Tag: David

The Law of Retaliation

"Saul Tries to Kill David" by Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld, 1850's, Wikimedia Commons
“Saul Tries to Kill David” by Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld, 1850’s, Wikimedia Commons

This past weekend in worship and ABC, we discussed the importance of friendship.  Every person needs a friend for encouragement, for challenge, and for consolation. In the words of Proverbs 17:17:  “A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.”  For good times and for bad, everyone needs a friend.

Perhaps the most famous example of friendship in the Bible is that of David and Jonathan.  These two guys far more than just bar buddies.  1 Samuel 18:1 describes their relationship like this:  “The soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David.”

Though David and Jonathan’s friendship was strong, it was also fraught with peril.  Jonathan’s dad, Saul, the king of Israel, hated David and wanted to kill him.  But Jonathan was so deeply devoted to his friend that he went to bat for him, telling his father:

“Let not the king sin against his servant David, because he has not sinned against you, and because his deeds have brought good to you.  For he took his life in his hand and he struck down the Philistine, and the LORD worked a great salvation for all Israel. You saw it, and rejoiced. Why then will you sin against innocent blood by killing David without cause?” (1 Samuel 19:4-5)

In my sermon, I talked about how Jonathan, in order to defend his friend, appeals to the lex talionis, a Latin phrase referring to the “law of retaliation.”  This law is classically expressed in Leviticus 24:19-20:  “If anyone injures his neighbor, as he has done it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; whatever injury he has given a person shall be given to him.”  This law, of course, is not meant to promote violence, but to contain it.  The lex talionis stipulates that “the punishment must fit the crime.”  If someone takes your eye, you can’t take his arm.  The example I used in my sermon is, “If someone steals $100 from you, you can’t sue him for $1 million because of emotional pain and suffering.”

The way Jonathan uses the lex talionis in 1 Samuel 19 is especially fascinating.  For rather than appealing to the lex talionis responsively to punish a crime, he appeals to it preemptively to prevent a crime.  Jonathan’s essential argument to his father is this:  “You can’t kill David!  The law of retaliation says you can only hurt someone if he first hurts you!  And David hasn’t hurt you!”

I have gained a deep appreciation for Jonathan’s argument to his father because Jonathan essentially turns the lex talionis into a catch 22.  You can hurt someone, but only if he hurts you first.  Someone else can hurt you, but only if you hurt him first.  This means no one can hurt anyone because no one can make the first move to hurt someone because, by sheer chronological necessity, there would be no prior just cause for such an injury, thus breaking the lex talionis!  Far more than regulating violence, the lex talionis prevents it.

This use of the lex talionis is nicely in line with Jesus’ commentary on the rule:  “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:38-39).  Jesus essentially says, “Even if you are unjustly wounded, never give anyone a reason to use the lex talionis on you.  Self-control, even in the midst of terrible adversity, is paramount.  If you don’t hurt someone else, then that other person has no ground on which to stand if he hurts you.”

What tensions and quarrels do you have with others?  The best way to end them is to refuse to give the person with whom you are in conflict any reason to retaliate.  Your cool and collected response to someone who is angry may just be what diffuses a fight, ends a conflict, and restores a friendship.

ABC Extra – Be Reconciled Today

This weekend in worship and ABC, we continued our series “Five Family Fiascos!  Is There Hope For Us?” with a look at the fiasco of familial estrangement.  Certainly the scene is familiar:  one family member betrays, embarrasses, or even inadvertently hurts another family member and retaliation ensues.  But this retaliation does not take the form of a fistfight or of cutting words or of a heated demand for an apology.  No, this retaliation takes the form of a cold shoulder – a refusal to speak to, or sometimes to even acknowledge, the other person.  And the longer this goes on, the further these two family members drift apart.  This is sad story of estrangement.

The story of King David and his son Absalom follows this all too proverbial pattern of estrangement.  As we learned this weekend, after Absalom’s brother Amnon rapes their sister Tamar, Absalom becomes furious at his father for not stepping in and meting out justice against Amnon in the face of such shocking wickedness.  Absalom subsequently becomes estranged from his father.  Indeed, we read, “Absalom lived two years in Jerusalem without seeing the king’s face” (2 Samuel 14:27).  Two men, two years, in the same town – and they never so much as catch a glimpse of each other.

Tragically, it’s not as if they didn’t want to see each other.  We read in 2 Samuel 13:39:  “The spirit of the king longed to go to Absalom.”  But David defies his spirit’s yearning.  He never goes to see his son.  Indeed, he even prevents his son from seeing him.  “He must not see my face,” David says just verses later (2 Samuel 14:24).

Eventually, the estrangement between father and son becomes too much for Absalom to bear.  He rebels by staging a coup against his father.  Battle lines are drawn, strategies are devised, and, in the end, David proves victorious – but only after Absalom is killed.  When David hears the news that his son has been killed and the threat to his throne has been removed, a wave of remorse and regret comes rushing over the king:  “O my son Absalom!  My son, my son Absalom!  If only I had died instead of you – O Absalom, my son, my son” (2 Samuel 18:33).  Interestingly, this is the first time that David calls Absalom, “my son.”  Before this, he referred to him only as, “the young man” (cf. 2 Samuel 14:21, 18:5, 12, 29, 32).  But now he longs for the relationship he could have had.  Now he dotingly calls Absalom, “my son.”  Now he wishes, “If only I had died instead of you.”  But now it’s too late.  Trading his own life for Absalom’s life would do David no good.  Absalom is already gone.

Certainly one of the weighty lessons of this story comes in the utter tragedy of leaving relationships estranged.  Indeed, this story ends on a terribly tragic note – with a wailing monarch riddled by regret.  And yet, through David’s tear-choked words, we hear a distant note of hope.  For though David cannot die in the stead of Absalom and restore their broken relationship, there is someone who can.  And there is someone who has.  For when our sins separated us from God, God traded His Son’s life for our lives so that we would no longer be estranged from Him, but reconciled to Him, even as Paul declares:  “We were reconciled to God through the death of His Son” (Romans 5:10).  God is in the business of reconciliation.  And His reconciliation is truly the most challenging and most glorious reconciliation of all – for He reconciles imperfect people to His perfect Person.  Will you, as an imperfect person, seek reconciliation with other imperfect people from whom you are estranged?   Remember, the remorse of estrangement will always be heavier than the challenge of reconciliation.  Be reconciled today.

Want to learn more on this passage? Go to
www.ConcordiaLutheranChurch.com
and check out audio and video from Pastor Tucker’s
message or Pastor Zach’s ABC!