Then the LORD sent Nathan to David
This phrase highlights God's direct intervention in the situation. Nathan, a prophet, is sent by God to confront King David. This reflects the role of prophets in Israel as God's messengers, often tasked with delivering difficult truths. Nathan's mission underscores the seriousness of David's sin with Bathsheba and Uriah, as recorded in the previous chapter. Prophets like Nathan were crucial in maintaining the covenant relationship between God and Israel, often calling leaders and the people back to righteousness.

and when he arrived, he said
Nathan's arrival signifies the beginning of a divine confrontation. The use of a parable to address David is strategic, allowing David to judge the situation objectively before realizing his own guilt. This method is reminiscent of Jesus' use of parables in the New Testament to reveal deeper truths and convict the heart. Nathan's approach is both wise and compassionate, aiming to lead David to repentance rather than immediate condemnation.

“There were two men in a certain city
The introduction of two men in a parable sets the stage for a moral lesson. The "certain city" is unspecified, making the story universally applicable. This narrative technique draws the listener into the story, encouraging them to focus on the moral implications rather than the specifics of location or identity. The use of parables is a common biblical method to convey spiritual truths, as seen in the teachings of Jesus.

one rich and the other poor
The contrast between the rich and poor man is central to the parable's message. This dichotomy highlights issues of justice, power, and exploitation, themes prevalent throughout the Bible. The rich man's abundance and the poor man's lack serve as a metaphor for David's actions against Uriah, where David, despite having much, took the little that Uriah had. This mirrors the biblical principle that those with power have a responsibility to act justly and protect the vulnerable, as seen in laws and teachings throughout the Old Testament.

The rich man
In the context of 2 Samuel 12, the "rich man" represents King David. This parable, told by the prophet Nathan, is a metaphor for David's actions regarding Bathsheba and Uriah. The rich man's wealth symbolizes David's power and resources as king. In biblical times, wealth was often measured by livestock, which were essential for food, clothing, and sacrifices. This imagery highlights the disparity between David's abundance and Uriah's limited resources.

had a great number of sheep and cattle
Sheep and cattle were significant assets in ancient Israel, representing wealth and prosperity. The mention of a "great number" emphasizes the extent of the rich man's resources, contrasting with the poor man's single ewe lamb in the parable. This abundance is symbolic of David's many blessings and privileges as king. In a broader biblical context, sheep often symbolize God's people (Psalm 100:3), and cattle can represent material wealth (Genesis 13:2). The rich man's possession of many sheep and cattle underscores his responsibility to use his resources justly and compassionately, a responsibility David failed to uphold in his dealings with Uriah.

but the poor man had nothing except one small ewe lamb that he had bought.
This phrase highlights the stark contrast between the rich and the poor, a common theme in biblical narratives. The poor man's possession of only one small ewe lamb underscores his poverty and vulnerability. In ancient Israel, sheep were valuable assets, and owning even one lamb was significant for a poor man. This lamb symbolizes the man's limited wealth and deep personal attachment, as he had invested in it by purchasing it. The imagery of a lamb is also significant in biblical typology, often representing innocence and sacrifice, foreshadowing Christ as the Lamb of God (John 1:29).

He raised it, and it grew up with him and his children.
The relationship between the man and the lamb is depicted as familial and nurturing. Raising the lamb alongside his children suggests a deep bond and affection, elevating the lamb from mere property to a beloved family member. This reflects the cultural practice of shepherding in ancient Israel, where animals were often integral to family life. The nurturing aspect can be seen as a metaphor for God's care for His people, as seen in Psalm 23, where the Lord is described as a shepherd.

It shared his food and drank from his cup;
This phrase illustrates the intimacy and care the man had for the lamb, treating it as an equal rather than livestock. Sharing food and drink signifies a close relationship, akin to that of family members. In the cultural context, sharing a meal was a sign of fellowship and trust. This imagery can be connected to the communal aspects of the early Christian church, where believers shared meals and resources (Acts 2:44-46).

it slept in his arms and was like a daughter to him.
The lamb's place in the man's arms signifies protection, love, and tenderness, akin to a parent-child relationship. This deep emotional connection emphasizes the man's affection and the lamb's importance in his life. The comparison to a daughter highlights the depth of the bond and the man's sense of responsibility and care. This can be seen as a reflection of God's love for His children, as expressed in passages like Isaiah 49:15, where God's care is likened to that of a mother for her child.

Now a traveler came to the rich man
In ancient Near Eastern culture, hospitality was a significant social obligation. Travelers relied on the generosity of others for food and shelter. The rich man in this parable represents those with abundant resources, highlighting the expectation that he would provide for the traveler. This scenario sets the stage for a moral lesson, as the rich man's actions are contrasted with the expected norms of hospitality and generosity.

who refrained from taking one of his own sheep or cattle
The rich man's decision not to use his own resources underscores his selfishness and greed. In biblical times, livestock was a sign of wealth and prosperity. The refusal to use his own sheep or cattle, despite having plenty, reveals a heart that is unwilling to sacrifice for others. This reflects a broader biblical theme where God calls His people to be generous and to care for the needy, as seen in passages like Deuteronomy 15:7-11.

to prepare for the traveler who had come to him
The preparation of a meal for a guest was a customary act of hospitality. The rich man's failure to use his own resources for this purpose highlights a moral failing. This act of preparation is symbolic of the spiritual and moral preparation expected of God's people, as seen in the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25:1-13, where readiness and proper preparation are emphasized.

Instead, he took the poor man’s lamb
The poor man's lamb represents innocence and vulnerability. In the context of the parable, this act is a grave injustice, as the lamb was not only the poor man's possession but also a cherished part of his household. This mirrors the biblical theme of the exploitation of the weak by the powerful, a sin condemned by prophets like Amos (Amos 2:6-7). The lamb can also be seen as a type of Christ, the Lamb of God, who was sacrificed for the sins of humanity.

and prepared it for his guest.
The preparation of the poor man's lamb for the guest is the culmination of the rich man's selfishness and lack of compassion. This act of taking what little the poor man had and using it for his own purposes is a direct violation of the biblical call to love one's neighbor as oneself (Leviticus 19:18). It serves as a powerful illustration of the consequences of sin and the need for repentance, as later seen in David's own repentance in Psalm 51.

