Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Samuel 12:15
And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore unto David, and it was very sick.
15 23. The Death of the Child
15. strake ] An archaism for struck. Cp. ch. 2Sa 20:10.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The Lord struck the child with some sudden and dangerous distemper.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15-23. the Lord struck the child . .. and it was very sickThe first visible chastisement inflictedon David appeared on the person of that child which was the evidenceand monument of his guilt. His domestics were surprised at hisconduct, and in explanation of its singularity, it is necessary toremark that the custom in the East is to leave the nearest relativeof a deceased person to the full and undisturbed indulgence of hisgrief, till on the third or fourth day at farthest (Joh11:17). Then the other relatives and friends visit him, invitehim to eat, lead him to a bath, and bring him a change of dress,which is necessary from his having sat or lain on the ground. Thesurprise of David’s servants, then, who had seen his bitter anguishwhile the child was sick, arose apparently from this, that when hefound it was dead, he who had so deeply lamented arose of himselffrom the earth, without waiting for their coming to him, immediatelybathed and anointed himself, instead of appearing as a mourner, andafter worshiping God with solemnity, returned to his wonted repast,without any interposition of others.
2Sa 12:24;2Sa 12:25. SOLOMONIS BORN.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Nathan departed unto his house,…. His own house, which probably was in the city of Jerusalem, having delivered his message, and brought David to a sense of his sin, and declared to him from the Lord the forgiveness of it; yet for the honour of religion, and the stopping of the mouths of blasphemers, the death of the child is threatened and foretold, and then Nathan took his leave of him, having nothing more from the Lord to say to him:
and the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David; for so she was, and not David’s wife, when this child was begotten of her; and, as a mark of God’s displeasure at the sin of adultery, the child was struck with a sore disease by the immediate hand of God:
and it was very sick; even unto death, as the event showed.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
David’s Penitential Grief, and the Birth of Solomon. – 2Sa 12:15. The last-mentioned punishment was inflicted without delay. When Nathan had gone home, the Lord smote the child, so that it became very ill.
2Sa 12:16-17 Then David sought God (in prayer) for the boy, and fasted, and went and lay all night upon the earth. , “he came,” not into the sanctuary of the Lord (2Sa 12:20 is proof to the contrary), but into his house, or into his chamber, to pour out his heart before God, and bend beneath His chastising hand, and refused the appeal of his most confidential servants, who tried to raise him up, and strengthen him with food. “The elders of his house,” judging from Gen 24:2, were the oldest and most confidential servants, “the most highly honoured of his servants, and those who had the greatest influence with him” (Clericus).
2Sa 12:18 On the seventh day, when the child died, the servants of David were afraid to tell him of its death; for they said (to one another), “Behold, while the child was still living, we spoke to him, and he did not hearken to our voice; how should we say to him, now the child is dead, that he should do harm?” (i.e., do himself an injury in the depth of his anguish.)
2Sa 12:19-20 David saw at once what had happened from their whispering conversation, and asked whether the child was dead. When they answered in the affirmative, he rose up from the ground, washed and anointed himself, and changed his clothes; that is to say, he laid aside all the signs of penitential grief and mourning, went into the house of the Lord (the holy tent upon Mount Zion) and worshipped, and then returned to his house, and had food set before him.
2Sa 12:21-22 When his servants expressed their astonishment at all this, David replied, “As long as the boy lived, I fasted and wept: for I thought (said), Perhaps (who knows) the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may remain alive. But now he is dead, why should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.” On this O. v. Gerlach has the following admirable remarks: “In the case of a man whose penitence was so earnest and so deep, the prayer for the preservation of his child must have sprung from some other source than excessive love of any created object. His 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, in the preservation of the child, a proof of divine favour consequent upon the restoration of his fellowship with God. But 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.” This state of mind is fully explained in Ps 51, though his servants could not comprehend it. The form is the imperfect Kal, according to the Chethibh, though the Masoretes have substituted as the Keri , the perfect with vav consec.
