3 And [Dovid] sent and enquired after the woman [isha]. And one said, Is not this Bathsheba [Bat-Sheva], the daughter of Eliam [Bat Eli'am], the wife of Uriah the Hittite? [eshet Uriyah the Chitti?]

It is quite likely, and far more in keeping with his character, that David had no intent of going as far as adultery when he first sent for Bathsheba to visit him. The deadly downward course had begun, and God was watching and controlling, but David, presuming on his own strength and goodness, may have intended to go only so far.

There is much greater pertinence and significance in the lesson for us if it were a matter of presumption on his strength, and a foolish playing with fire, rather than the deliberate premeditated commission of a vile sin.

Surely few-if any-claiming to be Christ's brethren would deliberately set out to commit a deadly sin. But any could very easily be trapped in a self-made net that began with a very small act of folly.

David doubtless repented, or thought he repented, of the adultery into which he had stumbled, but it is a self-justifying concept of the sordid sequence of events that followed, as he struggled to break out of the net that was tightening on him.

David's whole motive in the subsequent terrible chain of events may have sincerely been to save Bathsheba from shame and Uriah from sorrow-or he may have convinced himself that was his motive.

Or David may have, in his heart, excused himself by blaming Bathsheba, as Adam blamed Eve, and it is quite conceivable that in the development of the events, there was some degree of justification for him so doing, though we have no specific reason to assume so. Clearly the responsibility was David's. He was the one exclusively called to account and judged.

David was not a deliberate hypocrite. This is the least possible thing we could believe. Somehow he was able to square his conscience. He had to have some way of living with himself for that long, dark year before he was exposed.

It may have been a combination of self-deception on his part with judicial blinding on God's part, and the more time passed without anything terrible happening, or any condemnation from God, the more his conscience would be lulled, and his self-justification confirmed. But the day of account, though long delayed came unerringly at last, just as it always does and always will.

Whenever we consider David's sin, we must keep the whole picture of his life in true balance and perspective. It is a glorious picture of a "man after God's own heart."

David was a giant: one of the few really great men of all history. He was great in both strength and in sweetness: in physical courage, and in spiritual discernment, poetry, music and psalms.

David is the Psalms, and the Psalms are David. Truly they are prophetically and inspirationally the mind of the Spirit of Christ, but David's own heart and mind were the Spirit's chosen medium of their expression.

Bro Growcott - BYT 4.7.

15 And he wrote in the letter, saying, Set ye Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he may be smitten, and die.

If we would understand the sad sins of David, their bitter consequences and their glorious aftermath; if we would truly learn their deep lessons, let us read and read and reread the Psalms. We have no right to attempt any conclusions concerning David without taking his Psalms fully into account. Here he states his case and bares his heart in terms that should put us all to shame. Let us get the spirit of David, which is the spirit of Christ-

"My heart and my flesh cry out for the living God" (Psalm 84:2).

"My soul thirstiest for Thee: my flesh longeth for Thee" (Psalm 63:1).

"One thing have I desired, that I may behold the beauty of the Lord" (Psalm 27:4).

David's sin manifests the wise and loving working of God-both in punishment and in mercy. For His people, God always combines punishment with hope and reconciliation. God loved Solomon. God called him Jedidiah, "Beloved of Yahweh"-same root as David, "Beloved." Why did God make choice of Solomon for the direct line of Christ, for all succeeding generations to marvel at?

We would think it much more in keeping with the principles of holiness to carefully avoid any connection with this questionable union, rooted in sin and lust, and stained with adultery and murder, and rather, to choose the heir for the direct line of Christ from one of David's legitimate and faithfully-acquired wives.

Certainly God had a deep purpose and lesson for us in it. And certainly it was not to condone or belittle the dreadfulness of David's sin. Perhaps it was another beautiful illustration of the divine principle that if there is true repentance, God will bring good out of evil, after there has been appropriate punishment, faithfully submitted to. When God must punish heavily He compensates. Contrast the two children of David and Bathsheba, the first manifested His wrath. It must die, because of David's sin.

But Solomon it is especially recorded that God loved, and personally named him to commemorate that love-Jedidiah.

Would it not be to show the fullness of God's forgiveness-the fullness of the restored communion and fellowship? The fellowship of God was the most important thing in the world to David. It was life itself.

"There is none upon earth that I desire before Thee" (Psalm 73:25).

The especial choice and favouring of Solomon would be a gracious and greatly needed gesture of love from God that reconciliation was complete.

As the wise woman of Tekoah said to David, in words that-like those of Caiaphas-go far beyond the meaning and understanding of the original speaker-even to encompass the whole sweep of God's purpose.

"Neither doth God respect any person yet doth He devise means that His banished be not expelled from Him" (2 Samuel 14:14).

Bro Growcott - BYT 4.7.