David burned with anger against the man
David's reaction is intense and immediate, reflecting his sense of justice and righteousness. This anger is significant because it reveals David's initial blindness to his own sin. In the cultural context of ancient Israel, a king was expected to uphold justice, and David's response aligns with this expectation. His anger also foreshadows the divine judgment that will be pronounced upon him. This moment is a turning point, as it sets the stage for Nathan's revelation of David's sin with Bathsheba.

and said to Nathan:
Nathan, the prophet, plays a crucial role as God's messenger. Prophets in Israel were often tasked with delivering difficult truths to kings and the people. Nathan's approach, using a parable, is strategic and wise, allowing David to pronounce judgment on himself. This interaction highlights the role of prophets as intermediaries between God and His people, often bringing messages of both judgment and hope.

“As surely as the LORD lives,
This phrase is an oath, invoking the name of the LORD, which underscores the seriousness of David's declaration. In ancient Israel, oaths were binding and sacred, reflecting a deep commitment to truth and justice. The invocation of the LORD's name also emphasizes the theocratic nature of Israel, where God is the ultimate authority. This phrase connects to other biblical instances where oaths are made before God, such as in 1 Samuel 14:39 and 2 Kings 5:16.

the man who did this deserves to die!
David's pronouncement of death is severe, reflecting the gravity of the offense in his eyes. In the context of the parable, the rich man's actions are seen as a gross violation of justice and compassion. This mirrors the Mosaic Law, where certain sins were punishable by death (e.g., Leviticus 20:10). David's judgment is ironic, as it ultimately applies to himself, revealing the depth of his own transgression. This moment foreshadows the concept of divine justice and mercy, themes that are central to the narrative of redemption throughout Scripture.

Because he has done this thing
This phrase refers to the sin committed by David, which Nathan the prophet is addressing. The "thing" is David's adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband, Uriah. This context is crucial as it highlights the gravity of David's actions, which were not only personal sins but also violations of God's commandments. The narrative underscores the seriousness of sin and the need for accountability, even for a king. This reflects the biblical principle that no one is above God's law.

and has shown no pity,
David's lack of compassion is emphasized here. In the parable Nathan tells, the rich man shows no pity to the poor man by taking his only lamb. This mirrors David's actions towards Uriah. The absence of pity is a significant moral failing, highlighting the importance of mercy and justice in biblical teaching. This connects to other scriptures that emphasize God's desire for mercy over sacrifice (Hosea 6:6, Matthew 9:13).

he must pay for the lamb four times over.”
The requirement to pay fourfold is rooted in the Mosaic Law, specifically Exodus 22:1, which states that a thief must repay four sheep for a stolen sheep. This legal principle underscores the concept of restitution and justice. In David's case, the fourfold repayment is prophetic, as he later suffers the loss of four of his sons: the child born to Bathsheba, Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah. This serves as a sobering reminder of the consequences of sin and the fulfillment of divine justice. Theologically, it also points to the need for atonement and the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who pays the debt of sin for humanity.

Then Nathan said to David, “You are that man!”
Nathan, a prophet, confronts King David directly, revealing his sin. This moment is pivotal, as it follows Nathan's parable about a rich man who unjustly takes a poor man's lamb. David, unaware the story is about him, condemns the man in the parable, prompting Nathan's declaration. This confrontation highlights the role of prophets in holding leaders accountable and the importance of repentance. It also underscores the personal nature of sin and the need for self-awareness.

This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says:
Nathan speaks with authority, delivering a message directly from God. The phrase emphasizes God's sovereignty and His covenant relationship with Israel. It reminds David and the audience that God is actively involved in the affairs of His people and that His words carry ultimate authority. This introduction to God's message sets the stage for the divine judgment and grace that follow.

‘I anointed you king over Israel,
God reminds David of his divine appointment as king, highlighting the sacredness of his role. The anointing signifies God's choice and empowerment, setting David apart for leadership. This reference serves as a reminder of David's responsibilities and the divine favor he received. It also connects to the broader biblical theme of God's sovereignty in appointing leaders, as seen in the anointing of other kings and leaders throughout Scripture.

and I delivered you from the hand of Saul.
God recounts His past deliverance of David from King Saul, who sought to kill him. This deliverance underscores God's protection and faithfulness to David. It serves as a reminder of God's past mercies and the expectation of David's gratitude and obedience. The historical context of David's escape from Saul's pursuit is a testament to God's providence and serves as a backdrop for understanding the gravity of David's sin in light of God's continued faithfulness.

I gave your master’s house to you
This phrase refers to God's provision for David after the death of King Saul. In ancient Near Eastern culture, the transfer of a king's house to his successor was a sign of divine favor and legitimacy. The "house" here symbolizes Saul's royal authority and possessions. David's rise to power was orchestrated by God, who anointed him as king (1 Samuel 16:13). This transfer signifies God's sovereign choice and the fulfillment of His promise to David.

and your master’s wives into your arms
In the context of ancient Israel, the taking of a predecessor's wives was a political act that signified the transfer of kingship and authority. While there is no biblical record of David taking Saul's wives, this phrase underscores the completeness of the transfer of Saul's royal privileges to David. It highlights the cultural practice of consolidating power and the divine endorsement of David's rule.

I gave you the house of Israel and Judah
This phrase emphasizes the unification of the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah under David's reign. Historically, this unification was significant as it established a centralized monarchy and strengthened the nation. Theologically, it reflects God's covenantal promise to establish David's throne (2 Samuel 7:16). This unification prefigures the ultimate unity found in Christ, who reconciles all believers into one body (Ephesians 2:14-16).

and if that was not enough, I would have given you even more
This statement reveals God's abundant generosity and willingness to bless David beyond measure. It underscores the principle that God is a provider who desires to give good gifts to His people (James 1:17). Theologically, it points to the limitless nature of God's grace and foreshadows the ultimate gift of salvation through Jesus Christ, who offers life abundantly (John 10:10). This phrase serves as a reminder of God's faithfulness and the potential for greater blessings when one walks in obedience to Him.

Why then have you despised the command of the LORD by doing evil in His sight?
This phrase highlights the gravity of David's sin against God. The word "despised" indicates a deep disrespect and disregard for God's authority and commandments. In the context of ancient Israel, the king was expected to uphold God's law as a model for the people. David's actions were not just personal failings but a public violation of the covenant relationship between God and Israel. This echoes the sentiment found in 1 Samuel 15:23, where rebellion against God's command is equated with idolatry. The phrase "doing evil in His sight" underscores the omniscience of God, who sees all actions and intentions, as seen in Proverbs 15:3.

