Readers raised on a hermeneutic of suspicion find it difficult to trace honor in David’s bloody treatment of a rival king’s assassins. David’s words are high-minded, yet the consequences of his judicial murdering—if that’s what it is—are transparently beneficial.
Perhaps suspicion is the right prima facie response. What is patently false is the assumption that the text’s compilers were too dim to glimpse the same suspicious potentialities. That they do not resolve David’s self-described honorable actions into a moral flatline of good or evil is not oversight. It is profound awareness of the human drama, the mixed motives that usually fuel it, and the burden of the recorder not to distort this complexity in the service of clarity. Continue Reading »