Role Model
After He had removed him, He raised up David to be their king, concerning whom He also testified and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after My heart, who will do all My will. Acts 13:22 NASB
After my heart – Let’s consider David. What was his life really like? Eighteen women. Multiple sons. Palace intrigue. Rebel. Hints of vindictive revenge. Adultery (more than once if Ahinaom is Saul’s wife). Conspiracy. Murder (certainly more than once). Failure as a father.
On the other hand, submissive. Sensitive. A keen appreciation for God’s instruction. A brilliant narrator of God’s glory. Repentant. Humble. Generous. Forgiving. Kind. Loyal.
We could write two résumés of this man. One would be summarily rejected by any form of religious organization. The other would be praised. Which one is the real David? Both, of course. And it’s not as if the “bad” one is a description of David before he was saved. No, a lot of those less-laudable characteristics come at the end of his life. Repentance, for example, seems to be as much an up and down movement as any other part of his existence in this world. If this is the case, then how is it that we hold David up as a paragon of spirituality? And even more importantly, how is it that God Himself describes David as “a man after My own heart”? Some serious rethinking must occur.
The usual explanation of this phrase, “after My heart,” feels like a whitewash. “In conclusion, David was a man after God’s own heart because he demonstrated his faith and was committed to following the Lord. Yes, his faith was tested on a grand scale, and he failed at times. But after his sin he sought and received the Lord’s forgiveness. In the final analysis, David loved God’s Law and sought to follow it exactly. As a man after God’s own heart, David is a role model for all of us.”[1] Is this really true? Did David actually repent after his great sins and receive forgiveness? Is that what it takes to be someone after God’s heart? If that’s the case, then I suppose we should sin greatly so we can experience korban (drawing close). This naive explanation seems to overlook the fact that on his deathbed David schemes murder. No repentance there.
Paul seems to do a bit of revisionist history. He might have 1 Samuel 13:14 or Psalm 89:20 in mind. Of course, Samuel’s announcement that God has sought out a man after His own heart is delivered to Saul, long before David engages in acts that bring judgment upon him and the people. And Psalm 89:20 doesn’t exactly say that David is a man after God’s heart. It recalls a time in the past when God found “David my servant.” We’re still left with both résumés.
Maybe the problem isn’t with God’s assessment but with our filters? Maybe being a man after God’s own heart is about something other than moral purity and upright behavior. That’s a fairly shocking thought. We’ve been taught to emulate David in his worship of God, his acknowledgement of sin, his repentant attitude. Isn’t that what a role model is for? But at the end of his life he instructs his son to commit murder—again. How much of a spiritual saint is he then? The very idea that this hero of faithfulness is tainted is a jarring blow to our view of obedience. So we will have to fasten our seatbelts and take a hard look at what it means to be after God’s own heart.
Paul’s Greek is kata kardian. It could be read, “toward,” or “facing,” or “according to.” We get the idea that David chased after God when we translate kata as “after,” but maybe David’s actions are not always that deliberate. Maybe he was found facing God, even in his disobedience, or going in God’s direction (toward) or, as a summary of his life, “according to God,” that is, attempting to align himself with God. And maybe Paul is deliberately overlooking some of David’s history in order to accomplish another purpose.
If we turn to the Hebrew (1 Samuel 13:14), we find the word kilbabo, a combination of the preposition ki with tob (heart). Ki could be rendered “like, as, about, according to” or “in the same way.” What might this mean? Is there a difference between “a man after my heart” and “a man like my heart,” or “a man about my heart”? Maybe the nuance changes. Maybe the fact that this statement comes before David becomes king is also an important factor. Of course, it isn’t a factor in Paul’s assessment, but then maybe Paul has something in mind that doesn’t actually depend on David’s history.
This statement from Paul comes in the middle of a speech given to the Jews in the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch on Shabbat. The speech is intended to prove that Yeshua is a descendent of David, and, as such, qualifies as Messiah. The speech is so persuasive that the people ask Paul to continue his exposition the following Shabbat. Given the audience, do you think Paul is likely to paint David as a man of suspect character? Furthermore, do you recognize the Paul is extrapolating from the Tanakh? The closest text he might cite is 1 Samuel 13:14 and that text doesn’t actually say what Paul cites. Perhaps Paul is being very rabbinic, shaping the text to needs of the audience.
When we consider all the factors, David still remains a role model. It’s just that this role model may now seem a lot more human than we tend to wish. And maybe that tells us the most important thing. God doesn’t grade us according to some rigid standard of righteousness. There seems to be a lot more to it. And David proves it.
Topical Index: after God’s heart, David, 1 Samuel 13:14, kilbabo, Psalm 89:20, Acts 13:22, kata kardian, role model, xenizonta
[1] https://www.gotquestions.org/man-after-God-heart.html
To be fair, you cannot call it “murder” if the people of those days would not have called it such, right? Those men had already incurred the death penalty; they were alive because of David’s leniency, but they were not going to hold up their end of the bargain for their lives, and David knew it. He instructed Solomon to carry out the delayed sentence for treason and the murders these men had ALREADY committed and were fixing to do again.
