Year 1, Day 323: 2 Samuel 6

This is a great passage for debate.  We have several things happening in this chapter, and most of them are quite controversial.  Was it necessary for Uzzah to die even though his intent was good?  Was Michal right to be angry with David?  Was it right for her to remain childless for the rest of her life because of this argument between her and David?

Uzzah

Let’s deal with Uzzah’s death first.  This story has always bothered me because I find so much of David’s reaction to make sense.  David wants to bring the Ark to Jerusalem, so he has it transported.  In the transporting process the cart falters because the oxen stumble.  Uzaah touches the Ark and dies immediately.  David becomes angry and then afraid – turning the Ark aside to the house of another.  It all makes perfect sense.

Well, it makes sense to me until I stop looking at it with human eyes and begin to look at it anew with the eyes of God.  Let’s tell the story again, this time from God’s perspective.  This should be quite revealing.

David wants the Ark in Jerusalem because it is a powerful connection to a powerful God.  David doesn’t consult with God about where God wants the Ark to reside. David doesn’t consult with God about how to move the Ark.  David doesn’t consult with God period.  David goes and imitates the way the Philistines transported the Ark by putting it in a cart in spite of numerous Biblical teachings that the Ark is to be transported by the sons of Kohath (Num. 3:27–31; 4:15; 7:9; 10:21).  Had the Levites been carrying the Ark, the oxen would not have stumbled and Uzzah would not have touched the Ark.  David’s ignorance of the Word of God led him down this path of mistake after mistake, and this trail of mistakes is what put Uzzah in the path of God’s wrath.

What can we learn from this?  It is important to know God’s Word so that we can know God’s ways.  We need not do everything in the same manner all the time, but we must follow the leading of the Holy Spirit often felt through the Word of God.  Without knowing God’s Word we stumble in making choices that seem rational to us but are against the wisdom of the Lord.

Ark in the House of Another

For three months the Ark remained away from David.  Although we don’t know this for certain, no doubt this three months time period allowed David to be angry, then fearful, and likely repentant.  We know that David had a pattern of understanding himself as wrong and being repentant, so it fits his character that this process should be followed here.  It is also likely that David consulted with the Word of God in the meantime because we see a very important change in David when he brings up the Ark a second time – and remember that change away from wrongdoing and into righteousness is a sign of repentance. 

What is the change?  We see that people bear the Ark as God’s Word addresses.  No longer does David follow the Philistine means of moving the Ark in a cart.  Now David has found the right means – likely from reviewing the Word of God.  This is the power of the Word of God: it brings unrighteous behavior into righteous behavior.  Of course, the seeker must be willing to hear the truth of God’s Word and willing to obey or else God’s Word will not take root in the person.

Michal

In the space remaining, let’s deal with Michal.  As the Ark is coming up to Jerusalem David offers sacrifices and dances before the Lord.*  Michal is embarrassed to see David behave this way, and I personally think that Michal’s accusations are an exaggeration of David’s behavior.  We know that David was wearing an ephod, and it was the priestly practice to wear undergarments underneath their ephod.   So I am skeptical as to the accuracy of Michal’s accusation in light of how God’s Word speaks about the moment of worship.

Furthermore, I am lead to this skepticism because of Michal’s attitude towards the honoring of the Lord.  Michal doesn’t attend the worship of the Lord, although in her accusation she makes it clear that other women do – servants even!  Michal looks out from a window as one desiring to know what is happening but not one desiring to be a part of the worship. 

I think it is possible that in Saul’s house Michal learned the worship of the Canaanite gods.  This makes 2 Samuel 6:16 read that she despised David not so much because of the dancing but because he was bringing the God of the Hebrew people into her presence.  Furthermore, notice that Michal focuses on David before the people, but it is David who reminds Michal that it was actually him dancing before God! 

Given everything that transpires in this passage, I think this is quite a likely reading of this chapter.  Michal was upset about the transition of power from Ba’al whom she worshipped (and was worshipped by the Jebusites – being Canaanites) to the God of the Hebrew people.  As further proof, don’t forget the story from 1 Samuel 19 where Michal covers up for David by taking an idol and covers it with goat hair and places it in David’s bed so that Saul’s men think it is David.  Clearly Michal had experience with the gods of the Canaanite people. Also, keep in mind that her brother was Ishbosheth, also known as Ishbaal – which means “man of Ba’al.”

I think back to the words I wrote yesterday.  We don’t get to enjoy victories and spiritual experiences long before being dragged down to reality.  Here David no sooner finishes bringing in the Ark of the Lord to his city and has a wonderful worship when he is immediately embroiled in an argument with one of his wives.  No, we don’t get to enjoy the spiritual moments for long at all, do we?

So, is it right for her to remain childless all her days?  The Bible remains silent on the rationale, but given everything that I’ve said here it is not unreasonable to think that a rift occurred here that affected marital relations.  Michal and David never had a relationship built on love, and now it is likely that their choice in gods has irrevocably come between them.  Michal’s barrenness has little to do with punishment and more to do with the consequences of her choices.  This speaks volumes to me about thinking through the choices we make and ensuring that we are ready to deal with the consequences.

<>< 

*As an aside, some may wonder how it is that a man from the tribe of Judah can make sacrifices and act as a priest without incurring God’s wrath.  In my research of this passage I have found an answer.  The possible answer begins with Genesis 14:18 where we hear about Melchizedek – an ancient king of Salem (Jerusalem) who was a high priest of God.  When David conquers Jerusalem, it is not out of the question to think that he takes on the titles of those who came before him.  Thus, in a manner of speaking we can say that David is a priest because of the order of Melchizedek as king of Jerusalem, but not because he is a Levite (and specifically from the lineage of Aaron).  There are some really cool New Testament implications to this line of thinking that I’ll save for another space.