Cleaning Up the Story
It happened when the ark of the covenant of the Lord came to the city of David, that Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and celebrating; and she despised him in her heart. 1 Chronicles 15:29 NASB
Leaping and celebrating – We’ve commented in the past that the books of Chronicles tend to remove or modify material from the parallel stories in Samuel and Kings in order to enhance the Davidic monarchy. Some things are left out. Some things get added. Previously we recognized this process in the stories of Solomon, particularly Solomon’s idolatry. But here we have a re-write of an event in David’s life that requires investigation.
The problem is the possible interpretation that David exposed his genitals to the public. In an article concerning the story from Samuel, one author writes:
No. David was not dancing in his tighty whities. He was dressed as a priest and dancing in a twisting, rollicking manner in front of the commoners in Jerusalem’s streets. This was what Michal was upset about. David was not acting dignified like a king should. He was strutting his priestly/kingly stuff in front of everyone and his slave girl in the biggest parade of his kingship. It was his “coming out as king” party, and she felt he should have done it in a dignified, cultured way rather than dancing in the streets as a priest-king.[1]
This analysis is based on the verse in Samuel:
But when David returned to bless his household, Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, “How the king of Israel distinguished himself today! He uncovered himself today in the eyes of his servants’ maids as one of the foolish ones shamelessly uncovers himself!” 2 Samuel 6:20
The question is the meaning of the Niphal verb, gālâ. The author contending that the story is about David’s disregard for royal dignity rightly claims that gālâ means, “to remove or uncover,” and is used in a host of contexts where improper exposure cannot be inferred. But notice Waltke’s comment on this particular, reflexive, verb form:
In the Niphal the action happens to the subject itself in either a passive or reflexive way. Thus in a passive sense it means “to be uncovered”: of nakedness (Ex 20:26; Isa 47:3), of skirts (Jer 13:22), and of foundations (II Sam 22:16 = Ps 18:16) where it is parallel to the Niphal of rāʾâ “to be visible.” Thus it also means “to be known” (Isa 23:1) and “to be revealed”—of a word from God to Daniel (Dan 10:1).
In the reflexive sense it means “to expose oneself” (three times of David in II Sam 6:20) or “to show/reveal oneself,” of Jonathan to the Philistines (I Sam 14:8), of the gates to death to Job (Job 38:17) and of God.[2]
Now let’s ask some questions about the two accounts of this event. First we need to know something about Michal. Remember that she was Saul’s second daughter. Saul promised the first daughter to whoever slew Goliath, and when David became the victorious recipient, Saul changed the deal, marrying the first daughter off for another political connection. The Bible tells us that Michal was the only one of David’s women who “loved” him, but that her father also married her off to another man while she was David’s wife. Then there’s that “throw away” verse saying that after marrying Abigail David also married Ahinoam, a very strange name that occurs in only one other context—as wife to Saul. Is it possible that David takes revenge (and establishes political superiority) by taking Saul’s wife and Saul’s daughter to bed? If so, Michal has plenty of reason to despise David, regardless of his “frolicking.” We should take note that Michal accuses him of gālâ in front of many maids. David’s personal history with eight wives and ten concubines might also have caused some distress, right?
Back to the verse in Chronicles. Notice that as it is written it makes no sense. If all David was doing was “leaping and celebrating,” why would Michal despise him? The verb (bāzâ) is very strong, used, for example, of God’s assessment of David’s adultery with Bathsheba.[3] There has to be more to the story. If Waltke’s comment about self-exposure is correct, then the account in Samuel where Michal mentions the servant girls makes sense. Notice that Michal does not mention any male observers. With this interpretation, the need to clean up the account in Chronicles also makes sense. If, as the commentator from Scribalishess suggests, it is only about royal foolishness, then why would the Chronicles account need to “clean up” the story by removing the reference to other women? And even in Samuel’s account, why does Michal suggest a comparison to other men who shamelessly uncover themselves?
Sometimes I think we forget the sexual politics in David’s life. We want him to be the paradigm case of a man “after God’s own heart,” a statement from Paul (Acts 13:22), but only referenced to David by God before he was anointed king (1 Samuel 13:14). We ignore the eighteen women, the abandoned sons, the scheming for political advantage, and we concentrate of the humility, obedience and desperation for God. We forget that this is a man with considerable internal issues and a wide range of behaviors. He’s human, just like us. No wonder the chroniclers felt that they needed to fix things.
