commentary: 1 & 2 Samuel. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 2003.

Delitzsch, F. and C.F. Keil. Commentary on the Old Testament: Volume II. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980.

Hartley, John E. New International Biblical Commentary: Genesis. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000.

Lennox, Stephen J. Psalms: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition. Indianapolis, Indiana:

Wesleyan Publishing House, 1999. Metzger, Dr. Bruce M. NRSV Exhaustive Concordance. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1991. Peterson, Eugene H. First and Second

Samuel. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminister John Knox Press, 1999.

Renn, Stephen. Expository dictionary of Bible words : word studies for key English Bible words based on the

Hebrew and Greek texts. (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005).

Walton, John H., Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2000.