The seduction of false religion dies hard: we all want to ‘earn’ merit, but not one of us deserves it, no matter how hard we ‘work’. David did not earn his title “man after the heart of God” because of merit, either. This has to touch a sore spot in all of us. It does! He was a man who, like Jacob before him, clung to his Redeemer and would not let him go. May we do the same!
https://skipmoen.com/2014/06/passing-it-on/
Maybe because David revealed God’s glory = a man after God’s own heart :)….. no kahad
Try not to make David into Michelangelo’s statue, perfect but fossilized. Let David be as real as we are and see what happens to your icon.
Also I believe while being a young shepherd boy he received the shepherd heart of God & became a man after God’s own heart giving back what God had given -this is a place of glory ………
Yes, the Good Shepherd! Brave, humble and faithful.
We are so accustomed to having a death penalty mindset when we read Leviticus. To be honest it just wasn’t used Willy nilly. No case was cut and dry. Needed two or three witnesses than a court of judges and the witnesses themself better not lie. 2 Samuel 16:5-13 shows you a heart of man after God . David thought the curse was from God and did not kill those who stoned him or his troops with him. He was always willing to accept judgement with no excuse. David did commit adultery and death of Uriah by proxy is still murder. God in his mercy sent ONE witness Nathan and David repented. David was not given the death penalty and I for one am most greatful for God showing mercy on whom he chooses to show mercy. THANK GOODNESS for from his line came Yeshua. David did however suffer great consequences in his life for his sin.
So David the guilty does not die, but the son, who is totally innocent, does die. What kind of mercy is that?
David was already told by Nathan his son would die. He prayed and fasted that it would not happen but on the 7th day it did. Many innocent die daily but will they not be at the ressurection. IMHO they may be more honored than us guilty. God’s not done with the innocent they have a future isn’t that mercy?
But that’s not the point. The point is that God condemns the innocent. It doesn’t matter when that happens or why it happens. Do you think God is justified in making the son die instead of the perpetrator? Why would he do that?
The bastard’s curse operated upon the bastard baby; not the parents of that child born out of wedlock. Such is the unfairness of sin. That baby was a bastard; an outcast in society. It would not have been a good life, surely. So death in infancy and, consequently, growing up in a perfect world in the Olam haba instead: why not look at it from the baby’s point of view? When the baby died, the parents suffered instead of the child. Wouldn’t that make it more fair; not less?
While we are at it, why are we putting the charge of injustice “God condemns the innocent” upon God? Don’t the innocent suffer because SINNERS around them are making choices that affect them? God didn’t force those sinners to make those choices, did He?
If I were to answer the question “why would He do that?” isn’t it because we chose to learn from experience? Isn’t the playout of our choices exactly that experience that He warned us in the Garden not to choose? Did He force the first folks to make that choice, too?
All sin affects the innocent. God just allows it to. That is the essence of what makes sin sin, in fact. BUT, God doesn’t do it, does He? Doesn’t He just allow it? Allowing consequences is not the same as doing it yourself. I think if we think God does it all, we are still trying to duck the responsibility He handed us when He gave us free will. When He did that, He scooted over and shared will (power of choice) with us. That’s a double-edged sword; not a single edged one. It is not His cut only; it is also ours.
There are so many better and more uplifting things to comment on in this thred, but I am compelled to reply as my sister did on this “While we are at it, why are we putting the charge of injustice “God condemns the innocent” upon God?”. I might add who are we to put YHVH to the test, who are we to question him? I react to the vain arogance of the positioning to question the almighty. As he said to Job, ” Who are you to question me. Where where you when I…..” With all due respect and sincere love for our brother Skip It is my opinion the Socratatic methodology ought not be applied to YHVH. His people; yes, the cultures over time; yes, scriputueral- translators, translations ; yes but the Author/ Creator ; NO…This rant itself and perhaps the spirit behind it might illuminate David, “a man after God own heart.” While David was clearly a human with all our foibles, conflicts, confusions and out-right rebellions David had a real relationship and a profound heart of respect and admiration for YHVH. He humbeld himself and corrected himself, he repented and turned from (As Oswaled Chambers would say ) ” His right to himself” and that included his right to decide how God should or should not be or what he should or should not do. David, I think respect God’s right to define himself for us rather than the alternative represented when one alows onself self to question God. It is wiser to rather question ones own understand of God, his justice or his mercy!
Conflict and sarcasm are useful tools–sometimes. If my writing causes people to react and rethink, then it serves its purpose. That doesn’t mean I hold God responsible. It means that we have to deal with a implications of the text and ask ourselves how we are going to answer the skeptic.
Shalom dear brother. I understand your intentions and do not doubt your heart. Perhaps we can honor Yah and be respectful of his sovereignty and dignity while yet inspiring introspection, healthy dialog and carefull consideration?