You put Uriah the Hittite to the sword and took his wife as your own.
This part of the verse recounts David's specific sins: the murder of Uriah and the taking of Bathsheba. Uriah, though a Hittite, was a loyal soldier in David's army, highlighting the betrayal involved. The act of taking another man's wife was a direct violation of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:13-14). The cultural context of the time placed a high value on loyalty and honor among warriors, making David's actions even more egregious. This incident foreshadows the consequences of sin and the unraveling of David's household, as prophesied later in 2 Samuel 12:10-12.

You have slain him with the sword of the Ammonites.
This phrase emphasizes the indirect method David used to ensure Uriah's death, manipulating the ongoing conflict with the Ammonites to achieve his ends. The Ammonites were long-standing enemies of Israel, and using them as instruments of murder added a layer of treachery to David's sin. This reflects the deceitful nature of sin, as described in James 1:14-15, where desire leads to sin, and sin, when full-grown, leads to death. The use of the Ammonites' sword also serves as a grim reminder of the consequences of David's actions, as violence and strife would later plague his own family.

Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house
This phrase is a direct consequence of King David's sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband, Uriah. The "sword" symbolizes ongoing conflict and violence, which would plague David's family. Historically, this prophecy is fulfilled through the turmoil and bloodshed within David's household, including the rebellion of his son Absalom and the murder of his son Amnon by another son, Absalom. This reflects the biblical principle of reaping what one sows (Galatians 6:7-8) and serves as a warning about the long-term consequences of sin.

because you have despised Me
In this context, "despised" indicates a profound disrespect and disregard for God's commandments. David's actions showed contempt for God's authority and holiness. This phrase underscores the personal nature of sin against God, as it is not merely a violation of law but an affront to God's character. Theologically, it highlights the seriousness of sin and the need for repentance, as seen in David's later contrition in Psalm 51.

and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.
This phrase points to the specific sin of adultery and murder. Uriah, a Hittite, was one of David's mighty men, indicating his loyalty and importance in David's army. The mention of Uriah's ethnicity highlights the inclusivity of David's reign, yet also the gravity of his betrayal. This act of taking another man's wife is a direct violation of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:13-14). It also foreshadows the greater redemption narrative, where Jesus, a descendant of David, would come to fulfill the law and offer forgiveness for all sins.

This is what the LORD says:
This phrase introduces a direct message from God, emphasizing the authority and certainty of the pronouncement. In the biblical narrative, prophetic declarations often begin with such a formula, underscoring that the message is not from the prophet's own mind but from God Himself. This is a common introduction in prophetic literature, seen in books like Isaiah and Jeremiah, where God communicates His will and judgments.

I will raise up adversity against you from your own house:
This prophecy foretells internal strife within David's family, a direct consequence of his sin with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah. The fulfillment of this prophecy is seen in the rebellion of Absalom, David's son, which brought great turmoil and division to David's household. This internal conflict serves as a reminder of the principle of sowing and reaping, as seen in Galatians 6:7-8, where actions have consequences, often within one's own sphere of influence.

Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to another:
This part of the prophecy was fulfilled when Absalom, in his rebellion, took David's concubines and lay with them publicly (2 Samuel 16:22). This act was a cultural and political statement, signifying a transfer of power and a deep humiliation for David. In the ancient Near Eastern context, taking a king's wives was a declaration of assuming his throne and authority.

and he will lie with them in broad daylight:
The public nature of this act contrasts with David's secret sin with Bathsheba, highlighting the theme of exposure and judgment. While David's sin was hidden, the consequences were made public, fulfilling the principle found in Luke 12:2-3, where hidden things are brought to light. This public exposure served as a divine retribution and a sobering reminder of the seriousness of sin and its repercussions.

You have acted in secret
This phrase refers to King David's sin with Bathsheba and the subsequent murder of her husband, Uriah. David's actions were hidden from the public eye, reflecting the human tendency to conceal wrongdoing. The secrecy of David's sin contrasts with God's omniscience, as nothing is hidden from Him (Hebrews 4:13). This also highlights the biblical principle that hidden sins will eventually be brought to light (Luke 8:17).

but I will do this thing in broad daylight
God's response through the prophet Nathan indicates that the consequences of David's sin will be public. This public exposure serves as a divine judgment and a warning to Israel about the seriousness of sin. The phrase "broad daylight" symbolizes transparency and the inevitability of divine justice. It also foreshadows the public nature of Christ's crucifixion, where the sins of humanity were dealt with openly (Colossians 2:14-15).

before all Israel
The public nature of the judgment serves as a national lesson for Israel, emphasizing the importance of accountability and the consequences of sin. This public exposure is meant to deter others from similar transgressions. It also reflects the communal aspect of sin and its impact on the entire community, a theme seen throughout the Old Testament (Joshua 7:1-26). The phrase underscores the idea that leaders, like David, are held to a higher standard due to their influence over the people (James 3:1).

’”
The closing quotation marks indicate the end of God's pronouncement through Nathan. This marks a pivotal moment in David's life, leading to his repentance and the writing of Psalm 51, a profound expression of contrition and a model for seeking forgiveness. This moment also points to the ultimate redemption found in Jesus Christ, who offers forgiveness and restoration to all who repent (1 John 1:9).

Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.”
David's confession marks a pivotal moment of repentance. This acknowledgment of sin is significant because it shows David's recognition of his wrongdoing not just against Bathsheba and Uriah, but primarily against God. In the cultural context of ancient Israel, sin was understood as a violation of God's covenant, and David's admission reflects a deep understanding of his breach of this relationship. This moment is reminiscent of Psalm 51, where David expresses his contrition and desire for purification. The phrase also connects to the broader biblical theme of repentance, as seen in the lives of other figures like Jonah and the Ninevites (Jonah 3:5-10).

“The LORD has taken away your sin,” Nathan replied.
Nathan's response highlights God's mercy and forgiveness. In the historical context, the role of a prophet was to convey God's messages, including both judgment and grace. The assurance that God has taken away David's sin underscores the concept of divine forgiveness, which is a central theme throughout Scripture. This act of grace prefigures the ultimate forgiveness offered through Jesus Christ, as seen in the New Testament (1 John 1:9). Theologically, it emphasizes that while sin has consequences, God's grace is sufficient to cover transgressions when there is genuine repentance.

