 |
.JPG)  |
.jpg)  |
 |
Study the Word. Meditate on it and let it be your delight and holy guide.
Youth Ministry
Children's Nurture
Mission & Food Pantry
2 Samuel 13-15
Absalom is David’s third son. Amnon is David’s firstborn. Tamar is David’s daughter, although, not surprisingly, the text never refers to her as such. This chapter describes the rape of Tamar by her brother.
Amnon was clearly obsessed with Tamar. Perhaps he realized his feelings were not healthy, for he sought a counselor. But Amnon chose his crafty cousin Jonadab to be his counselor and took advice from him for how to handle the obsession. What do you think our choice of counselors says about us?
According to Amnon, Absalom and not Tamar’s virginity is what stood in the way of his “getting” Tamar. Then, Amnon followed Jonadab’s plot in achieving some voyeurism before raping Tamar, in using Tamar’s sense of obligation and obedience against her, and in sending away potential witnesses. What does all of this imply?
Initially, Tamar did not speak. Suddenly, Amnon grabbed Tamar, and then she claimed her voice and spoke. Some people see this “claiming of voice” as an act inspired by God, emboldened by the touch and presence of God. What do you think the story is implicitly saying about the “silenced” finally speaking out?
Perhaps it was due to Amnon’s skewed values that Tamar appealed to custom and not divine law when she tried to dissuade Amnon from his attack. She made an essentially secular argument. Sadly, it would not have worked for her to argue from her own feelings of violation; he would not have honored her feelings and she knew it. What does it tell us that Tamar realized, and so told Amnon, that all Amnon had to do to “have” her legally was to ask for her from the King, their father?
Amnon refused to hear or heed Tamar’s pleas. What are some contemporary examples of our “refusals to hear”? To what does refusal to hear always lead? Why don’t we learn from this?
After Amnon raped Tamar, his satiated lust turned to derision and hatred. He refused to use her name or recognize her as his sister. He simply ordered, “Go,” and implied, “Go, thing!” Still, Tamar managed to speak again and told him, “No!” She realized his expulsion increased his violence against her, that a rape dismissed or ignored is a crime exacerbated. She managed to maintain her personhood despite his attempt to strip her of it. What does this suggest to us, whether male or female, when we are attacked, dismissed and victimized today? What do you think God is telling us?
Although Amnon continued to refuse to listen, the nuances of the story show that his power was waning. Now when Amnon spoke, the text called him by a pronoun rather than by name. At the hand of God, finally, abuse of power always leads to loss of power.
Tamar did not try to “buck up” and keep her tragedy secret. She put ashes on her head, tore her clothes and cried. If this is a healthy model demonstrated in the Scriptures, why do we tell people to “buck up”?
The text manages to describe for us not only the cultural realities of that era, but also at the same time, profound truths. The text does not use Tamar’s name when she speaks to Amnon, and refers to her as “she” instead, indicating her powerlessness and place in society. Clearly, Tamar lacked power, but she did not lack reason and wisdom. On the other hand, Amnon had power, but neither reason nor wisdom. The Bible remains ever a subversive text. Those without power are often wiser and more faithful than those with power. What would it mean for us if we took this message to heart?
Compare Absalom as an advocate with Jonadab as a counselor. Both planned deceit. Absalom told Tamar not to speak or take to heart what had happened for the time being. Meanwhile, he made plans for revenge. This is not the only story in the Bible in which deceit is used as an “appropriate” strategy. That is difficult for many of us to handle. We want the heroes in the Bible to act in justice without dirty hands. The biblical characters, however, lived in the real world where difficult choices had to be made. Some of those choices involve prioritizing “sins.” While deceit is never valued, it is weighted as a lesser sin than injustice. Better to resort to deceit in order to enact justice than to let injustices continue.
In many places in the Middle Eastern culture today, revenge is still part and parcel of “justice.” How do we achieve justice without vengeance?
Absalom uses euphemisms to speak of the rape, for rape is unspeakable. He shares his counsel to Tamar with tenderness. He cannot redeem for Tamar what is lost, but can move to act in the future. What does this suggest to us about ways we can help hurting people?
Tamar is portrayed as a desolate woman, thus a woman of sorrows, acquainted with grief. What do you think that symbolic allusion means?