2Sa 12:23-25 2Sa 12:23 is paraphrased very correctly by Clericus: “I shall go to the dead, the dead will not come to me.” – 2Sa 12:24. David then comforted his wife Bathsheba, and lived with her again; and she bare a son, whom he called Solomon, the man of peace (cf. 1Ch 22:9). David gave the child this name, because he regarded his birth as a pledge that he should now become a partaker again of peace with God, and not from any reference to the fact that the war with the Ammonites was over, and peace prevailed when he was born; although in all probability Solomon was not born till after the capture of Rabbah and the termination of the Ammonitish war. His birth is mentioned here simply because of its connection with what immediately precedes. The writer adds (in 2Sa 12:24, 2Sa 12:25), “And Jehovah loved him, and sent by the hand (through the medium) of Nathan the prophet; and he called his son Jedidiah (i.e., beloved of Jehovah), for Jehovah’s sake.” The subject to (he sent) cannot be David, because this would not yield any appropriate sense, but must be Jehovah, the subject of the clause immediately preceding. “To send by the hand,” i.e., to make a mission by a person (vid., Exo 4:13, etc.), is equivalent to having a commission performed by a person, or entrusting a person with a commission to another. We learn from what follows, in what the commission with which Jehovah entrusted Nathan consisted: “And he (Nathan, not Jehovah) called his (the boy’s) name Jedidiah.” And if Nathan is the subject to “called,” there is nothing to astonish in the expression “because of the Lord.” The idea is this: Nathan came to David according to Jehovah’s instructions, and gave Solomon the name Jedidiah for Jehovah’s sake, i.e., because Jehovah loved him. The giving of such a name was a practical declaration on the part of Jehovah that He loved Solomon, from which David could and was intended to discern that the Lord had blessed his marriage with Bathsheba. Jedidiah, therefore, was not actually adopted as Solomon’s name.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| David’s Humiliation; Birth of Solomon. | B. C. 1036. |
15 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick. 16 David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night upon the earth. 17 And the elders of his house arose, and went to him, to raise him up from the earth: but he would not, neither did he eat bread with them. 18 And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died. And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead: for they said, Behold, while the child was yet alive, we spake unto him, and he would not hearken unto our voice: how will he then vex himself, if we tell him that the child is dead? 19 But when David saw that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David said unto his servants, Is the child dead? And they said, He is dead. 20 Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the LORD, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat. 21 Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? thou didst fast and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didst rise and eat bread. 22 And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live? 23 But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me. 24 And David comforted Bathsheba his wife, and went in unto her, and lay with her: and she bare a son, and he called his name Solomon: and the LORD loved him. 25 And he sent by the hand of Nathan the prophet; and he called his name Jedidiah, because of the LORD.
Nathan, having delivered his message, staid not at court, but went home, probably to pray for David, to whom he had been preaching. God, in making use of him as an instrument to bring David to repentance, and as the herald both of mercy and judgment, put an honour upon the ministry, and magnified his word above all his name. David named one of his sons by Bath-sheba Nathan, in honour of this prophet (1 Chron. iii. 5), and it was that son of whom Christ, the great prophet, lineally descended, Lu. iii. 31. When Nathan retired, David, it is probable, retired likewise, and penned the 51st Psalm, in which (though he had been assured that his sin was pardoned) he prays earnestly for pardon, and greatly laments his sin; for then will true penitents be ashamed of what they have done when God is pacified towards them, Ezek. xvi. 63.
Here is, I. The child’s illness: The Lord struck it, and it was very sick, perhaps with convulsions, or some other dreadful distemper, v. 15. The diseases and death of infants that have not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, especially as they are sometimes sadly circumstanced, are sensible proofs of the original sin in which they are conceived.