“You will not die.”
This assurance of life is significant given the gravity of David's sins, which included adultery and murder. According to the Law of Moses, such sins were punishable by death (Leviticus 20:10, Numbers 35:16). However, God's decision to spare David's life illustrates His sovereign grace and the possibility of redemption. This phrase also foreshadows the New Testament message of eternal life through Christ, who takes upon Himself the penalty of sin (Romans 6:23). In a typological sense, David's spared life points to the salvation and life offered through Jesus, the greater King in the line of David.

Nevertheless, because by this deed
This phrase refers to the actions of King David, specifically his adultery with Bathsheba and the subsequent murder of her husband, Uriah. In the context of ancient Israel, such actions were not only morally reprehensible but also a violation of the Mosaic Law, which David, as king, was expected to uphold. The word "deed" underscores the gravity of his sin, highlighting the deliberate nature of his actions. This serves as a reminder of the biblical principle that leaders are held to a higher standard of accountability (James 3:1).

you have shown utter contempt for the word of the LORD
David's actions demonstrated a profound disrespect for God's commandments. The "word of the LORD" refers to the divine laws and instructions given to Israel, which David was supposed to embody as king. This contempt is not just a personal failing but a public scandal, as David's sin could lead others to question the integrity of God's law. This phrase echoes the biblical theme that sin is ultimately against God (Psalm 51:4), and it highlights the seriousness of disregarding divine authority.

the son born to you will surely die.”
This pronouncement of judgment is both personal and prophetic. The death of David and Bathsheba's child serves as a direct consequence of David's sin, illustrating the biblical principle of reaping what one sows (Galatians 6:7). In the cultural context of ancient Israel, the death of a child was a profound tragedy, often seen as a sign of divine displeasure. This judgment also foreshadows the suffering and loss that sin brings, pointing to the need for redemption and the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who would bear the consequences of sin for humanity. The certainty of the child's death underscores the seriousness of sin and the justice of God, while also setting the stage for David's repentance and the eventual birth of Solomon, through whom God's promises would continue.

After Nathan had gone home
Nathan the prophet had just delivered a message of judgment and repentance to King David regarding his sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband, Uriah. Nathan's departure signifies the completion of his prophetic duty. This moment underscores the role of prophets as messengers of God, who deliver His word and then leave the outcome to God. It also highlights the gravity of David's sin and the seriousness with which God addresses it.

the LORD struck the child
This phrase indicates divine intervention and judgment. The illness of the child is a direct consequence of David's sin, illustrating the principle that sin often has far-reaching consequences beyond the individual. It reflects the justice of God, who holds even His chosen king accountable. This act is not arbitrary but serves as a tangible expression of the moral order God upholds. It also foreshadows the suffering of the innocent for the guilty, a theme that finds its ultimate fulfillment in the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ.

that Uriah’s wife had borne to David
The text refers to Bathsheba as "Uriah’s wife," emphasizing the adultery and the breach of covenant that occurred. This reminder of her previous marital status highlights the sin's severity and the violation of God's commandments. It also serves as a reminder of the human tendency to try to cover up sin, as David did, and the futility of such attempts before God. The child, born out of this union, becomes a symbol of the consequences of sin.

and he became ill
The illness of the child is both a personal tragedy for David and Bathsheba and a public demonstration of God's displeasure. In the ancient Near Eastern context, illness was often seen as a sign of divine disfavor or judgment. This event would have been understood by the people of Israel as a serious matter, reflecting the communal nature of sin and its consequences. The child's illness also sets the stage for David's subsequent repentance and intercession, highlighting the themes of mercy and forgiveness that are central to the biblical narrative.

David pleaded with God for the boy.
David's plea to God reflects his deep remorse and desperation following Nathan's prophecy of judgment due to his sin with Bathsheba. This act of pleading is consistent with the biblical tradition of intercession, where individuals seek God's mercy on behalf of others. David's actions echo those of other biblical figures like Moses and Abraham, who also interceded for others. The boy in question is the child born to David and Bathsheba, whose life was threatened as a consequence of David's sin. This moment highlights the personal and communal impact of sin, as well as the hope for divine mercy.

He fasted
Fasting in the biblical context is often associated with mourning, repentance, and seeking God's favor. It is a physical expression of humility and dependence on God. In the Old Testament, fasting is seen in times of crisis or when seeking divine intervention, as in the case of Esther or the people of Nineveh. David's fasting signifies his earnestness in seeking God's forgiveness and intervention for the child's life. It is a spiritual discipline that underscores the seriousness of the situation and David's sincere repentance.

and went into his house
David's retreat into his house signifies a withdrawal from public life to focus on prayer and supplication. The house, in this context, serves as a private sanctuary where David can express his grief and seek God without distraction. This act of seclusion is reminiscent of Jesus' teaching in the New Testament about praying in private, emphasizing sincerity and personal connection with God over public display.

and spent the night lying in sackcloth on the ground.
Sackcloth is a coarse material traditionally worn as a sign of mourning and repentance. Lying on the ground further emphasizes David's humility and contrition. This posture of submission is seen throughout scripture, where individuals humble themselves before God in times of distress or repentance, such as Job or the people of Israel during times of national crisis. The use of sackcloth and lying on the ground symbolizes David's acknowledgment of his sin and his total dependence on God's mercy. This act foreshadows the ultimate humility and submission of Jesus Christ, who, though sinless, took on the sins of humanity.

