Was King David a good example for Christians?

[okay]

Not at all.
Not according to anything God the Creator ever Said, Says, or even hinted at.
Quite contrary to what you post, she was blessed beyond almost all women , if not all women, today even, as well as then.

So the collective teachings of Christ and Paul and other biblical writers doesn’t even hint to you that forcing a woman to sleep with her husband’s murderer over and over and over again, bear his children and be one of his multitude of wives would be a sin?

Just … wow.

 

[Vanellus]

No.

The question was only for the illustration of the use of tenses.

 

[Aaron112]

David lived in the past.
e.g. was the life Socrates led a good example for philosophers today?

The Creator HImself Stated David was/is?/ a man after The Creator's Own Heart (i.e. faithful and truthful, seeking the same as the Creator Desires)
as we all should be. (to be alive)

So King David was/is a good example for the Faithful ones abiding in Jesus.

Socrates was not a good example for anyone faithful to truth.

 

[Fervent]

In some ways, David serves as an excellent example of faith. But he also lived in a very different historical context, and was subject to temptations well beyond the average Christian so not everything he did serves as a pattern. We can't judge historical people by modern standards, but must judge them according to their historical context. David was a man who showed mercy to his enemies and while he engaged in violence it was out of necessity rather than as part of his person. In light of Christ, David's shadow stands out in bright contrast so we may appreciate both his virtues and his failings.

 

[Guojing]

When the king sends messengers to fetch her what choice did Bathsheba have? There may have been no need to hold a knife to her throat but that is not the same as Bathsheba having a free choice in the matter.

When a woman choose to shower at a place where King David could see, what do you think she was thinking?

 

[Bobber]

To me that is a modern, or more modern, way, a wrong way, of thinking that was not
at the time of King David et al.

Oh I think it probably was. Servants of Kings would always like to know the King is fair and honorable in his dealings. At least that's what I think.

 

[okay]

When a woman choose to shower at a place where King David could see, what do you think she was thinking?

We don’t know where she was exactly - just that David could see her from at least one spot on his roof. We don’t know what kind of washing she was performing - ritual or routine? We also don’t know how exposed she was. There is a famous painting by Rembrandt that depicts her as naked, but could it have been different? I don’t think we know for sure whether she was breaking standard modesty norms (please correct me if that is wrong). Given the lack of specifics in the text it is impossible to guess what she might have been thinking.

One thing we do know is that David is the only one who is called out in the text for sinning in this episode.

 

[Guojing]

We don’t know where she was exactly - just that David could see her from at least one spot on his roof. We don’t know what kind of washing she was performing - ritual or routine? We also don’t know how exposed she was. There is a famous painting by Rembrandt that depicts her as naked, but could it have been different? I don’t think we know for sure whether she was breaking standard modesty norms (please correct me if that is wrong). Given the lack of specifics in the text it is impossible to guess what she might have been thinking.

One thing we do know is that David is the only one who is called out in the text for sinning in this episode.

She was not "unwilling" in the sexual act afterwards, that is my point.

Would you agree?

 

[Vanellus]

Then David sent messengers to get her, and when she came to him, he slept with her. (Now she had just purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then she returned home. 5And the woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.”

There's no indication about willingness or unwillingness in the actual sexual act. But what choice had she but to go with the messengers who may or may not have told her the reason.

 

[Guojing]

Then David sent messengers to get her, and when she came to him, he slept with her. (Now she had just purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then she returned home. 5And the woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.”

There's no indication about willingness or unwillingness in the actual sexual act. But what choice had she but to go with the messengers who may or may not have told her the reason.

Earlier on, I have posed this question to you "When a woman choose to shower at a place where King David could see, what do you think she was thinking?"

Do I need to actually prove to you that that action was not done unwillingly?

 

[Vanellus]

Earlier on, I have posed this question to you "When a woman choose to shower at a place where King David could see, what do you think she was thinking?"

Do I need to actually prove to you that that action was not done unwillingly?

okay responded to your question about the "bathing" and then you responded by discussing the sexual act. So what is your actual point: the bathing or the sexual act? When I wrote about Bathsheba being sent for you then asked about the bathing. How about actually responding to what is said in a post rather than posing a different question? What is your one point? How about deciding what that is and posing it?

 

[Guojing]

okay responded to your question about the "bathing" and then you responded by discussing the sexual act. So what is your actual point: the bathing or the sexual act? When I wrote about Bathsheba being sent for you then asked about the bathing. How about actually responding to what is said in a post rather than posing a different question? What is your one point? How about deciding what that is and posing it?

My point is that Bathsheba was not unwilling in the sexual act afterwards.

 

[Vanellus]

My point is that Bathsheba was not unwilling in the sexual act afterwards.

Answered in post #50

 

[Aaron112]

Maybe we can take this as exaggeration by the women of Israel

I think that would be a false premise, and if it is, then anything built on that/ following that, would not be helpful.

 

[Vanellus]

I think that would be a false premise, and if it is, then anything built on that/ following that, would not be helpful.

There is no evidence in the Bible that David had killed 10,000 people at the time this was sung.

 

[Aaron112]

There is no evidence in the Bible that David had killed 10,000 people at the time this was sung.

No evidence except Scripture perhaps.
Other nations/ witnesses may also indicate this.

 

[Vanellus]

No evidence except Scripture perhaps.
Other nations/ witnesses may also indicate this.

Do you think that the women exaggerating contradicts inerrancy? Where is the Bible evidence that David had personally killed tens of thousands and Saul had personally killed thousands before this was sung.

 

[splish- splash]

Everything about David's life was prophetic.

He indeed acted as a type of Christ. It may be difficult to figure out how at first because of his sometimes crooked ways. But studying God's word everytime, will eventually reveal, how David was a type of Christ.

An example would be, his life as a Shepherd boy when he cared for his father's sheep. That part would symbolise Christ as our shepherd, caring for His father's sheep. So that would mean his father Jesse, acted as a type of God the Father.

 

[splish- splash]

& by the way, King David's shenanigans also had something to preach about Christ somehow.

It wasn't just his good side, that brought out Christ but even his badside too .

 

[RDKirk]

It might include that. But I am very skeptical that Bathsheba was a willing participant. She did not need to be in order for David to do whatever he wanted to her.

Of course David wanted Uriah to go home and sleep with Bathsheba in the hopes that he and others would assume the baby was conceived while he was home from war. Clearly that concern trumped the one about her telling Uriah about it. Given how hard it is for victims of sexual assault to speak up even today, I am guessing that David wasn’t so worried about that. By the way, the “wash your feet” language that David uses over and over when speaking to Uriah was a euphemism for having sex, or at least that is what I was taught by a Jewish Studies professor.

When David was on the run from Saul, he asked the high priest for the outdated altar showbread. David asserted that he never allowed his men to have sexual intercourse with their wives while at war. Uriah, who had been one of David's "Mighty Men" even then, probably thought the king was testing him by urging him to go in to Bathsheba.

But David's reign posed many problems. It was because of his arrogance that Israel suffered the greatest tragedy up to the Captivity, when David demanded a count of the troops (against the advice of his officers). That cost them more lives than had ever been lost in all their wars combined to that point.

David's continual inability to manage his own family (observed by those around him and noted as failures by scripture) led to successive civil wars...more lives lost uselessly. Even into his old age, David was still making blatant errors that cost lives.

David was a good warrior, but he was an overall lousy king.

Although, to be honest, every Israelite king made critical mistakes that led to the Captivity. Even the "good" kings like Hezikiah and Josiah made critical (if unintentional) errors leading to the Captivity. I think that's a point God intends us to glean from the Old Testament.