Purpose of this lesson: to stress that Uzzah's death was of profound significance to David
The context of this situation should be seen as David's determination to continue to unite Israel as a single kingdom. In 2 Samuel 5 we learn numerous things. (1) David was made King over all Israel. He was requested to lead the Hebrews as a shepherd, not as a dictator. (2) David made Jerusalem the new capitol of the nation. Jerusalem was not under Israel's control or Judah's control--it previously belonged to the Jebusites. Thus it is a "neutral" city that favored neither side as far as past history was concerned. (3) David made Jerusalem his royal city by having his palace built there. He settled in his new home, married additional wives and added concubines, had eleven sons who were born in Jerusalem (the author named them and acknowledged that daughters were also born to David at that time), (4) and the Philistines were decisively defeated.
Stress that this incident (David's attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem and Uzzah's death) was in the sequence of King David's determination to reunite Judah and Israel as a strong single nation.
The occurrence of David's determination to move the Ark to Jerusalem was his effort to make the royal city also the site of national worship. The royal city, the political capitol, would also become the geographical site of national worship. This would further consolidate the nation as a single kingdom. By building a permanent Jewish temple there, this would become the unquestionable, permanent center of Judaism.
To combine the royal city and the site of national worship would add great strength to Israel as a single nation. To make the King's city the city for the nation to assemble to worship God would unite the kingdom as nothing else could. Remember, later when Jereboam assumed the role of King over the ten breakaway tribes, he established different sites of worship (1 Kings 12, especially verses 25-33).
Recall some background. When the Philistines returned the Ark to Israel in 1 Samuel 6:1-16, they returned it on a new cart (verse 7). It was obvious to the Philistines this method was "the god appropriate way" to return the Ark. They seemingly were correct--in ways that only God could have guided/directed, the Ark returned to Israelite territory. The Hebrews at Beth-shemesh were so ignorant in their view of God and the proper treatment of the Ark, they viewed God and treated the Ark inappropriately. As a result, they suffered the consequences--massive death. The last recorded time the Ark was transported with obvious God approval was on a new cart built by the Philistines. When David brought the Ark out of its seclusion to be placed in the Jerusalem tent he prepared for it, he and the Levites again transported the Ark on a new cart.
Stress David and the Levites were transporting the Ark in the last recorded way the Ark was successfully transported. Also stress that method was fine for the Philistines, but not fine for Israel. The Levites were given specific instructions on how to transport the Ark (Exodus 25:13-15).
When the Ark was in danger of falling from the cart, Uzzah touched it to stabilize it. As a result, Uzzah died immediately. His act did not honor God. It violated the God declared method for moving the Ark given in Exodus 25:13-15 [do remember Uzzah's action occurred many, many generations from the declaration in Exodus 25. It is obvious that even those "who should know" did not know.]
Uzzah did what he thought was a good, respectful act. He did not know (perhaps realize) that using a cart opposed a specific directive from God. Do stress there is a significant distinction between rebelling against a specific directive from God and imposing an accepted human tradition or preference.
When Uzzah touched the Ark, he quickly died. David was shocked! He was both angry and afraid [the original language may suggest David was angry at both Uzzah and God]. Again, place the happenings in context. The Ark was moved at David's request. This was the man who faced Goliath, who trusted God as he lived among the Philistines, who refused to kill King Saul because of his respect for God, and who [even in times of deep distress] knew God's kindness and protection. Before all David's distresses, God obviously was with David. David captured Jerusalem in the understanding God was with him. Even in moving the Ark, David was certain he sought God's purposes. He was (1) strengthening the union of the nation and (2) honoring God. Uzzah's death was extremely confusing for David. He was certain (1) he honored God all his life, (2) he was strengthening the union of Israel as God wanted, and (3) he was elevating the status of God in the entire nation.
David's objectives were good, godly objectives. He has no reason to think God was not with him. Though he was ignorant of the appropriate way to move the Ark, he intended no disrespect to God. Uzzah's death was extremely confusing to David--enough so to make him angry with God.