II. David’s humiliation under this token of God’s displeasure, and the intercession he made with God for the life of the child (2Sa 12:16; 2Sa 12:17): He fasted, and lay all night upon the earth, and would not suffer any of his attendants either to feed him or help him up. This was an evidence of the truth of his repentance. For, 1. Hereby it appeared that he was willing to bear the shame of his sin, to have it ever before him, and to be continually upbraided with it; for this child would be a continual memorandum of it, both to himself and others, if he lived: and therefore he was so far from desiring its death, as most in such circumstances do, that he prayed earnestly for its life. True penitents patiently bear the reproach of their youth, and of their youthful lusts, Jer. xxxi. 19. 2. A very tender compassionate spirit appeared in this, and great humanity, above what is commonly found in men, especially men of war, towards little children, even their own; and this was another sign of a broken contrite spirit. Those that are penitent will be pitiful. 3. He discovered, in this, a great concern for another world, which is an evidence of repentance. Nathan had told him that certainly the child should die; yet, while it is in the reach of prayer, he earnestly intercedes with God for it, chiefly (as we may suppose) that its soul might be safe and happy in another world, and that his sin might not come against the child, and that it might not fare the worse for that in the future state. 4. He discovered, in this, a holy dread of God and of his displeasure. He deprecated the death of the child chiefly as it was a token of God’s anger against him and his house, and was inflicted in performance of a threatening; therefore he prayed thus earnestly that, if it were the will of God, the child might live, because that would be to him a token of God’s being reconciled to him. Lord, chasten me not in thy hot displeasure. Ps. vi. 1.
III. The death of the child: It died on the seventh day (v. 18), when it was seven days old, and therefore not circumcised, which David might perhaps interpret as a further token of God’s displeasure, that it died before it was brought under the seal of the covenant; yet he does not therefore doubt of its being happy for the benefits of the covenant do not depend upon the seals. David’s servants, judging of him by themselves, were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, concluding that then he would disquiet himself most of all; so that he knew not till he asked, v. 19.
IV. David’s wonderful calmness and composure of mind when he understood the child was dead. Observe,
1. What he did. (1.) He laid aside the expressions of his sorrow, washed and anointed himself, and called for clean linen, that he might decently appear before God in his house. (2.) He went up to the tabernacle and worshipped, like Job when he heard of the death of his children. He went to acknowledge the hand of God in the affliction, and to humble himself under it, and to submit to his holy will in it, to thank God that he himself was spared and his sin pardoned, and to pray that God would not proceed in his controversy with him, nor stir up all his wrath. Is any afflicted? Let him pray. Weeping must never hinder worshipping. (3.) Then he went to his own house and refreshed himself, as one who found benefit by his religion in the day of his affliction; for, having worshipped, he did eat, and his countenance was no more sad.
2. The reason he gave for what he did. His servants thought it strange that he should afflict himself so for the sickness of the child and yet take the death of it so easily, and asked him the reason of it (v. 21), in answer to which he gives this plain account of his conduct, (1.) That while the child was alive he thought it his duty to importune the divine favour towards it, v. 22. Nathan had indeed said the child should die, but, for aught that he knew, the threatening might be conditional, as that concerning Hezekiah: upon his great humiliation and earnest prayer, he that had so often heard the voice of his weeping might be pleased to reverse the sentence, and spare the child: Who can tell whether God will yet be gracious to me? God gives us leave to be earnest with him in prayer for particular blessings, from a confidence in his power and general mercy, though we have no particular promise to build upon: we cannot be sure, yet let us pray, for who can tell but God will be gracious to us, in this or that particular? When our relations and friends have fallen sick, the prayer of faith has prevailed much; while there is life there is hope, and, while there is hope, there is room for prayer. (2.) That now the child was dead he thought it as much his duty to be satisfied in the divine disposal concerning it (v. 23): Now, wherefore should I fast? Two things checked his grief:– [1.] I cannot bring him back again; and again, He shall not return to me. Those that are dead are out of the reach of prayer; nor can our tears profit them. We can neither weep nor pray them back to this life. Wherefore then should we fast? To what purpose is this waste? Yet David fasted and wept for Jonathan when he was dead, in honour to him. [2.] I shall go to him. First, To him to the grave. Note, The consideration of our own death should moderate our sorrow at the death of our relations. It is the common lot; instead of mourning for their death, we should think of our own: and, whatever loss we have of them now, we shall die shortly, and go to them. Secondly, To him to heaven, to a state of blessedness, which even the Old Testament saints had some expectation of. Godly parents have great reason to hope concerning their children that die in infancy that it is well with their souls in the other world; for the promise is to us and to our seed, which shall be performed to those that do not put a bar in their own door, as infants do not. Favores sunt ampliandi–Favours received should produce the hope of more. God calls those his children that are born unto him; and, if they be his, he will save them. This may comfort us when our children are removed from us by death, they are better provided for, both in work and wealth, than they could have been in this world. We shall be with them shortly, to part no more.
