THEOSISTheodoret of Cyrus
Question 24. Why, after discussing the complete destruction of Adraazar (2 Kings 8:9), does the author later mention his assistance to the Ammonites (2 Kings 10:16)? While the author describes Adraazar's defeat, he refrains from stating that he was killed. This narrative is consistent with earlier accounts. He notes that 'Adraazar sent to Adraazar and summoned the Syrians, bringing them halfway up the river Halamak’ (ibid.). Had he relied solely on his own power, he would have had no need for foreign allies. From this tale, we understand the lessons that arise from hardship, grief, and anxieties. It recounts how the divine David, in the face of Saul's persecution, excelled in wisdom; engaged in battles, remained focused on military duties, and lived according to divine commandments.
Read more (1288 words)
Yet, when he encountered a brief moment of weakness, he was led into temptation. It is narrated: ‘it was evening, and David arose from his bed and walked on the roof of the king's house, and saw a woman washing herself; and the woman was very beautiful to look upon’ (2 Sam. 11:2). A significant struggle ensues, characterized by comfort, indulgence, nobility, power, physical allure, and the temptation of overindulgence, igniting fierce desires in the ascetics, making it seem as though the food is enhanced with oil. It is clear that David inherently possessed a strong desire for lust, for had it not been for his nature, he would not have taken many wives. Although polygamy was not prohibited by any laws at that time, divine law explicitly forbade adultery. Despite seeing the woman as she bathed, rather than avoiding this perilous sight, he allowed himself to be seduced by her beauty, which led him to consume the poison of sin. His lust led him into this wrongdoing, and his shame followed. Upon learning that his wife was expecting a child, he sought to evade reproach and employed various strategies to prevent her from experiencing secondary shame. He summoned Uriah, assuming that after a long absence, he would wish to reunite with his wife. Yet, Uriah exhibited chastity, bravery, and allegiance to the king, sleeping at the entrance of the king's palace with the king's guards. The following day, the king confronted him for not resting, to which Uriah replied, ‘When the commander and all the army are in need of war, besieging a city, I do not think it fair to indulge my own body’ and he confirmed this declaration with an oath. The king commanded him to stay one more day, provided him with drink, and pressured him with frequent toasts, hoping to weaken Uriah’s resolve. When all his efforts failed, as Uriah again slept at the king's palace, the king penned a letter to the commander, unknowingly sending Uriah away with his death sentence. After Uriah's demise and the conclusion of the mourning period for his wife, the marriage took place. Yet, the Physician of souls would not allow the ailment to remain untreated, nor would He overlook the unjust death, nor permit the wronged party to seek vengeance for David's other virtues. For it is written: ‘The thing that David had done displeased the Lord’ (2 Sam. 11:27). Consequently, the prophet Nathan was dispatched, transferring the accusation to a figure crafted for this purpose; we tend to view sins in others one way while regarding our own wrongdoings differently; hence, we judge ourselves and others through distinct lenses; we render fair judgments about others while often imposing harsher penalties than warranted; but when we sin, we either wholly excise the acknowledgment of our wrongs from our minds or, if we recognize them, we justify our actions. Thus, the prophet devised a tale of a rich man and a poor man, depicting the abundance of the former and illustrating the extreme poverty of the latter pathos. He states: ‘He had nothing except one little ewe lamb which he had bought and nourished, and it grew up with him and with his children; it ate of his own food, drank from his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and it was like a daughter to him’ (2 Sam. 12:3). The prophet presents this to underscore the severity of iniquity. He further elucidates by comparing wicked lust to a traveler, as it comes to one unexpectedly and unusually, which led David to repentance. David was not raised in vice and was merely led astray due to the accidental misdirection of his will; thus, his sin stemmed from carelessness rather than malice. But the subsequent words of the prophet intensified the accusation, as it was to slay one of his own flock instead of another's lone lamb. The charge is directed against a stranger, and the judge rendered a truthful sentence, declaring: ‘As the Lord liveth, the man who has done this deserves to die; and he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no compassion’ (2 Sam. 12:5-6). Once the accused condemned himself, the prophet stripped away the pretense, declaring: ‘Thus says the Lord God of Israel: "I anointed you king over Israel and delivered you from the hand of Saul, and I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your bosom, and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah"' (2 Sam. 12:7-8). Following this immense grace, he further assured: ‘And if this were too little, I would add to you much more’ (2 Sam. 12:8). Before the wound is opened with the knife, the remedy is applied, and before the judgment is issued, comfort is bestowed. ‘And if there is not enough, I will add to these.’ Then follows the identification of the offense: ‘Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord to do evil in His sight?’ (2 Sam. 12:9). In rejecting My statutes, you acted as though I am unaware of human actions; despite fully enjoying My generosity, you rebelled against your Benefactor: ‘You killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own, and you killed him with the sword of the children of Ammon. Therefore the sword shall not depart from your house forever; because you have despised Me and taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife’ (2 Sam. 12:10). This declaration underscores that the Lord God was more incensed by the marriage than by the adultery that preceded it. The former was the result of overpowering lust that clouded the mind, while the latter was a choice made consciously by the mind, which—after the wrongful murder—should have mourned and lamented, rather than consenting to an unlawful union. Subsequently, the prophet foretold dire consequences, which ultimately showcased the magnificence of the wondrous king; for the divine plagues served as a healing remedy, restoring David to his former state of grace. Thus, the Physician of souls inflicted these calamities with compassion. Yet amid the threats, He added: ‘What you have done in secret, I will do before all Israel’ (2 Sam. 12:12)—a clear indication that, in your desire to hide, you orchestrated murder stealthily, but I will expose your sin for all to see. When David heard these words, he did not feel anger at being revealed as a wretched man. He recognized the divine voice speaking through Nathan and exclaimed: ‘I have sinned against the Lord’ (2 Sam. 12:13). The prophet, affirming the confession and relying firmly on God’s mercy, promptly replied, ‘The Lord has put away your sin; you shall not die’ (ibid.). David indeed faced the death penalty, as the law mandates death for both the adulterer and murderer. However, the act of confessing his sin annulled that death sentence. Nonetheless, like an astute healer, God subjected him to varied remedies as demonstrated in the scripture. After stating, ‘You shall not die,’ the prophet continued: ‘Nevertheless, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also that is born to you shall surely die’ (2 Sam. 12:14). Aquila renders this more explicitly: ‘You have provoked the Lord's enemies,’ for, bereft of divine protection, you have unwittingly granted the nations an opportunity to gloat against the God of all. Ultimately, the Lord struck down the offspring conceived in adultery, illustrating that even though Uriah was a foreigner and considered an outsider, the God of all does not disregard anyone wronged, affirming that He upholds justice even when the offender is a fellow Jew and the victim a stranger.