Topical Index: gālâ, to remove, to uncover, David, Michal, 2 Samuel 6:20, 1 Chronicles 15:29
[1]https://scribalishess.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/was-david-dancing-in-his-tighty-whities-2-samuel-6/
[2]Waltke, B. K. (1999). 350 גָּלָה. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament(electronic ed., p. 160). Chicago: Moody Press.
[3]You have to wonder why there is no condemnation of David’s relations with Ahinoam. In fact, there is a verse that says that God Himself would have given David Saul’s wivesif he desired them.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED: Last Shabbat I gave a lecture on the elements of exegesis at Beth Messiah in Sarasota. It was recorded and is available on their web site (CLICK HERE). Just scroll down to the two lectures I gave. The sound isn’t quite right at the beginning but that is soon corrected. I think you might enjoy these two sessions. There is a lot more to exegesis than just looking up the words in a dictionary.
Hey are you guys, sleeping in? —NO comments–its already 5:45 here in Western Washington– How can I start my day?
Skip,
How is it going?
David is a controversial figure! I have come to a deeper appreciation of this broken and beautiful person.
Personal Story: Earlier in the Spring of this year, my right hand got nipped by a wood chipper. I still have all of my phalanges! I am still not able to bend the middle finger because of no cartilage in the middle joint, and the top joint will not bend because of significant scar tissue. The two fingers on either side of it are stiff because they work in tandem with the middle finger (my ring finger also had a laceration that cut partially through the tendon). The latest doctor prognosis was not reassuring. The trauma was significant for me and my family. The emergency room experience was horrible! I wish I was kidding, but I was probably the most lucid of the individuals working with me that night. Prayers for restoration and functionality would be greatly appreciated. By the way, I had a dream this morning that my hand was able to fully close! I have recently returned back to a huge workload.
Violence has been the norm throughout history, but unlike the ancient people, we have the convenience of viewing it through a screen. The screen has brought us together! You want to talk about disassociation and disconnection. Violence has become a commodity, and we have sold our souls to be enslaved.
I bled for three hours before they sewed me up! Accidental violence gave me a perspective on those who perpetrate violence upon others. David slew Goliath, and then he cut off his head! David was a warlord. How did this impact his very being? How many people did he slay in his lifetime? The trauma upon his very nephesh is staggering! Why did he turn to so many women in his lifetime? Was it just sexual politics?
In regards to David, I just recently picked up a book: “In The Footsteps Of King David” – Yosef Garfinkel, Saar Ganor, Michael G. Hasel
YHVH is King!
Brian, I have been praying for you since you wrote yesterday (I hope others are, too) and am grateful that you gave us more details. Now I can pray for full healing for you and your hand, too.
It sounds like you use your hands to provide for your family (I do too). There is hope for the restoration of cartilage as well as the transformation of scar tissue in the functional medicine world. There are many techniques as well as restorative natural remedies for just such injuries. Cut, poison and burn are not your only options! There are miracles, too, for us willing to meet them in faith. I am putting my faith in the great Healer for you.
Thank you, Laurita! I am Owner / Operator of a business, and my hands are pivotal in accomplishing tasks. I have been in nutrition and fitness for years, and I naturally turned to these things. I am on a regiment to restore the fingers and their components. I fell on my left hand a month before this accident, and I severely dislocated my pinky. I am not able to close either hand fully. I have also developed dupuytren’s contracture in both hands, and the carpal tunnel syndrome in my right hand has been exacerbated since the accident (three of my fingers are constantly feeling half asleep). It has been an inconvenient and interesting season. Thank you again for your prayers!
Laurita,
Please feel free to share any recommendations.
I am no expert, just Pogo. I can, however, forward sources and resources that I find in the process of finding them for others (and myself) if you want to continue by email: mine is hayeslaurita at gmail.
In some of the more advance medical science there is Stem Cell therapy that helps the body replace itself. They take cells from your body or they have Cells available that they inject to start the process. There are several here in the Seattle – Tacoma Area. You might check in your area or even the internet, who knows. Shalom
David, of all people in the Bible, has always given me the most hope. His flaws are glaring; his repentance genuine and revealing, and his relationship with YHVH through it all shows us that it is NOT ABOUT US – not any ‘goodness’, power, talents or genetics we possess – not even about our flaws, failures and foibles, but about Him. David was willing to crucify his flesh and lust on a hill for all to see so that his Redeemer might be glorified and not ashamed of him. And He is! If He can redeem and use that man, He can redeem and use anybody! Even me. (Now, where did I put that cross?)
