Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.
14Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.
15And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.…
And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died. — 2 Samuel 12:13-15, 18a
I understand that it was a convention in Hebrew literature to say that God did things that He did not literally or at least directly do. Although I do not remember all of the exact data that I used to use in order to support this, it can be seen in Psalm 88, for example, where, in the first part of it, a man is praying that God relieve him of his illness, and, in the second part of it, says that God gave him the illness. It’s also seen in Ezekiel 20, where God says that He is the one that caused the Israelites to practice paganism and their other sins (which the entire book of Ezekiel, and much of the rest of the Old Testament is dedicated to condemning them for), and then just after tells the Israelites to repent of that sin.
While I do not know exactly why this convention is used in Hebrew literature, I believe that it may be used in order to cause a person to remember God, and thus their sin, when they see or experience the consequence of their sin. Alternatively, it may simply be that this was how the Hebrews thought, and therefore God used this convention when He spoke to the Hebrews.
It is because of Ezekiel 20 that I myself can say that, when God said in 2 Samuel 12:10-11 that He would cause someone from David’s house to have sex with his wives, he wasn’t speaking literally. This is necessary to believe, because James 1:13-14 say that God does not cause anyone to commit evil; this is besides the fact that this idea is morally repugnant.
Could it be that, when the Scripture says that God struck David’s son with an illness, this same convention is being used by the Hebrew author? Is it possible that the text does not mean that God literally killed David’s child, but only says this to make a theological point? Is there anything in the text that may suggest this?
Also consider Deuteronomy 24:16 and Ezekiel 18:20.
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. — Deuteronomy 24:16
…The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. — Ezekiel 18:20
The latter verse teaches that a son cannot bear his father’s iniquity, going further than simply saying that he cannot be punished for it. If God killed David’s son to punish David, would that not be in violation of this rule?
Thank you.
Troy Day
is it possible??? @followers This question invites us to wrestle deeply with scripture and the nature of divine justice. While the text in 2 Samuel 12:14–23 presents God’s decision as direct and consequential, it also reveals profound lessons about repentance, mercy, and the legacy of David’s faith. Whether understood literally or providentially, the episode reminds us that restoration and hope emerge even in moments of loss. What do others think about the tension between judgment and grace here?
Dan Irving
Troy Day I can better cope with the death of the infant than I can with God’s judgment on David in respect to Absolem as fulfilling the sword against David’s house due to David’s sin. David’s son seems to have been condemned and to have become a prophetic forerunner of Judas Iscariot. This has troubled me in the present day, and in my own affairs.
Troy Day
Dan Irving where have you been my old legal friend? IT seems like a decade since you participated in any theological discussions here?
Dan Irving
Troy Day It has probably been about that long. I’ve worked on the Lamp-Stand youtube channel, putting out teachings through prophecy. Unfortunately, its been difficult for me to continue them in the last couple of years, as I haven’t felt the same inspiration.
Gary Edgar
You are too deep for me I guess it plain to me while the child lived there was hope but when God did what he promised , executed his judgement David accepted it ; maybe out of your context of reason but Ecclesiastes says a live dog is better than a dead lion , not calling the child a dog but while he lived there was hope and a place to draw nigh to God , he gives and takes away
Troy Day
Gary Edgar IT seems like a decade since you participated in any theological discussions here? Why NOW for our @highlight post on this topic?
Andrew Dean Sargent
Troy Day I cannot even open the article. It triggers all my computer safety features.
Pentecostal Theology
Andrew Dean Sargent You should check your computer for ciruses
Andrew Dean Sargent
Pentecostal Theology I’ll assume you meant viruses instead of circuses. It was a coin flip for a second or two, but then… Ah… context. 😉 I have excellent virus software… that’s what got triggered.
Troy Day
BOTh viruses instead of circuses
what is hexes ? from your exes ?
Gary Edgar
Troy Day sorry I did should not put my 2cents in 🤷♂️
Troy Day
2 is nice but a million bux is better 🙂
keep on doing the good work
AND post your comments
You are welcome !!!
Pentecostal Theology
Gary Edgar oh well