The elders of his household stood beside him
In ancient Israel, elders were respected leaders and advisors within a household or community. They often held positions of authority and were responsible for providing guidance and support. In this context, the elders of David's household were likely senior servants or officials who had the responsibility to care for the king during his time of distress. Their presence indicates the seriousness of the situation and the communal concern for David's well-being.

to help him up from the ground
David was in a state of deep mourning and repentance, lying prostrate on the ground. This posture was a common expression of intense grief and supplication in the ancient Near East. It reflects David's profound sorrow over his sin with Bathsheba and the resulting illness of their child. The elders' attempt to help him up signifies their desire to comfort and restore him, both physically and emotionally, to a state of normalcy.

but he was unwilling
David's unwillingness to rise demonstrates the depth of his penitence and his focus on seeking God's mercy. It highlights his recognition of the gravity of his sin and his dependence on divine intervention. This act of refusal can be seen as an expression of humility and submission to God's will, reminiscent of other biblical figures who fasted and prayed in times of crisis, such as Esther and Daniel.

and would not eat anything with them
Fasting was a common practice in the Bible, often associated with mourning, repentance, and seeking God's favor. By refusing to eat, David was engaging in a spiritual discipline intended to demonstrate his earnestness in prayer and his desire for God's forgiveness and healing for his child. This act of fasting connects to other scriptural instances where individuals or communities sought divine intervention through abstaining from food, such as in the book of Jonah with the people of Nineveh.

On the seventh day the child died.
The death of the child on the seventh day is significant, as the number seven often symbolizes completion or divine perfection in the Bible. This event marks the completion of the judgment pronounced by Nathan the prophet in 2 Samuel 12:14. The child’s death is a direct consequence of David’s sin with Bathsheba, illustrating the seriousness of sin and its repercussions. The seventh day also holds cultural significance, as it was the day of circumcision for Hebrew male infants, a covenantal sign between God and His people (Genesis 17:12).

But David’s servants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead,
The fear of David’s servants reflects the gravity of the situation and their understanding of David’s emotional state. In ancient Near Eastern cultures, kings were often seen as powerful and potentially volatile figures. The servants’ fear indicates their concern for David’s reaction, knowing his deep grief and previous behavior during the child’s illness. This also highlights the hierarchical nature of ancient societies, where servants had to carefully navigate their interactions with their superiors.

for they said, “Look, while the child was alive, we spoke to him, and he would not listen to us.
This phrase underscores David’s intense mourning and his refusal to be comforted or distracted from his vigil for the child. It reflects a common human response to impending loss, where individuals may become withdrawn or unresponsive. The servants’ observation also points to David’s deep remorse and repentance, as he fasted and prayed for the child’s life, hoping for God’s mercy despite the prophetic word of judgment.

So how can we tell him the child is dead?
The servants’ question reveals their dilemma and the potential consequences of delivering bad news to a grieving king. In the context of ancient Israel, messengers of bad news often faced danger, as seen in other biblical accounts (e.g., 2 Samuel 1:15-16). This reflects the broader cultural understanding of the messenger’s role and the weight of their message.

He may even harm himself.”
The concern that David might harm himself indicates the depth of his despair and the servants’ awareness of his fragile emotional state. This phrase highlights the potential for self-destructive behavior in the face of overwhelming grief and guilt. It also serves as a reminder of the human tendency to react intensely to personal tragedy, especially when compounded by feelings of responsibility and remorse. The servants’ fear for David’s well-being underscores the communal aspect of grief and the importance of support during times of crisis.

When David saw that his servants were whispering to one another
David, as king, was accustomed to observing the behavior of those around him. The whispering of his servants indicated that they were discussing something of great importance and likely distressing. In the ancient Near Eastern context, servants often communicated sensitive information discreetly to avoid causing public alarm or distress to their masters. This behavior reflects the cultural norms of the time, where direct communication of bad news was often avoided to prevent immediate emotional reactions.

he perceived that the child was dead
David's perception indicates his awareness and understanding of the situation. This perception was likely influenced by the context of the preceding events, where the prophet Nathan had pronounced judgment on David for his sin with Bathsheba, stating that the child born to them would die (2 Samuel 12:14). David's understanding of the gravity of his actions and the consequences foretold by Nathan would have made him sensitive to any signs indicating the child's fate.

So he asked his servants, “Is the child dead?”
David's direct question to his servants shows his readiness to confront the reality of the situation. In the cultural and historical context, it was not uncommon for kings to seek confirmation of events from their servants or advisors. This moment also reflects David's acceptance of the divine judgment pronounced by Nathan, as he seeks to confirm what he already suspects.

“He is dead,” they replied
The servants' confirmation of the child's death fulfills Nathan's prophecy and marks a pivotal moment in David's life. This event is a turning point, leading to David's repentance and subsequent actions. The death of the child can be seen as a type of Christ in that it represents the innocent suffering for the sins of another, prefiguring the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus Christ for the sins of humanity. This moment also connects to the broader biblical theme of sin, judgment, and redemption, illustrating the consequences of sin and the possibility of restoration through repentance.

Then David got up from the ground
David's actions follow a period of intense mourning and fasting for his sick child, a result of his sin with Bathsheba. This moment signifies a turning point, where David accepts God's judgment. The act of rising from the ground symbolizes a shift from despair to acceptance and readiness to move forward.

washed and anointed himself
Washing and anointing were customary practices for purification and renewal in ancient Israel. Anointing with oil often signified consecration or preparation for a new task. This act indicates David's return to normalcy and his readiness to resume his kingly duties.

changed his clothes
Changing clothes can symbolize a change in status or condition. In biblical times, clothing often represented one's state of mind or spiritual condition. By changing his garments, David signifies a transition from mourning to acceptance and a readiness to re-engage with life and his responsibilities.

and went into the house of the LORD and worshiped
David's first action after his personal renewal is to worship God, demonstrating his continued faith and submission to God's sovereignty. The house of the LORD refers to the tabernacle, the central place of worship for Israel. This act of worship highlights the importance of maintaining a relationship with God, even in times of personal failure and loss.

Then he went to his own house
Returning to his own house signifies David's re-entry into his personal and kingly life. It marks the end of his period of mourning and the beginning of a new chapter. This action underscores the importance of fulfilling one's responsibilities despite personal grief.

and at his request they set food before him, and he ate
Eating after fasting is a sign of acceptance and moving forward. In the cultural context, sharing a meal often symbolizes fellowship and restoration. David's decision to eat indicates his acceptance of God's will and his readiness to continue his life and duties as king.

“What is this you have done?”
This question is posed by David's servants, reflecting their confusion and surprise at David's actions. In the cultural context of ancient Israel, mourning customs were well-established, and David's behavior seemed to contradict these norms. Typically, fasting and weeping would follow a death, not precede it. This question highlights the servants' lack of understanding of David's spiritual insight and his relationship with God. It also echoes the broader biblical theme of questioning God's ways, as seen in Job 38:2-3, where God questions Job, challenging human understanding of divine actions.