“NOT ABOUT US” Woke up this morning Laurita with that same thought!
I keep asking the Lord what was it that made Him send a tsunami that swept us along in the sixties????Not about us –
Better find it –please don’t lose it.
It’s not that it gets lost: that would, sadly, be me.
“IF YOU ARE INTERESTED: …” Truly appreciated your presentation “elements of exegesis”! This is my silent journey. When I broach this way of think, oh my, if they don’t walk away, they certainly run. So, over time, it’s become a ‘solo’ walk. Listening to both (part 1 & 2), I am on the same page… keep asking questions, be open to change and read, read, read. Thank you Skip!
Framing the narrative… when there’s an opportunity to manipulate, distort, redirect or even lie, the advantage to clean up and cover up is always tempting. David is human, like the rest of us. So what’s the ‘big deal’? Is the leaping and celebrating the issue here? Maybe. Or could it be David was willing to be ‘authentic’ even for a brief moment during that heavy, burdening time in his life. Throw off the grandiose and be that ‘boy’ just one more time. Celebrate with leaping (joy/gladness) and to heck with imagery. Not ‘king-like’ and he ruffled feathers all over the place. Sorry… NOT! David was being ‘david’. That made someone very angry! Michal. Did she loose control of David? Probably never had it. So it goes… what a mess!
David didn’t seek out the anointing (when he was a shepherd boy). God choose him. Why? Mistake? Regrets? When I see the uncovered, revealed David, I can’t help but think of my own story board. The build up and releases so necessary to cope with all the trauma I have wittingly or unwittingly collected. David gives me hope, even in his/my distress. David also warns me as I ponder his laments. David’s narrative is somewhat mine. I no longer desire or need ‘framing’ to please the world… I choose my authentic self each and every time.
I appreciate your comment here, but Michal’s anger seems disproportionate if all David did was leap and celebrate. I suggest that there is a sexual component that tips Michal’s anger, and there is plenty of history in David’s life that supports this. So, maybe David was being David in more ways that just celebrating.
Skip, I hesitate to say this, but you may (indadvertently) be stepping on some toes, here. I have seen the modern worship embrace what they like to call “Davidic dancing” (of WOMEN, no less, y’all – um, head scratcher?). What raises my hair, though, is that when I lay those pictures over the top of many of the false religions of the world (most of whom worship sex), they employ women dancing in exactly this way. I have been invited many times, also, to my new age friends’ gatherings, where they ALSO engage in this ritual, and for the life of me, I can’t tell the difference. Coincidence? There, I had my beef: y’all can throw the tomatoes now!
Interesting comment. I have also wondered about this phenomenon. But I haven’t investigated it.
Laurita, with you on this topic. Hard to understand why this component of worship exists, but it does. In Sufism, it called tantric dancing. I kinda hung out with them for a very short while until it became very noticeable they are all about ‘sex’. Not for me.. ran.
Of course David had other issues and it’s not too much a secret that he had a sexual component to his ‘self’. That being said, my point was examining David as authentic and not hiding as others tried to ‘hide’ him. Hence, framing him as something other than what might have been well known back then… sex on the mind. Linking David to what we have been discussing for a while now… hiding, running and avoiding the obvious… self, my thoughts focused on Michal’s reaction. She must have known David had this proclivity. And if it resurfaced over time we now see the ‘cover up’. Then maybe, just maybe many others around David knew too. Exposing himself whether it be emotions or his genitals, was not a consideration as I pondered. How I see David… repressed, angry, hurt… etc… just like the rest of us. So he had that day he ‘let loose’ and frankly didn’t care what the result was. OK… now we know. Thanks Skip… always a pleasure! I really mean that.
Nice comment. I agree. 18 women usually means some serious internal emotional issues.
2 Samuel 6:23: “And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death.” ESV
This is an add on to the event listed above in 1 Chronicles 15:29.
It reads like a succinct conclusion to the sexual politics involved!
Particularly notice that all of the wives of David produce sons, except Michal, each of which has a claim to the throne and to his mother’s father’s territory. Sexual politics indeed.