Part 5: Proof Texts (v) David's young child

And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it became ill. David therefore pleaded with God for the child, and David fasted and went in and lay all night on the ground. So the elders of his house arose and went to him, to raise him up from the ground. But he would not, nor did he eat food with them. Then on the seventh day it came to pass that the child died. And the servants of David were afraid to tell him that the child was dead. For they said, “Indeed, while the child was alive, we spoke to him, and he would not heed our voice. How can we tell him that the child is dead? He may do some harm!” When David saw that his servants were whispering, David perceived that the child was dead. Therefore David said to his servants, “Is the child dead?” And they said, “He is dead.” So David arose from the ground, washed and anointed himself, and changed his clothes; and he went into the house of the LORD and worshiped. Then he went to his own house; and when he requested, they set food before him, and he ate. Then his servants said to him, “What is this that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child while he was alive, but when the child died, you arose and ate food.” And he said, “While the child was alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who can tell whether the LORD will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” (2^nd Samuel 12:15-23)

In order to remain relevant to the theme of this document it is perhaps unnecessary to dwell upon the story behind David’s words in verse twenty three. Most readers will be familiar with the circumstances that led to the tragic death of David’s young child, but his response to why he no longer fasted and wept for the child once news of his death had reached him has given rise to theories that David was referring to the hope of an intermediate existence – a better place for the child. Given that this was a young child being spoken about, no wonder we have sought for hope in his words.

Tragically, true to the nature of the story, I do not believe we should be extrapolating any hope from these words either. David is resigned to reality: God has judged his sin against Uriah (vv1-14) and no amount of fasting and weeping was going to preserve the child’s life. He must now get on with life bearing this burden. It is a brave and commendable reaction to his judgement. If hope is to be drawn from the story it is that God was clearly satisfied enough to allow David and Bathsheba to then bear Solomon (v24). David was not to dwell upon his judgement anymore without hope of comfort from God. 

That said, the judgement was final. ‘I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me’. Where was the child? Heaven? Abraham’s Bosom? It is wise not to allow understandable sentiment to cloud the fact that no such destinies were mentioned. The child was in the grave. ‘I shall go to him’.