Verse 13:[1] (see 1 Sam. 15:24) And David said unto Nathan, (2 Sam. 24:10; Job 7:20; Ps. 32:5; 51:4; Prov. 28:13) I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, (Ecclus. 47:11[2]) The LORD also hath (2 Sam. 24:10; Ps. 32:1; Job 7:21; Mic. 7:18; Zech 3:4) put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.
[David said to Nathan, I have sinned] God here shows the utility and dignity of the external ministry. David knew that he had sinned; he read the sacred books: yet he was not moved. But by this speech (of Nathan) he was overpowered (Martyr), who up to this point appears to have been senseless, and without consideration (Sanchez). The Confession of Repentance is a welcome companion (Grotius).
[I have sinned to the Lord[3]] Or against the Lord (Serarius). This more severely wounded the soul of David, than the disgrace of it, the stench of an ulcer, etc. And this he more clearly affirms in Psalm 51, against thee, thee only, etc. (Sanchez, Tirinus): or, before the Lord; with Him seeing, so be it; let me hide it from men (Lapide). He confesses in few words; God does not delight in loquaciousness (Martyr). The sorrow of David was not so much from the fear of punishments, or the loss of benefits, whether of this, or the coming, age; as from the offending of Him, whom he loved above all things (Sanchez). Moreover, those words were set forth with immense sorrow, and with tears; as it is evident from Psalm 51, composed upon this occasion; and from the readiness of the pardon. Saul said, I have sinned;[4] but in a similar expression yet the heart was dissimilar, which the divine eye was discerning, says Augustine in contra Faustum 22:67 (Serarius). Saul did not sorrow on account of his guilt, but only on account of the punishment (Menochius); 1 Samuel 15:30, etc., honor me, etc. (Sanchez).
I have sinned against the Lord; I now freely confess that sin which I have hitherto so wickedly smothered; and I have deserved all these and far heavier judgments for it; and I am more troubled for my sin against my sovereign Lord and gracious God, than for the shame and punishment that follow it. How serious and pathetical this confession was, we may see, Psalm 51.
[The Lord has caused thy sin to pass, הֶעֱבִיר] He caused to pass from thee (Tirinus); He removed, dismissed, 1. with respect to guilt (Menochius, Serarius, similarly Martyr), 2. with respect to eternal punishment (Serarius), 3. the death that God had threatened through me, and which David was fearing, thou shalt not die (Sanchez). The punishment that thou wert obliged to bear He transferred to thy family (certain interpreters in Martyr). I deliver thy person from the sin and punishment that thou hadst pronounced against thyself, verse 5 (Junius).
The Lord also hath put away thy sin, that is, so far as concerns thy own life and eternal salvation; both which were forfeited by this sin.
[Thou shalt not die] David was indeed above the punishments of law, as King, as was the Queen after him. But God had threatened to be the avenger of those things that the magistrate was unable, or unwilling, to punish, Leviticus 26:14, etc. But by this He had not taken from Himself the power of forgiveness, of which He here makes use, in such a way that He frees David only from the punishment of death and of the loss of the kingdom, otherwise being about to inflict upon him many other evils (Grotius).
Thou shalt not die, as by thy own sentence, verse 5, thou didst deserve, and as thou mightest expect to do by my immediate stroke; though possibly thou mightest elude the law before a human judicature, or there be no superior to execute the law upon thee.
Verse 14:[5] Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD (Is. 52:5; Ezek. 36:20, 23; Rom. 2:24) to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.