V. The birth of Solomon. Though David’s marrying Bath-sheba had displeased the Lord, yet he was not therefore commanded to divorce her; so far from this that God gave him that son by her on whom the covenant of royalty should be entailed. Bath-sheba, no doubt, was greatly afflicted with the sense of her sin and the tokens of God’s displeasure. But, God having restored to David the joys of his salvation, he comforted her with the same comforts with which he himself was comforted of God (v. 24): He comforted Bath-sheba. And both he and she had reason to be comforted in the tokens of God’s reconciliation to them, 1. Inasmuch as, by his providence, he gave them a son, not as the former, who was given in anger and taken away in wrath, but a child graciously given, and written among the living in Jerusalem. They called him Solomon–peaceful, because his birth was a token of God’s being at peace with them, because of the prosperity which was entailed upon him, and because he was to be a type of Christ, the prince of peace. God had removed one son from them, but now gave them another instead of him, like Seth instead of Abel, Gen. iv. 25. Thus God often balances the griefs of his people with comforts in the same thing wherein he hath afflicted them, setting the one over-against the other. David had very patiently submitted to the will of God in the death of the other child, and now God made up the loss of that, abundantly to his advantage, in the birth of this. The way to have our creature-comforts either continued or restored, or the loss of them made up some other way, is cheerfully to resign them to God. 2. Inasmuch as, by his grace, he particularly owned and favoured that son: The Lord loved him (2Sa 12:24; 2Sa 12:25), ordered him, by the prophet Nathan, to be called Jedidiah–Beloved of the Lord: though a seed of evil-doers (for such David and Bath-sheba were), yet so well ordered was the covenant, and the crown entailed by it, that it took away all attainders and corruption of blood, signifying that those who were by nature children of wrath and disobedience should, by the covenant of grace, not only be reconciled, but made favourites. And, in this name, he typified Jesus Christ, that blessed Jedidiah, the son of God’s love, concerning whom God declared again and again, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
David’s First Payment, vs. 15-25
Nathan’s task finished he returned to his home, and soon after the child of David and Bathsheba fell gravely ill. Though the Lord had said that the child would die David knew that the Lord was merciful. He had allowed David to live, though guilty of both adultery and murder, because he had confessed his sin. He hoped that he might, through prayer and fasting, succeed in invoking the same mercy on behalf of the little child. He lay constantly on the ground imploring the Lord to spare the baby. But it was not to be; David would pay his first chastisement in the loss of the baby boy.
Why would God take the little child for David’s sin? He had said by Nathan, that it was because David had given great occasion to the Lord’s enemies to blaspheme. Had the child grown up it would have been with a stigma on him, perhaps an object of shame because of his adulterous conception. Even worse, it would have appeared that David could get by with such a sin without chastisement, for the living son would be a seeming manifestation of it. It may very well be that, by the Lord taking the child, he did not grow up an ungodly man like so many other sons of David did. Whatever it may have been, God knew best, and that is what happened.
All David’s servants and the elders of his council came to him, trying to raise him from the ground, but he refused. They became concerned for his sanity. On the seventh day the baby died, but they were afraid to tell David for the shock he might suffer. When, however, he saw their whispering, he questioned them and learned that the child had died. He then arose, cleaned up, and dressed and went to the house of the Lord to worship. This is a good example of David’s resignation to the Lord’s will, setting a good example for men today to follow in their sorrows and material losses.
When David returned to his house he had them set the table for him, and he ate. The servants marveled that he would sorrow so while the baby lived, but be calm and resigned when the child had died. David answered with words of eternal truth and worth; there was hope while the baby was alive, but nothing more could be done when it had died. David had confidence of reunion with him when he died, but not before. His words teach that 1) there is conscious abode of the dead in afterlife; 2) those who die in Christ may be reunited with loved ones who have gone before; 3) souls of the innocent have their sins covered in the Lord.
