Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
King David didn't die for the murder of Uriah, though Law/the Letter, according to some, demanded it. Some dare to question God when he didn't implement the death penalty here. This seems to show God's judging of things doesn't follow a rigid seemingly-limited interpretation of the Written that some hold. Some excuse this irregularity of not-going-by-the-Book by saying God judged by a higher law, Mercy. But does God have two sets of Law to pick-and-choose from as he pleases?
|
The law says this:
Deuteronomy 17:6-7 KJV
At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death. [7] The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.
David could not have been put to death lawfully without two or more witnesses to a violation of the law of God worthy of the death penalty. David ordered Uriiah to the battle, the command was lawful, there was nothing illegal about it. He also ordered a military action that resulted in Uriah's death. Technically, this was also lawful in the strict sense of the legalities of what a king may order his soldiers to do. Obviously, all of it was UNLAWFUL because it all stemmed from David's violation of the 10th Commandment prohibiting the coveting of one's neighbor's wife. Yet, there could not lawfully be any public execution and sentencing of David for his crime because there simply weren't any qualified witnesses to a crime who could testify to it.
The same situation is observed in Cain's case. He certainly killed Abel in malice, and was guilty of murder. Yet where are the witnesses? There were none except for God. Therefore, nobody could execute judgment upon Cain LAWFULLY. So in allowing Cain to live, and in allowing David to live, God was
not following "two different sets of laws"
but was instead upholding His one divine Law.
Now some may, as you pointed out, feel that God is being partial. After all, He struck Onan dead by an immediate divine judgment, bypassing any need for human execution of law. Yet, God sees EVERY trespass committed by EVERYONE, and yet the vast majority of people are not struck dead by a bolt of lightning or suffer some other Providential calamity. Why? Because God's personal judgment of sin is declared to be reserved for the Day of Judgment. Thus sinners "get away with" stuff all day long, though their damnation slumbereth not and in due time they will fall. And yet on the other hand God clearly orders Providential events and even divine interventions to, at times, provide immediate relief to the aggrieved justice of His moral law. How is God justified in such cases? Because in such cases there are in fact two witnesses - the sinner's own conscience and God. Further, a temporal judgment does not always imply eternal judgment, for Providence has been known to take away the righteous as well as the wicked, though their eternal fates are clearly going to be different.
In any event, the case of David, as with Cain and indeed with the woman caught in adultery whom Jesus refused to condemn, are all examples where God's law was in fact being upheld. God's law requires two or more eyewitnesses to a capital offense in order to rightly pronounce sentence, and those cases did not meet the requirement of the law. Therefore, in those instances, the guilty person was not sentenced.