“his servants asked.”
The servants represent the common perspective of the people around David, who are observing his actions closely. In the historical context, servants often had intimate knowledge of the household's affairs and were privy to the personal lives of their masters. Their role here is significant as it provides a narrative device to explore David's internal transformation and understanding of God's will. This interaction also reflects the hierarchical structure of ancient Near Eastern societies, where servants could question but not challenge their master's decisions.

“While the child was alive, you fasted and wept,”
David's fasting and weeping while the child was alive demonstrate his deep repentance and plea for God's mercy. This behavior aligns with the biblical tradition of fasting as a form of supplication and humility before God, as seen in Jonah 3:5-10, where the people of Nineveh fasted to avert God's judgment. David's actions also reflect his understanding of the gravity of his sin with Bathsheba and the resulting consequences, as Nathan the prophet had pronounced in 2 Samuel 12:14. The fasting and weeping signify David's hope that God might relent and spare the child, illustrating the biblical principle of seeking God's compassion.

“but when he died, you got up and ate.”
David's decision to rise and eat after the child's death signifies acceptance of God's judgment and a return to normalcy. This action is counterintuitive to the expected mourning practices, which would typically involve continued fasting and lamentation. David's behavior demonstrates his faith and submission to God's will, acknowledging that the child's death was part of God's divine plan. This acceptance is reminiscent of Job's response to suffering in Job 1:20-21, where he worships God despite his losses. David's actions also foreshadow the New Testament teaching of hope and resurrection, as seen in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-14, where believers are encouraged not to grieve as those without hope.

David answered
David, the second king of Israel, is responding to his servants. This moment follows the death of his child, born from his adulterous relationship with Bathsheba. David's response is significant as it reflects his understanding of God's sovereignty and his own repentance. His answer is a window into his heart, showing a man who, despite his failures, seeks after God.

While the child was alive
This phrase indicates the period of intense intercession by David. The child, a result of David's sin with Bathsheba, was struck with illness as a consequence of David's actions. The life of the child represents a time of hope and potential divine intervention. David's actions during this time reflect the Jewish practice of seeking God's mercy through prayer and fasting.

I fasted and wept
Fasting and weeping are traditional expressions of mourning and repentance in Jewish culture. David's fasting is an act of humility and supplication, seeking God's favor. This practice is seen throughout the Old Testament, such as in the story of Esther (Esther 4:3) and the repentance of Nineveh (Jonah 3:5). It demonstrates a deep reliance on God and a desire for His intervention.

for I said, ‘Who knows?
This phrase captures David's hope and uncertainty. It reflects a common biblical theme where humans, limited in understanding, appeal to God's mercy. Similar sentiments are expressed in other scriptures, such as Joel 2:14, where the prophet calls for repentance with the hope that God may relent and leave a blessing.

The LORD may be gracious to me
David appeals to the character of God, who is known for His grace and mercy. This reflects the covenant relationship between God and Israel, where God is often described as compassionate and gracious (Exodus 34:6). David's hope is rooted in the possibility of divine grace, a theme that runs throughout the Bible and is ultimately fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ.

and let him live.’
David's plea is for the life of his child, hoping for a reversal of the judgment pronounced by the prophet Nathan. This reflects the biblical principle that God holds the power over life and death. While the child does not survive, this moment foreshadows the ultimate hope of resurrection and eternal life found in the New Testament through Jesus Christ, who conquers death and offers life to all who believe.

But now that he is dead
This phrase refers to the death of David's child, born from his union with Bathsheba. The context is the consequence of David's sin with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband, Uriah. Nathan the prophet had foretold the child's death as a divine judgment (2 Samuel 12:14). The death signifies the finality of God's judgment in this instance, emphasizing the seriousness of sin and its consequences.

why should I fast?
Fasting in the Old Testament was often associated with mourning, repentance, or seeking God's favor (e.g., 1 Samuel 7:6, Jonah 3:5). David had fasted and prayed while the child was ill, hoping for God's mercy (2 Samuel 12:16). This rhetorical question indicates David's acceptance of God's will and the futility of fasting now that the child has died. It reflects a shift from seeking intervention to accepting God's sovereign decision.

Can I bring him back again?
This question underscores the irreversible nature of death. In the ancient Near Eastern context, death was seen as a one-way journey, with no return to earthly life. This aligns with the broader biblical understanding that life and death are in God's hands (Job 1:21, Ecclesiastes 3:2). The question highlights human limitations and the acceptance of divine sovereignty over life and death.

I will go to him
David expresses a belief in an afterlife, suggesting that he will one day join his child in death. This reflects an early understanding of life beyond the grave, which is more fully developed in later biblical texts (e.g., Daniel 12:2, 1 Corinthians 15:20-22). It also conveys a sense of hope and reunion, indicating that death is not the end of existence.

but he will not return to me.
This final phrase reiterates the permanence of death and the separation it causes in this life. It acknowledges the reality that the child cannot return to the living, emphasizing the finality of earthly life. This acceptance is a crucial part of David's grieving process and reflects a trust in God's ultimate plan, even amidst personal loss. The phrase also subtly points to the future hope of resurrection and eternal life, themes that are central to Christian eschatology.

Then David comforted his wife Bathsheba
David's act of comforting Bathsheba follows the death of their first child, a consequence of David's sin with her. This reflects David's role as a husband seeking to console his wife in her grief. The use of "his wife" signifies the legitimacy of their union post-repentance, contrasting with the earlier illicit nature of their relationship. This moment also highlights the restoration of their relationship and the beginning of a new chapter in their lives.

and he went to her and lay with her
This phrase indicates the resumption of marital relations between David and Bathsheba. It signifies a return to normalcy and the continuation of life after a period of mourning. In the cultural context of ancient Israel, the act of lying together was not only for procreation but also an expression of intimacy and unity within marriage. This act leads to the birth of Solomon, a significant figure in biblical history.

So she gave birth to a son
The birth of a son is a pivotal moment, as it represents hope and the continuation of David's lineage. In the historical context, sons were often seen as a blessing and a means of carrying on the family name and legacy. This birth is particularly significant as it follows a period of judgment and loss, symbolizing God's grace and the potential for redemption and new beginnings.

and they named him Solomon
The name Solomon is derived from the Hebrew word "shalom," meaning peace. This name is prophetic, as Solomon's reign is characterized by peace and prosperity, contrasting with the wars and conflicts of David's time. Solomon's name also reflects the peace that God has restored to David's household. Solomon is a type of Christ, as he is a king of peace and wisdom, prefiguring the ultimate peace and wisdom found in Jesus.