David then went to comfort Bathsheba She must also have been very distraught at the illness and loss of her baby, and David did the part of a godly husband in going to her. It is interesting to note here that Bathsheba is called the wife of David for the first time. Before David got forgiveness she was called the wife of Uriah, the Scriptures even calling the baby the child of the wife of Uriah (verse 15). God blessed the couple now with another baby son, whom David named Solomon (meaning “peaceable”), “and the Lord loved him.” David sent the word to Nathan, the prophet, who acknowledged the Lord’s blessing on the child by calling him Jedidiah, which means “Beloved of the Lord.”
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
DEATH OF THE CHILD OF DAVID AND BATHSHEBA, 2Sa 12:15-23.
There is no section of Old Testament history more graphically and touchingly worded than this. Every verse presents a vivid picture. We seem to see the infant child wracked with pain and struck with death. (15.) The conscience-smitten king flies to his chamber, and spends seven days and nights in fasting and in tears, much of the time prostrate upon the floor, and pouring out his groanings all night to God, (16;) his most confidential advisers try to lift him up and console him, but he will not be comforted, (17.) At length the child dies, but they fear to tell the king, lest his frenzy know no control, and, lingering in the distance, they whisper to each other with mingled sorrow and amazement, (18, 19;) but as soon as he learns of his death he dries up his tears, and enters the sanctuary, and worships God, (20.) The servants marvel, but he explains his conduct in words most tenderly expressive of his faith in God and immortality.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
15. The Lord struck the child With some fatal disease which, on the seventh day, resulted in death.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The Son Born Of Adultery Dies As YHWH Had Said (12:15b-23).
The first consequence of David’s sin was to be that the son born of his adultery would die. While it would be clear to all at the time that this was YHWH’s judgment on David, we do not need to see in this an indication that YHWH personally struck the child down in a direct act of judgment which would not otherwise have taken place. In fact we may probably presume that this death would actually have taken place in the natural course of events, for the writer in Samuel takes all natural events as resulting from YHWH’s activity as much as any other kind of events. To him YHWH had total control over all events in history which he saw as proceeding from His hand, no matter who or what was naturally responsible for it. All was under the sovereignty of God, even the nations who invaded Israel. Thus if anything happened the writer acknowledged that YHWH had done it. (The prophets had the same idea. ‘Shall evil come on a city, and YHWH has not done it?’ – Amo 3:6; compare also Isa 10:5-7 and often). For example, in 2 Samuel 24 it was in the writer’s view YHWH Who was said to have moved David to number Israel, whereas in 1Ch 21:1 it was the Chronicler’s view that it was Satan. Both were, in fact, correct, but as seen from differing points of view. To the writer of Samuel anything that Satan did could only have occurred because YHWH permitted it, because YHWH is over all. To him YHWH is the cause of all that is and all that happens. He knows no second causes. The Chronicler sees the second cause. (The third cause was David’s renewed arrogance which was always an inevitable danger of greatness. If you would seek to be holy, do not seek to be great).
However, that the death of his son meant a great deal to David comes out in that he fasted and prayed and wept in the hope of persuading YHWH to keep the child from dying. He was genuinely concerned. But once the child had died he recognised that that was YHWH’s will and therefore humbly submitted himself to that will and accepted His punishment.
Analysis.
a
b David therefore besought God for the child, and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night on the earth (2Sa 12:16).
c And the elders of his house arose, and stood beside him, to raise him up from the earth, but he would not, nor did he eat bread with them (2Sa 12:17).
d And it came about on the seventh day, that the child died. And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead, for they said, “See, while the child was yet alive, we spoke to him, and he did not listen to our voice. How much will he then vex himself, if we tell him that the child is dead!” (2Sa 12:18).
e But when David saw that his servants were whispering together, David perceived that the child was dead, and David said to his servants, “Is the child dead?” And they said, “He is dead” (2Sa 12:19).
d Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his clothing, and he came into the house of YHWH, and worshipped. Then he came to his own house, and when he required it, they set bread before him, and he ate (2Sa 12:20).’
c Then his servants said to him, “What thing is this that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child, while it was alive, but when the child was dead, you rose and ate food” (2Sa 12:21).
b And he said, “While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, ‘Who knows whether YHWH will not be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ ” (2Sa 12:22).
a “But now he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me” (2Sa 12:23).
