He must make restitution for the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing and had no compassion."This verse is fairly well-known in the story, because it signifies how angry David was at the rich man in the story. He not only had to pay back the lamb, but there was what we would now call "punitive damages" because of how much he had, how little the poor man had, and how much the poor man loved the lamb.
But let's put the story into the real events. How could David have paid back Uriah's death? He can't give something, for a human life is not a specific value. He could not give himself, because he already had what he wanted (Uriah's wife). So what could he have done that would have been worth that fourfold restitution?
In the end, God decided the life of the child was forfeit. This does bother me, for it's not the child's fault he was born to unfaithful parents. Yet the child had to be the one to pay. I guess this does kind of mirror the way I've always been...not uncomfortable with Chrit's death for us, but I can't think of a better word right now. Yet I think there are differences, given one is the "illegitimate" son of a king, and the other is part of the Trinity that made all creation. But it still doesn't seem right to me that the child pays the price.
No comments:
Post a Comment