King David and Inadequate Theologies of Repentance and Forgiveness
Content warning: discussion of sexual assault and violence
There is no way to mince words. King David, as portrayed in Scripture is a horrible person. His actions toward Bathsheba and her husband involve rape and murder. I am grateful that, at least in more mainline and progressive spaces, the story of King David is open to more critical readings. However, even in more critical readings, the theology is also lacking. Recently, I read in a well-known Mainline Christian magazine a short commentary on King David. The author talked about repentance and forgiveness. This is a common trope in regards to King David. I am sure I have even made the same point using the King David story in my previous sermons. But the more I think deeply about the story the more I realize: King David is not the story of repentance and forgiveness that so many portray.
And the God of the King David story is not a God we should be honoring and worshipping. In fact, a much more helpful way to interpret the arch of King David is one where we make the decision that, the understanding of God give in the King David story is one that should be rejected. The punishment given to King David is not an example of justice or just consequences, but the actions of a cruel God.
The punishment makes sense in the context a society where punishments are inflicted on children and whole families in response to the horrific actions of one member of the family. It also makes sense in a cultural context where violence, death, and destruction are understood as an appropriate response to sin. And where harm to children and women, isn’t considered something worthy of discussion. But the question becomes, do we really want to reinforce that theology?
Sure in 2 Samuel 12, Nathan justly calls out King David’s horrific murder of Bathsheba's husband and King David repentance. But the punishment remains that an innocent child dies which subjects the child and also Bathsheba, another victim of King David, to punishment that they quite frankly didn’t deserve. It is an act of cruelty. If King David is a man after God’s own heart, well what type of God is that?
Again, this punishment makes sense in a society where whole families face the punishment for the actions of one member, and in a society where children and women, are essentially viewed as being subject to actions, good or ill of the male members of the family. In 2024, we should understandably view such a story and the theology it is tied to in horror. But instead of ignoring the story or simply saying, “the story of David is a story of God’s grace and forgiveness,” we instead grapple with the story head on.
The story of King David should shine a lot on how too many Christian institutions across the denominational and theological spectrum have covered up various forms of abuse against women and children. But it should also cause us to reflect on how the theology on repentance and forgiveness espoused by many churches is not only inadequate but amounts to a punishment for the very victims, they claim to care about. Just like King David’s punishment in 2 Samuel actually harms innocent victims, too many Christians’ shallow understanding of repentance, forgiveness, and grace hurts victims.
The shallow understanding of forgiveness that plagues many churches is one where the teaching basically goes like this, “we are all children of God and all have caused harm. And just like God has forgiven us, we need to forgive others.” The language in more progressive congregations may be a bit different. The focus may be on God’s expansive love. Which isn’t wrong per say. But too often, the accompanying discussion on repentance is nonexistent or lacking. Additionally, what exactly does this forgiveness look like? Because in too many causes it looks like the party causing the harm, making a statement, and life going on as normal for them. Meanwhile the harmed party is expected to push down their pain and suffering and “forgive.” The expected party is expected to simply deal with the shattered pieces of their lives. That’s not evidence of a theology of love but of cruelty.
Additionally, and I am going to be blunt, it’s a bit hypocritical for denominations to preach forgiveness and grace, when they are only now just barely dealing with the long history of harm they have inflicted and continue to inflict on various vulnerable groups. Especially when their understanding of forgiveness and repentance is shallow.
What denominations and individual congregations should do, when examining the King David story and seeking to craft some sort of moral message, is to 1) explore and acknowledge the real harm they have caused. 2) name the harm 3) and then explore whether the consequences, restitution or whatever phrase the congregation wants to use, is in fact causing even more harm to the injured party.
King David’s story is horrific. And God’s response, to be frank, is just as problematic. And it does no one any good to ignore that fact. Instead, perhaps individual Christians, congregations, and denominations would do well to instead use the story as a jumping-off point to reflect on the ways they have caused pain and suffering and the ways in which their all too inadequate theologies surrounding repentance, grace, and forgiveness, cause harm to injured parties.
White background with shadows of plant leaves and furniture: The story of King David should be used as a jumping-off point for churches to reflect on the ways their all too inadequate theologies surrounding repentance, grace, and forgiveness, cause harm to injured parties.