I was convicted and had to recognize that one defenition of wickedness could be considerd casing conflicts and disrupting the peace of others. I for many years felt my self rightious assults on others missed-understanding or errant thinking was justified. Because my intent was to serve their greater good. I do not brother , judge your intentions and in fact I trust he guides your works of words. Yet He is glorious, His majesty so exceeds our understanding we should I think speak and act with extreme defence in considerations of His person and ways. Heschel writes of YHVH as the God of “Sacred Time” this now is Shabbat, His sacred time. I recognize so much more now than ever before the importance of acting, and being in his time and not my own. Submitting to his time takes the attention of all my being not just my thoughts, my understanding or my ways. It requires a unity of spirit. It is He who must be reveled not myself, my thoughts or my ways no matter how correct true or rightious. They must be in His Spirit NOT My own to truly give Him the glory !
The son (Yeshua) CAME to die. It was part of God’s plan and no human could have stopped it. We don’t have to understand it…halleluyah!! As we’ve seen how the Temple sacrifices of Leviticus brought the individual (or nation closer) to God, so Yeshua’s death brings us closer to God and into His presence. The innocence was always required, both in the Temple sacrifices AND in Yeshua’s death. What good would a guilty, impure, unholy, unclean sacrifice do to please a Holy God…Barabbas would have sufficed if that were the case.
I totally missed that. You blessed me, Judi.
We can’t get into the mind of God, but perhaps David’s son was spared life in a dysfunctional family. Look at how David’s other sons turned out. Maybe the one that died as an infant was the fortunate one.
Perhaps it’s not God who condemned but rather David and Bathsheba. It’s not that God hasn’t told us about judgement being measure for measure, it’s just that we don’t want to believe it. David didn’t just murder Uriah, he stopped the generations that were to come from that. Hence the “stopping” of that fruit of the union from its future generations. It’s funny that we can say so assuredly where our country is headed towards, because of the activities engaged in at the moment and yet we miss that personal application in our own lives. Or maybe we’re just too optimistic. Either way, we tend to avoid the realization of this most fundamental of laws of the operation of creation.
I don’t think God owes me an explanation as to the why of things even it appears unfair to me. He sure did not tell Job.
No He does not, but He did tell us about certain things. I don’t know how the “future” plays out, but God tells me how I plant matters, today, and in the future. He tells me that EVERY thing will reproduce according to it’s kind. (That’s the correction) Isn’t it interesting that the technological advancements of the day are there to convince you otherwise. Somehow, we will “get around” what’s been “hindering” societies for so long. Instead of taking it as correction, we look for a way around it. Meanwhile, plants produce seed and a bunch more of the sand stuff comes up. And we’re surprised. There’s a verse of to in Daniel that speaks of this, they will attempt to change the times and LAWS… but a law is s law. Don’t use water in a gasoline engine, you’ll have problems. Don’t plant weeds……
That is an interesting statement Skip. Both Prophets and Apostles were also killed for doing God’s work. Yet high priests etc lived out their lives. Would that mean that some of God’s calling are eventually until death and not something we can choose to surrender or stop doing before the called get old… If the called ever get old.
I agree with you Robert certain things we know . The word is replete where one person commits sin ,like Ham and his son canaan gets cursed , Cain killing Able, priests who were corrupt and produced sons ,. Why were so many corrupt kings of Judah allowed to produce progeny that continued to be worse . So why should David’s son die . Why do some progeny live and others die for equally egregious sins of there parents. I am content that God knows what he is doing and we are not in this lifetime going to totally figure it out or need to.
I’ve no doubt of your agreeing with what God says in scripture. Perhaps this is an opportunity to step back and analyze what we think about scripture and what if really says. As times grow more intense, so do the consequences. But I’m thinkin’ that’s the plan. It would seem to behoove us to strive to understand God’s ways and intents, how else are we going to be a witness to His grace?
Btw, I looked at my responses from previously to make sure the spelling was correct before I posted them. It was, now it isn’t. Really smart, dumb phones! ?
I fixed it.
Thank you. I wasn’t expecting that, it just struck me as odd, that’s all.
Rereading the TW and every ones comment got me rethinking all our community comments on other TWs that confirm that God forgives unconditionally, as He looks into the heart or life at the moment of repentance. Once this is done staying redeemed is the choice we act out.
Very often as David we are caught in the moment. Not of weakness but of strength of opportunity. We can do it and no one can stop this, so away we go without considering the consequences. Is this sin perse. If it is then all human good or bad can be considered sin. How did God warn Able; sin is at the door and we must rule over it.
Mark Randall reminded us in The Man of Athens; To ask questions and then adapt our life to the truth we are answered with is what our relationship with God is all about. (Mark my understanding of your message) I want to add to this what John wrote – only the Son (action after thought – word takes on flesh) can truly set us free…
God always seems to welcome us prodigal sons back as He did David…