Foolishness Unrestrained
Samuel • Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 4 viewsFoolishness in the Bible is moral stupidity. In Amnon's Rape of Tamar, his foolishness is so great it will not be restrained by anything. And as is sadly so often the case, the foolishness of one man tempts the foolishness of another.
Notes
Transcript
I. Foolishness amplified by opportunism
I. Foolishness amplified by opportunism
Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
But if you have bitter envy and self-seeking in your hearts, do not boast and lie against the truth.
This wisdom does not descend from above, but is earthly, sensual, demonic.
For where envy and self-seeking exist, confusion and every evil thing are there.
II. Failure of Public Disgrace
II. Failure of Public Disgrace
‘If a man takes his sister, his father’s daughter or his mother’s daughter, and sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a wicked thing. And they shall be cut off in the sight of their people. He has uncovered his sister’s nakedness. He shall bear his guilt.
Here “cut off” doesn’t mean death, probably, but it is severe. In some contexts “cut off” clearly does mean death, but here, in the previous section, various more severe sexual sins are specifically to be punished by death. But in this section, there are other sexual sins that make them “childless.” Of course, the assumption is that the sister is complicit in the action, which is not the case with Tamar. Anyway, the point is that the children of some unions are to be declared illegitimate and not capable of inheriting the ancestral land promised to every Israelite. It also means that the children of this union cannot worship in the temple to the 10th generation.
“One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord.
Being cut off means that the individuals are no longer reckoned among the people of God. No one is going to give their sons to the girl, or their daughters to the boy. They are to be outcasts for the rest of their life. Tamar knows this, and tries to argue with him that his foolishness would cause him to lose his position and power, and become a complete disgrace in Israel. His life would be ruined. But he is so foolish, so driven by his passion, that it doesn’t matter to him. He only cares about what he wants right now, and doesn’t care who it hurts or what the long-term consequences are. This is the height of foolishness - not mere lack of intelligence, but moral stupidity.
III. Failure of Private Guilt
III. Failure of Private Guilt
It gets worse, however. Due to the facts of the case, when a woman was violated sadly she would never find a husband. To compensate for this, and to make sure the man was forced to live with his consequences the rest of his days, he was to marry her. This would, at the very least, force him to pay for her living expenses for the rest of his days, and be a continual reminder of his foolishness. the disgrace would usually ensure this took place, except for the unusually foolish.
In this case, Amnon was truly despicable. Having done this very foolish thing, he will not accept the consequences, and can’t bear the thought of being reminded of his foolishness, so he puts her out, barring her from her only remaining possibility of a semi-normal life. She will now go to her grave without the dream of most women, and that of every ancient Israelite woman - she will never marry, and never have children. She will not be able to be a productive member of society through no fault of her own.
“If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out,
then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.
“If a man entices a virgin who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall surely pay the bride-price for her to be his wife.
If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money according to the bride-price of virgins.
IV. When Righteous Anger becomes Sin
IV. When Righteous Anger becomes Sin
There’s absolutely no doubt that Absalom had a right to be angry. He starts well, in trying to help his sister as best he can. David is angry too, but doesn’t allow the anger to fester. I don’t know if David declared Amnon’s royal privileges revoked; if he declared him cut off from the people of Israel. He may have, but Amnon didn’t live long enough for that to matter much. The Bible warns us, however, that even when we have the right to be angry, we must not hold a grudge, because it gives the Devil a foothold.
“Be angry, and do not sin”: do not let the sun go down on your wrath,
nor give place to the devil.
Jonadab remarked that Absalom’s plan was hatched for more than two years. He knew it was going too far, which is why he fled to his maternal Grandfather immediately afterwords. But his anger was unrestrained. BTW, Jonadab’s opportunistic cleverness is seen again. He immediately knows what is going on, but uses his knowledge to advance himself. If he knew that this was a danger, he ought to have warned King David, but he did not. He only mentions it now because he thinks it can get him cool points with David. He will say anything and do anything to advance his career.
Absalom has therefore gone too far. It’s David’s job to punish wrongdoers, and we have no reason to suspect that he was not going to enforce the law. Therefore that makes Absalom a murderer, worthy of death. Unlike David, he isn’t repentant at all, so he should not be shown mercy. David’s job is to enforce the law justly. I completely understand why that would be really hard - first of all, David might feel a bit hypocritical for enforcing the law against murderers, when he committed murder to cover up his own crime. I’m not sure if he felt that way, but most modern people would, I think. But that’s a wrong feeling. If you’ve repented of your sins, you do not need to carry them around. If have genuinely repented, and people charge you with hypocrisy to avoid being held accountable for the same sins you committed earlier, you should not be intimidated by it. Obviously the other reason David would have a hard time enforcing the law here, is because Absalom is his own son, and he loves him. I get that, too. I am not sure I could have done differently. But it’s still the right thing to do. As it turned out, Absalom ended up dying anyway, but in the meantime the kingdom split into civil war, and David himself was nearly killed, and 10 of his concubines were violated. Doing the right thing would undoubtedly have been extremely painful. But less painful than letting the sin fester until it was an even bigger problem.