There is a slight difference between the Greek (Septuagint) and Hebrew versions of this story. The Hebrew says that David was furious. Greek version says that David was furious because Amnon was his firstborn and he loved him. There’s a tremendous difference. Wonder again why the text never refers to David as “Tamar’s father.”
Absalom refused to speak with Amnon, who refused to listen to Tamar. What do you think the text is telling us about “chains” in a lack of communication? It’s interesting that later, Jonadab becomes the one who will tell David about Amnon’s death.
Let yourself feel David’s aching pain at the end of the 13th chapter. He has lost both Amnon and Absalom - the first to death, the second to murder. Absalom is a murderer. David knows he will lose him. Notice this verse: “The spirit of the king longed to go out to Absalom, because he was comforted about Amnon since he was dead” (13:39)
Absalom returned three years after he’d arranged for Amnon’s death, and David initially refused to see him. Remember, David had arranged for Uriah’s death in order to obtain Bathsheba. Remember too that David never said anything about the rape of his daughter, Tamar. What does this tell us about David? Notice what it also tells us about sons following the model of their fathers.
The narrator concludes this story by noting that Absalom, like Tamar, was beautiful. Absalom had four children - three unnamed sons (!) and one daughter, whom he named Tamar. Rape and desolation do not have the final say. In the conclusion, we see the hand of God.
Chapter 14
The prophet Nathan once went to David to reveal David’s sin through a parable about a bad shepherd. In this chapter, the wise woman of Tekoa, through Joab’s initiation, will tell a make-believe drama in order to help David through his emotional trauma. She pleads that the cycle of vengeance be broken. David had no idea that she was talking about his own family. The text knows, though. It is with a certain irony that David declares, “Not a hair will fall to the ground” (v. 11), because Absalom had a lot of hair (see v. 26; 18:9-10).
Consider the cycles of vengeance in our world today. Notice how it takes seeing things differently to break that cycle. David thought there was honor in keeping the cycle alive, in holding a grudge, but the woman shows him that real strength and honor will be found not in keeping the exiled one away, but in bringing him home. As you read this, think about the parable of the prodigal son, and the many parables Jesus tells of the lost being reclaimed.
Reconciliation seems only a moment away between Absalom and David. However, David realized Joab had a hand in the woman’s story (which in itself also employed some deceit) and rethinks his position. He decides Absalom can come home, but cannot come home to him. (Imagine the prodigal father, seeing his son returning, wanting to run to him but instead returning to the house and closing the door.) Joab manages to orchestrate a meeting, but only a “royal” one. David will act as king and greet Absalom with royal protocol, but he will not act as Absalom’s father. Compare the kiss of King David upon Absalom with the kiss of the father upon the prodigal in Luke 15:20.
The text leaves it to us to decide whether David’s refusal to give Absalom the throne is an act of justice (due to Amnon’s death) or alienation. Chapters 13 and 14 compel us to reflect on the continuing human saga of alienation and reconciliation, of vengeance and forgiveness. Second Samuel also forces us to consider the ongoing effects and consequences of our actions. Nathan in 2 Samuel 12:11 announced to David, “I will raise up evil against you out of your own house…” As a consequence of his actions, the one for whom David yearns (14:1), who sought to act in justice on behalf of his sister in the face of his father’s inaction, but then acted in vengeance, would indeed become a political threat to King David.
Chapter 15
The fifteenth chapter tells the story of Absalom’s rebellion and coup, of David’s escape, of the continuing conflict between this father and son, and David’s eventual bittersweet victory.
Given the 13th chapter, it is not surprising that part of Absalom’s political message against David was that Absalom was the more likely of the two to administer royal justice. Absalom stole the peoples’ hearts (15:6).
One may wonder what type of foreshadowing is present in the section about Ittai the foreigner and David - the reaching out to a homeless sojourner, the crossing of boundaries. The scene between Ittai and David, and the pledge of loyalty, is reminiscent of the scene between Ruth and Naomi in Ruth 1:16-17.
Although the text has shown us the “darker” sides of David, it also declares that David has nevertheless held to at least some faith. It is an act of faith to refuse to “use” the ark to accompany him in his flight. David refuses to try to manipulate God. Perhaps he has finally learned! David will scheme and plan, but he will also entrust himself to God. Notice that there is no contradiction here. Trusting God does not mandate sitting back and doing nothing!
Copyright 2002 Carrie Scott
|