Now the LORD loved the child
This statement underscores God's favor and blessing upon Solomon, despite the circumstances of his conception. It highlights the theme of divine grace, where God chooses to love and bless individuals according to His purposes. This love is further evidenced by God's later promise to David that Solomon would build the temple and continue the Davidic line, which ultimately leads to the birth of Jesus Christ, fulfilling the messianic prophecy.

and sent word through Nathan the prophet
Nathan the prophet plays a significant role in the life of King David, serving as a divine messenger. His involvement underscores the importance of prophetic authority in Israel, where prophets often acted as intermediaries between God and the king. Nathan previously confronted David about his sin with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12:1-14), demonstrating his role in holding the king accountable. This phrase highlights the continued communication between God and David through Nathan, emphasizing the prophet's role in delivering God's messages and instructions.

to name him Jedidiah
The name "Jedidiah" means "beloved of the LORD." This naming is significant as it reflects God's favor and love towards Solomon, despite the circumstances of his birth. In the ancient Near Eastern culture, names held profound significance, often reflecting one's destiny or divine purpose. The naming by God through Nathan indicates a divine endorsement and a special relationship between Solomon and God. This act can be seen as a foreshadowing of Solomon's future role as king and builder of the temple, a task that David was not permitted to complete (1 Chronicles 22:9-10).

because the LORD loved him
This phrase emphasizes God's grace and favor towards Solomon, despite the sin associated with his parents' union. It reflects the theme of divine love and election, where God chooses individuals for specific purposes regardless of their background. This love is a precursor to Solomon's future wisdom and prosperity as king (1 Kings 3:5-14). It also connects to the broader biblical narrative of God's covenantal love for His people, which is ultimately fulfilled in Jesus Christ, who is also called "beloved" (Matthew 3:17). Solomon's role as a wise king and temple builder serves as a type of Christ, who is the ultimate King and builder of the spiritual temple, the Church.

Meanwhile, Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites
Joab, the commander of King David's army, is engaged in battle with the Ammonites, a frequent adversary of Israel. The Ammonites were descendants of Lot and often in conflict with Israel (Genesis 19:36-38). Rabbah, the capital city of the Ammonites, is located in present-day Amman, Jordan. This battle is part of a larger campaign that began in 2 Samuel 10, where the Ammonites insulted David's envoys, leading to war. Joab's leadership in this campaign highlights his military prowess and loyalty to David, despite the moral complexities in their relationship, as seen in other parts of 2 Samuel.

and captured the royal fortress.
The royal fortress of Rabbah was a significant stronghold, indicating the city's importance and the strategic value of its capture. This victory would have been crucial for Israel's dominance in the region. The capture of such a fortress demonstrates the fulfillment of God's promise to give Israel victory over its enemies (Deuteronomy 20:1-4). The fall of Rabbah also foreshadows the eventual downfall of other nations opposing God's people, aligning with the broader biblical narrative of God's sovereignty over nations. This event sets the stage for David's later involvement in the siege, where he takes the crown of the Ammonite king, symbolizing the transfer of power and God's favor upon Israel.

Then Joab sent messengers to David
Joab, the commander of David's army, often acted as a military leader and intermediary between the battlefield and the king. This reflects the hierarchical structure of ancient Israel's military and governance. Joab's role is significant throughout David's reign, often executing the king's orders and sometimes acting independently, as seen in his dealings with Absalom. The sending of messengers indicates the importance of communication in military campaigns and the reliance on trusted individuals to convey critical information.

to say, “I have fought against Rabbah
Rabbah was the capital city of the Ammonites, located in present-day Amman, Jordan. The Ammonites were often in conflict with Israel, and Rabbah was a strategic target due to its location and resources. The siege of Rabbah is part of a larger campaign against the Ammonites, which began in 2 Samuel 11. This conflict highlights the ongoing territorial and political struggles in the region during David's reign. The phrase underscores Joab's role in leading the military efforts and his success in engaging the enemy.

and have captured the water supply of the city.
Capturing the water supply was a strategic military tactic, as it would weaken the city's defenses and force a surrender. Water was a critical resource, especially in the arid regions of the Near East, and controlling it could determine the outcome of a siege. This action demonstrates Joab's tactical acumen and the importance of resource control in ancient warfare. The capture of the water supply also foreshadows the eventual fall of Rabbah, as it would have severely compromised the city's ability to sustain itself during the siege.

Now, therefore, assemble the rest of the troops
This phrase is a directive from Joab, the commander of David's army, to King David. It reflects the military strategy and urgency in ancient warfare. The context is the siege of Rabbah, the Ammonite capital. Joab's call to assemble the rest of the troops indicates that a significant portion of the army was already engaged, highlighting the scale of the conflict. This reflects the importance of unity and collective effort in achieving victory, a theme echoed in Ecclesiastes 4:12, which speaks to the strength found in numbers.

Lay siege to the city
Laying siege was a common military tactic in the ancient Near East, involving surrounding a city to cut off supplies and force surrender. This tactic is seen throughout the Old Testament, such as in the siege of Jericho (Joshua 6). The city in question, Rabbah, was strategically significant, located east of the Jordan River in present-day Amman, Jordan. Archaeological evidence suggests that Rabbah was a fortified city, making siege warfare a necessary approach.

And capture it
The goal of the siege was to capture the city, a common objective in biblical warfare narratives. Capturing a city often involved not only military conquest but also the subjugation of its people and resources. This reflects the broader biblical theme of God's people claiming the land promised to them, as seen in the conquest narratives of Joshua. The capture of Rabbah would have significant political and economic implications, consolidating Israel's power in the region.

Otherwise I will capture the city
Joab's statement here is both a warning and a challenge to David. It underscores the importance of leadership and the potential for personal glory in military victories. Joab's willingness to capture the city himself if David does not act highlights the competitive nature of leadership roles and the desire for recognition. This can be contrasted with the humility and servant leadership exemplified by Jesus Christ, who taught that the greatest in the kingdom of heaven is the servant of all (Matthew 23:11).