[Thou hast made the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme (similarly Pagnine, Piscator), אֶ֗פֶס כִּֽי־נִאֵ֤ץ נִאַ֙צְתָּ֙ אֶת־אֹיְבֵ֣י יְהוָ֔ה] Because thou hast caused in reviling to revile (thou hast provoked to wrath [Septuagint], thou hast exasperated [Aquila in Nobilius]) the enemies of the Lord (Montanus); thou hast opened the mouth of the enemies, etc. (Jonathan in Vatablus); thou hast furnished occasion of ridiculing thyself, etc. (Arabic); thou hast given occasion to the enemies (Munster, Tigurinus, Junius and Tremellius, Castalio) of blaspheming (Tigurinus), or of cursing (Castalio), or of speaking ill of Israel (Munster) (in which such scandal was committed, not by a common man, but by the King, who so impiously delivered a faithful soldier into the hand of the enemy, so that he might all the more easily get possession of his wife [Munster]), or of contemptuously provoking Jehovah (Junius and Tremellius). In provocation thou hast provoked through the enemies of Jehovah. A term engaging in the function of the antecedent and of a relative, as in Genesis 15:6 (Junius). They explain, 1. that in this manner the Ammonites were provoked to blasphemy; and, while Uriah and other Israelites were meeting their death, mocked God, etc. (Martyr, thus Tostatus and Cajetan in Sanchez, Junius). 2. Thou hast furnished occasion to certain impious men (both Hebrew, and foreign [Sanchez]) of thinking ill of God’s righteousness, goodness, providence, etc. (Malvenda); for they shall say that He set a most wicked King over His people (Vatablus, similarly Menochius). Since they were seeing such crimes perpetrated by David with impunity; when they remembered Saul, cast out of the kingdom on account of lesser sins: they were impiously jeering, that either God is an acceptor of persons, or He ignores human affairs, or He does not see all things, or even He is an approver of sins (Tirinus almost out of Sanchez); since that man, whom they had heard to be after God’s own heart,[6] had perpetrated such things (Sanchez). They would say, Is this the holiness of God’s people? is this the piety of their kings and prophets? (Lapide). To others this opinion does not satisfy, because the stench of the adultery had not yet burst forth, etc. (Dionysius in Sanchez). Response: It was not able to remain a secret, because both the messengers and the assistants of David’s crime, and the whole family of Bath-sheba, and Joab, and perhaps others were having knowledge from yet others (Tirinus). The crimes of David had become known: 1. By conjectures from the acceleration of the wedding, 2. the unexpected swelling of the belly, 3. rumors among the servants (Serarius); 4. From the death of Uriah (Sanchez). It is a grievous addition to a sin, to give occasion to impious nations to think ill of the divine law, which they would see to be treated with contempt by the chiefs of the Hebrews (Grotius). Moreover, נִאֵץ in this place is a Piel infinitive for נַאֵץ, to treat with contempt, etc. (Buxtorf’s Lexicon, Munster).
To blaspheme, that is, to reproach both God and his people, and the true religion. For though these were not concerned in David’s sin, the blame and shame of which should have been appropriated to him; yet heathens and wicked men would, according to their own evil minds and malicious hearts, fasten the reproach of this upon God and religion; as if God were unholy, because the man after God’s own heart was so; and partial, in conniving at so great a crime, when Saul was cast off for a far less sin; and negligent in the government of the world, and of his church, in suffering such a wickedness as even heathens have abhorred to go unpunished; and as if all religion were but hypocrisy and imposture, and a pretence for villainies. Besides, the Ammonites, upon their success against Uriah and his party, did doubtless magnify and praise their idols, and blaspheme the God of Israel.
[The child that is born unto thee, הַיִּלּ֥וֹד לְךָ֖] יִלּוֹד is in the Piel: but יִלֵּד in the Piel does not signify to be born or to beget, but to assist in childbirth. הַיּלוּד, the one born, would be much more properly read, so that it might be a Pa‘ul from the Qal (Cappel’s Sacred Criticism). But, 1. Who said to the Critic that יִלֵּד did not of old signify to beget? because, of course, in the Bible it does not occur in this signification. But this is no reason at all: because the whole use of the Hebrew tongue is not contained in the Bible. 2. Let it be so that the verb thus signifies, yet the תּוֺאַר/Toar Noun[7] or Adjective and participle thence derived is able to signify this. Thus שִׁכּוֹר/drunken is from the Piel; while שִׁכֵּר is nevertheless not found in the Bible: neither would it, if found, signify to be drunken, but to make drunk. 3. Other passages show that the pointing is correct, where it occurs in this form, and with this use, as in Exodus 1:22;[8] Joshua 5:5;[9] 2 Samuel 5:14;[10] Jeremiah 16:3.[11] Does he wish to teach the sacred Authors how they ought to speak or write? (Buxtorf’s Vindication 2:13:859).
The child shall surely die; which, considering his affection to it, and the punishment threatened to the poor innocent infant for his sake, must needs be grievous to him.