Note that in ‘a’ YHWH struck the child and he was very ill, and in the parallel the child was dead and would not return. In ‘b’ David prayed and fasted all night, and in the parallel he said that he had prayed and fasted hoping that the child may yet live. In ‘c’ the elders of his house tried to assist him and persuade him to eat, and in the parallel his servants wondered that he ate food now that the child was dead. In ‘d’ his servants feared that he would vex himself on knowing that the child was dead, while in the parallel in contrast he does the opposite. Centrally in ‘e’ it is confirmed that the child had died.
2Sa 12:15 b ( e-Sword Note: For commentary on 12:15a, see the commentary on 2Sa 12:14)
‘And YHWH struck the child which Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it was very ill.’
As mentioned above any natural illness that struck the child would, to the writer and to those who surrounded David, have been seen as being from the hand of YHWH. Thus we need not see here a positive act of YHWH in striking down a healthy baby, while at the same time we can see it as an act of judgment. We may understand that the baby was born sickly and weak, which explains why it was very ill, and that what YHWH refrained from doing was hearing the prayer for healing. But to those living at that day it would be quite clear that ‘YHWH had smitten the baby’. It was obvious, for the baby was ‘smitten’ with illness and YHWH was to be seen as overall responsible for all that happened.
In the same way we may ourselves see certain events as indicating God’s judgment on us, while at the same time recognising that those events happen within the natural course of events. God’s judgments and natural happenings are often to be seen as intertwined. The earthquake may occur naturally, but what it signifies to us may well be that it is a sign of the judgment of God, for God has built His judgments into creation.
2Sa 12:16
‘ David therefore besought God for the child, and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night on the earth.’
Recognising that the baby might die from its illness David went before YHWH and pleaded for the child’s life. And to that end he fasted, and prayed all night, lying on the earth before God. He was no longer the arrogant king, but the humble suppliant.
2Sa 12:17
‘ And the elders of his house arose, and stood beside him, to raise him up from the earth, but he would not, nor did he eat bread with them.’
The leading servants in the household came to him to try to persuade him to rise up and eat some food, but he refused to do either and continued on in his attitude of prayer. He would not desist while the baby was alive and there was hope.
“The elders of his house.” These would be the older and wiser men among his servants who had known him for many years and were his trusted servants. They were probably the only ones who dared to approach David at such a time.
2Sa 12:18
‘ And it came about on the seventh day, that the child died. And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead, for they said, “See, while the child was yet alive, we spoke to him, and he did not listen to our voice. How much will he then vex himself, if we tell him that the child is dead!” ’
When therefore, after seven days, the baby died the servants were afraid to tell David because of what they feared that the news might do to him. In their view, as he had not listened to him while the baby was alive, he would be so distraught that the baby was dead he would be even less likely to listen to them. So they quietly discussed the matter among themselves, baffled as to what to do, and concerned for David’s reaction.
2Sa 12:19
‘ But when David saw that his servants were whispering together, David perceived that the child was dead, and David said to his servants, “Is the child dead?” And they said, “He is dead.” ’
David, however, saw them whispering together, and probably saw them looking at him in a worried way, and it made him realise that it could only mean one thing, and that was that the baby was dead. And so he asked them straightly, ‘Is the baby dead?’ to which they replied, ‘Yes, he is dead.’
2Sa 12:20
‘ Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his clothing, and he came into the house of YHWH, and worshipped. Then he came to his own house, and when he required it, they set bread before him, and he ate.’
Then to their surprise instead of being so distraught that he collapsed, he arose, washed and anointed himself, changed his clothing and went into the house of YHWH and worshipped. Then he returned to his house, and when he required it they gave him food and he ate. To their great surprise he was behaving as though nothing had happened.