And it will be named after me
Naming a city after oneself was a way to immortalize one's achievements and assert dominance. This practice is seen in other ancient cultures and is reflected in biblical accounts, such as the renaming of cities by conquerors. Joab's statement implies a desire for legacy and honor, which contrasts with biblical teachings on humility and the fleeting nature of earthly glory (James 4:14). This phrase also serves as a reminder of the human tendency toward pride, a recurring theme in Scripture that is addressed through the call to seek God's glory above personal ambition.

So David assembled all the troops
David, as king, had the authority and responsibility to lead Israel in battle. This phrase indicates his role as a military leader and his ability to mobilize the entire army. The assembling of troops signifies a united effort, reflecting the unity of Israel under David's leadership. This action follows Nathan's confrontation with David over his sin with Bathsheba, showing David's return to his kingly duties. The gathering of troops also highlights the importance of collective action in achieving victory, a theme seen throughout the Old Testament, such as in the battles led by Joshua.

and went to Rabbah;
Rabbah was the capital city of the Ammonites, located in present-day Amman, Jordan. It was a significant city due to its strategic location and resources. The Ammonites were descendants of Lot, and their relationship with Israel was often contentious. David's campaign against Rabbah was part of a larger conflict with the Ammonites, which began in 2 Samuel 10. The city was well-fortified, making its capture a notable military achievement. This action also fulfilled God's promise to give Israel victory over its enemies, as seen in Deuteronomy 20:1-4.

and he fought against it
David's direct involvement in the battle underscores his commitment to his role as king and warrior. This phrase indicates that David was not just a distant commander but actively participated in the military campaign. His presence would have been a morale booster for the troops. The act of fighting against Rabbah can be seen as a form of divine justice, as the Ammonites had previously humiliated David's envoys (2 Samuel 10:1-5). This engagement also reflects the biblical principle of confronting and overcoming evil, as seen in Ephesians 6:10-18.

and captured it.
The capture of Rabbah marked a significant victory for Israel and demonstrated God's favor upon David despite his previous sins. This victory secured Israel's dominance over the Ammonites and expanded its territory. The capture of the city also fulfilled the prophetic words of Nathan, who had assured David of God's continued support (2 Samuel 7:8-16). In a typological sense, David's victory can be seen as a foreshadowing of Christ's ultimate victory over sin and death, as Christ is often depicted as a conquering king in the New Testament (Revelation 19:11-16).

Then he took the crown from the head of their king.
This phrase refers to King David's conquest of Rabbah, the Ammonite capital. The "king" mentioned here is likely the Ammonite king, possibly Hanun, who had previously humiliated David's envoys (2 Samuel 10:1-4). The act of taking the crown symbolizes the transfer of power and authority from the defeated king to David. In ancient Near Eastern culture, the crown was a symbol of sovereignty and divine favor. This act signifies God's judgment against the Ammonites and His favor upon David, fulfilling the promise of victory over Israel's enemies.

It weighed a talent of gold and was set with precious stones,
A talent of gold is an enormous weight, approximately 75 pounds or 34 kilograms, indicating the immense wealth and splendor of the Ammonite kingdom. The inclusion of precious stones suggests the crown's value and the opulence of the Ammonite rulers. This detail highlights the material wealth that David acquired through his military campaigns, which was often seen as a sign of God's blessing. The use of gold and precious stones in royal regalia is consistent with other biblical descriptions of wealth and splendor, such as the construction of the Temple (1 Kings 6:20-22).

and it was placed on David’s head.
Placing the crown on David's head symbolizes his victory and the consolidation of his rule over the conquered territory. This act can be seen as a foreshadowing of the ultimate kingship of Jesus Christ, who is often referred to as the "Son of David" (Matthew 1:1). Just as David was a king who expanded his kingdom through conquest, Jesus is portrayed as the King who will establish His eternal kingdom. The imagery of a crown is also significant in the New Testament, where believers are promised crowns as rewards for faithfulness (2 Timothy 4:8, James 1:12).

And David took a great amount of plunder from the city.
The plunder taken from Rabbah represents the spoils of war, which were common in ancient military campaigns. This wealth would have been used to support David's kingdom and possibly for the future construction of the Temple, which Solomon, David's son, would build. The taking of plunder is consistent with God's promises to Israel regarding the conquest of their enemies (Deuteronomy 20:14). It also serves as a reminder of the material blessings that can accompany obedience to God's commands, although David's life also illustrates the spiritual and moral challenges that come with such success.

David brought out the people who were there
This phrase refers to the aftermath of David's conquest of the Ammonite city of Rabbah. The people mentioned are the surviving inhabitants of the city. In the context of ancient warfare, it was common for victors to take captives and utilize them for labor. This action reflects the practices of the time, where conquered peoples were often subjected to forced labor as a means of subjugation and economic benefit.

and put them to work with saws, iron picks, and axes
The tools mentioned here—saws, iron picks, and axes—indicate the type of labor the captives were forced into, likely involving construction or resource extraction. The use of iron tools suggests a level of technological advancement and the importance of these resources for building and infrastructure. This also highlights the harsh realities of ancient warfare, where the defeated were often put to work in difficult and demanding conditions.

and he made them work at the brick kilns
Brick kilns were essential for producing bricks used in construction, indicating that the labor was likely related to building projects, possibly fortifications or other structures. This reflects the strategic importance of Rabbah and other Ammonite cities, as controlling them would have provided economic and military advantages. The use of brick kilns also connects to the broader biblical theme of labor and servitude, reminiscent of the Israelites' own experience in Egypt.

He did the same to all the Ammonite cities
This phrase suggests that David's actions in Rabbah were not isolated but part of a broader campaign against the Ammonites. The systematic approach to subjugating and utilizing the conquered peoples underscores the thoroughness of David's military strategy. It also reflects the fulfillment of God's judgment against the Ammonites, as seen in earlier biblical narratives where the Ammonites opposed Israel.

Then David and all his troops returned to Jerusalem
The return to Jerusalem signifies the completion of the military campaign and a return to the center of David's kingdom. Jerusalem, as the political and spiritual capital, represents the consolidation of David's rule and the stability of his reign. This return also foreshadows the continued expansion and establishment of Israel under David's leadership, setting the stage for the future reign of Solomon and the building of the Temple.