[1] Hebrew: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר דָּוִד֙ אֶל־נָתָ֔ן חָטָ֖אתִי לַֽיהוָ֑ה ס וַיֹּ֙אמֶר נָתָ֜ן אֶל־דָּוִ֗ד גַּם־יְהוָ֛ה הֶעֱבִ֥יר חַטָּאתְךָ֖ לֹ֥א תָמֽוּת׃
[2] Ecclesiasticus 47:11: “The Lord took away his sins, and exalted his horn for ever: he gave him a covenant of kings, and a throne of glory in Israel.”
[3] Hebrew: חָטָ֖אתִי לַֽיהוָ֑ה.
[4] 1 Samuel 15:24.
[5] Hebrew: אֶפֶס כִּֽי־נִאֵ֤ץ נִאַ֙צְתָּ֙ אֶת־אֹיְבֵ֣י יְהוָ֔ה בַּדָּבָ֖ר הַזֶּ֑ה גַּ֗ם הַבֵּ֛ן הַיִּלּ֥וֹד לְךָ֖ מ֥וֹת יָמֽוּת׃
[6] See 1 Samuel 13:14.
[7] A Toar is a noun denoting an agent bearing a certain quality or characteristic.
[8] Exodus 1:22: “And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born (הַיִּלּוֹד) ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.”
[9] Joshua 5:5: “Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born (הַיִּלֹּדִים) in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.”
[10] 2 Samuel 5:14: “And these be the names of those that were born (הַיִּלֹּדִים) unto him in Jerusalem; Shammua, and Shobab, and Nathan, and Solomon…”
[11] Jeremiah 16:3: “For thus saith the Lord concerning the sons and concerning the daughters that are born (הַיִּלּוֹדִים) in this place, and concerning their mothers that bare them, and concerning their fathers that begat them in this land…”
William Jay's Morning Exercises: 'Some would prevent the effect of such self-inspections, by the notion that there is no evil in the sins of God's people. But their sins are worse than those of others, by reason of the nearer relations in which, and the greater obligations under which they are committed. They have also, in sinning, greater difficulties to overcome. They have not only to sin against greater love, but greater light; and they have been convinced of the evil and bitterness of sin, and have had a wounded spirit which they could not bear. [Prov 18:14] Their sins, also, are more injurious with regard to others: distressing the strong, stumbling the weak, confirming the prejudiced, hardening the wicked…
Westminster Confession of Faith 17:3: Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; [Matt 26:70,72,74] and for a time continue therein: [Ps 51:14] whereby they incur God's displeasure, [Isa 64:5,7,9; 2 Sam 11:27] and grieve his Holy Spirit; [Eph 4:30] come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; [Ps 51:8,10,12; Rev 2:4; Song 5:2-4,6] have their hearts hardened, [Isa 63:17; Mark 6:52; Mark 16:14] and their consciences wounded; [Ps 32:3-4; Ps 51:8] hurt and scandalize others, [2 Sam 12:14] and bring temporal judgments upon themselves. [Ps 89:31-32; 1 Cor 11:32]
Fisher's Catechism: Q. 83.12. How are sins aggravated from the gifts of the persons offending?
A. If the offenders have been eminent for their profession, 2 Sam 12:14, or have had a larger measure of gifts, 1 Kings 11:9, or grace, James 4:17, conferred upon them, their sins will be proportionably aggravated beyond others, who have not been so privileged.
Fisher's Catechism: 'Why should professors be careful to maintain their good name?
A. Because the loss of it tends to reflect dishonour on religion, by which the enemies of it take occasion to blaspheme, 2 Sam 12:14.'
Andrew Gray's Spiritual Warfare: 'Let confident faith be mixed with holy fear, that there may be a sweet mixture of these two, and there is this which we would speak to you, that there is a difference betwixt the grant and gift of pardon, and the intimation of pardon, unto a Christian; yea more, there is a difference betwixt the intimation of pardon, even for a sin mortified and repented for, and the divine application of it: this is clear by comparing 2 Sam 12:13, with Ps 51. where Nathan saith to David, Thine iniquities are blotted out, and thy sin is taken away. There is both the grant of pardon and the intimation of it; and yet he himself…