2Sa 12:21
‘ Then his servants said to him, “What thing is this that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child, while it was alive, but when the child was dead, you rose and ate food.” ’
His servants were amazed. To them it all seemed the wrong way round. In their view he should have fasted and wept when the baby died. So they asked him why it was that he had fasted and wept for the baby while it was still alive, but then arose and ate food when he heard that it was dead.
2Sa 12:22-23
‘ And he said, “While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept, for I said, ‘Who knows whether YHWH will not be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ But now he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” ’
David’s reply was that while the baby had been alive he had hoped by his fasting and praying and weeping to cause YHWH to reveal His goodness and compassion towards him by allowing the baby to live. But once the baby had died that had lost its point. He knew then what YHWH’s will was. So what was the use of praying and fasting further? For he knew that he could not bring him back again by prayer. And he was then sure that while one day he would go to be with the baby, there was no way in which the baby would return to him on earth. He was simply referring to the grave, not to what lay beyond it. He would go to the grave just as his son had, but his son would not emerge from the grave (unlike his Greater Son Who would do just that).
It is a reminder that to David, once he was in his right mind, prayer was a meaningful exercise which he saw as being effective, not just a ritual to be gone through at the recognised times.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Death of David’s Child
v. 15. And Nathan, v. 16. David, therefore, besought God for the child, v. 17. And the elders of his house, v. 18. And it came to pass on the seventh day that the child died, v. 19. But when David saw that his servants whispered, v. 20. Then David arose from the earth, and washed and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the Lord, v. 21. Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? v. 22. And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, v. 23. But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? Can I bring him back again? v. 24. And David comforted Bathsheba, his wife, v. 25. And He,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
(15) And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.
The Reader should observe how the conference broke off abruptly. Nathan had executed his commission; and now left the monarch to his own reflections, bitter indeed as they must have been. He stayed not to soften what he had said; nor to soothe David under his trouble. Probably, as a good man, he retired to his house to pray for David. Here let ministers learn, after that they have executed their commission, and dealt faithfully with sinners, to retire to seek a blessing on their ministry from him who alone can render their labours effectual. It is more than probable, that when Nathan went to his house, David retired to his chamber, and poured out his soul before the Lord in the devout and penitential expressions which we find penned in Psa 51 : the title of it saith as much; that it was when Nathan the prophet came unto him after he had gone in unto Bath-sheba. It would swell the commentary to a length inadmissible, to point out the numberless breathings of a soul truly awakened to a sense of sin and deprecating the divine displeasure, which that Psalm contains. I must therefore suppress what otherwise I should delight to enlarge upon. But there is one circumstance in it which is not perhaps so generally noticed as it ought; and yet it is the very one which, of all others, testifies in the loudest strains the genuine repentance of David for his foul transactions; namely, that as the title of the Psalm also expresses it, it was directed To the chief Musician; perhaps David sent it to the singers in the temple service, that it might be set to music, and constantly sung when David attended the worship of the Lord, as a standing memorial of his unfeigned humiliation and sorrow for his crimes; and that he was constantly looking up to God for the pardon of them. Now, Reader, as oft as you think of David’s scandalous fall, think also of his unequalled humility. Figure to yourself the king of Israel not only looking up to God in secret for pardon, but causing all the subjects in his kingdom to know what a sinner he had been, and calling upon the Lord in public to have mercy upon him. Surely! it affords the most complete view that any history ever afforded of real, true, and genuine repentance. See also Luk 22:61-62 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
2Sa 12:15 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.
Ver. 15. And the Lord struck the child. ] As he might justly do, both for the corruption of nature wherein it was conceived Rom 5:14 – infants are no innocents – and for that children are a part of their parents, they are their goods.
And it was very sick.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Accepting the Lords Judgment
2Sa 12:15-31
When Nathan had gone, David beat out his brief confession into Psa 51:1-19. He knew that he was clean, because purged with hyssop, Exo 12:22; that he was whiter than snow, because the hand of the Redeemer had touched him, and the joy of Gods salvation had been restored. And now he bowed himself before the train of evil consequences that must ensue. Sin may be forgiven, but the Father must needs chasten his child.
The little babe died. It cuts us to the quick when innocent children suffer for our wrong-doing. Two years after, Davids sin was repeated by one of his sons, while another sought to dispossess his father of the throne. In Amnons offense David beheld the features of his own passion, and in Absaloms revenge, his own blood-guiltiness. Psa 41:1-13; Psa 55:1-23 are supposed to record his sufferings during those dreary years, when it seemed as if the sunshine had passed forever from his life. The wonder is that he treated Rabbah so harshly; but it may be, as some think, that its fate was decided during the months which preceded his confession, when the misery of his soul made him petulant and exacting.
For Review Questions, see the e-Sword Book Comments.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
struck the child: Deu 32:39, 1Sa 25:38, 1Sa 26:10, 2Ki 15:5, 2Ch 13:20, Psa 104:29, Act 12:23
Reciprocal: 1Ki 14:1 – the son Mar 5:23 – besought
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Sa 12:15-16. The Lord struck the child With some sudden and dangerous distemper. David besought God for the child Supposing the threatening might be conditional, and so the execution of it prevented by prayer. And went in Namely, into his closet to pray, solitarily and earnestly. Or, perhaps, into the sanctuary, where the ark of God was; where he lay all night on the earth Humbling himself, mourning, repenting, weeping, praying, with all the agonies of the most bitter grief.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The death of one child and the birth of another 12:15b-25
Why did God take the life of this child since its parents sinned?
"That the child should be punished for what David did seems wrong. We need to remind ourselves, however, that even today innocent children suffer from the things their parents do. The more pointed question deals with whether God should be credited with the cause of the suffering. I once sat at the funeral of a child who had been accidentally killed by a drunk man riding through the community on a motorcycle. In the funeral message the minister tried to convince those of us present that God had a purpose in the child’s death as though it were something God had planned. I was revolted by what he said because he took an evil event and made God the cause. In understanding Nathan’s interpretation of the child’s illness we need to separate the physical cause and the religious interpretation or application. Whatever the child’s illness, both Nathan and David saw it as connected with David’s sin and raised no questions about it as we do." [Note: Kenneth L. Chafin, 1, 2 Samuel, p. 309.]
"When David slept with the woman and created new life, the woman did not belong to him but to Uriah. The child cannot belong to David. He cannot enrich himself through his sin, and in a sense, justice is done to Uriah." [Note: Vogels, p. 251.]
David prayed for the child’s recovery, lying on the ground as Uriah had previously slept (2Sa 11:9; 2Sa 11:11). However when God took its life, David knew the time for praying was over. Praying for the dead finds no support in this passage or anywhere else in Scripture. David’s servants apparently believed he would become hysterical with grief when he learned the child had died (2Sa 12:19). The king was probably referring to the grave rather than to heaven when he said, "I shall go to him . . ." (2Sa 12:23). In the context the issue was the inevitability of death, not what happens after death. The child could not come back to life, but David would someday join him in death. Scripture is silent on the eternal state of dead infants, but we can find great comfort in knowing that the Judge of all the earth will do right (Gen 18:25).
The birth of David and Bathsheba’s second son, Solomon (whose name comes from the Hebrew word shalom, peace), was a blessing from the Lord. It demonstrates that God’s grace is greater than all our sins. [Note: Merrill, "2 Samuel," in The Old . . ., p. 236.] Solomon had another name, Jedidiah (lit. beloved of Yahweh). The former was perhaps a throne name that David gave him to anticipate his reigning as king. [Note: Shemaryahu Talmon, King, Cult, and Calendar in Ancient Israel: Collected Studies, p. 152.] It may indicate that David felt that God was now at peace with him. [Note: NET Bible note on 2Sa 12:24.] Solomon was born about 991 B.C. The fact that God allowed him to live and even made him David’s successor on the throne is testimony to God’s great grace to David (cf. Rom 5:20). The statement, "Now the Lord loved him," (2Sa 12:24) is the Hebrew way of saying the Lord chose him. [Note: Heater, p. 145. Cf. Malachi 1:2-3.]