With Uzzah's death, many things were called into question. Why did this happen? Was he wrong in one, two, or all three of these things? Suddenly David knew a kind of terror he had not known previous--he was afraid of God! He had been terrified by people, but he had not been terrified of God. His past relationship with God sustained him! He knew God sought his best interest in all past circumstances even when he was deeply distressed. What did Uzzah's death mean? Was God no longer with David? Did God not want the Ark in Jerusalem? Was God not honored by what David did? This incident was not just about Uzzah. In a fundamental, relevant way it was about King David as well.
The critical question for David was, "Why did this happen? What does this happening mean?" That is the common question we still ask today when something goes in a manner we do not understand and in a manner we hold in disapproval.
A confused, grief-stricken, afraid David immediately decided it was too dangerous to take the Ark to Jerusalem. He did not know what the appropriate thing to do was. He decided the Ark again should go into seclusion, so he sent the Ark to the home of Obed-Edom.
The immediate decision King David had to make was this: Is the city of Jerusalem in danger if I bring the Ark there? The second question he had to answer quickly was this: What should be done with the Ark?
In three months, it was reported to David that the family of Obed-Edom was blessed [in unspecified ways] because of the presence of the Ark in his home. Immediately some basic questions were answered for the King. God was not dangerous! The Ark was not dangerous! Jerusalem would be in no danger because the Ark was present in the city! Uzzah's death did not mean King David was doing the wrong thing in bringing the Ark to Jerusalem!
Side thought: how would you feel if someone touching the Ark unexplainably died, and the King sent the Ark to your house? The contrast is between destruction/disaster and blessing. In 1 Samuel, the presence of the Ark commonly brought destruction/disaster. Uzzah's death associated destruction/disaster with the presence of the Ark. The report that the Ark brought blessings to the family of Obed-Edom stood in sharp contrast with the immediate and past incidences of destruction/disaster.
Associating the presence of the Ark with blessings answered numerous questions for King David.
A second time David began bringing the Ark to Jerusalem. Note this time they are "bearing the Ark" (verse 13, NAS). Every six paces sacrifices were offered [this was an elaborate, expensive trip filled with ceremony--all of which occurred because of David's desire, not God's directive]. Evidently, leading this elaborate ceremony was a dancing David who was not clothed in his royal clothing. It was a noisy occasion with shouting and trumpet blasts.
There were no scriptural instructions on the proper methods/manner to be used in moving the Ark from seclusion to the royal city. The elaborate ceremony was the product of King David's and the Levites thinking. He moved the Ark in a manner that seemed appropriate to him, and obviously God accepted it. The fact should not be ignored that this was a specific incident in which God accepted honor from a well intentioned human without benefit of specific command.
Michal saw the procession and the leaping, dancing King David as the Ark entered Jerusalem. The woman who once loved David and helped him escape the murderous wrath of her father (1 Samuel 18:20; 19:11-17) despised David. After David finished the ceremonial placement of the Ark in Jerusalem, he returned home to bless his family. Michal met him and criticized his actions. To her, David acted in an embarrassing manner, not at all in a manner befitting royalty. David informed her that he was acting as one who honored God, not as a King. He regarded putting off the royal attire, wearing part of the priests' garments, leaping, and dancing as appropriate conduct before the Lord.
Michal's perspective was that David functioned in a manner inappropriate for a king. David's response was that he was honoring God, and those who respected God knew that. He was not functioning as a king, but as one who was loyal to God (the true King) seeking to give praise to Him.
The author noted, for whatever reason, Michal died childless.
The NAS does not translate the verse in a manner that indicates specifically why Michal died childless. Was it David's decision? Did God prevent her from conceiving?
For Thought and Discussion:
David wanted to strengthen the union of Judah and Israel into a single kingdom (nation) again. By making a capitol from a city that (1) was close to the border of Judah and Israel and (2) had no past history with either Hebrew side, he would strengthen the union if that city became not only the center of the kingdom but the site of national worship.
David sought to make Jerusalem both the royal city (the place where the King lived) and the site of national worship (for the three national worship assemblies--Deuteronomy 16:16).
Uzzah touched the Ark as it was being transported on a new cart. He wanted to stabilize the Ark because it was in danger of falling from the cart.
The biggest question for David was the "why": Why did this happen? Was he wrong in his objectives? Did this mean God was angry with David? Did this mean God was not with David? Did this mean God did not want the Ark in Jerusalem? Did this mean Jerusalem was in danger if he took the Ark to that city?
David understood God was not dangerous. He understood the presence of the Ark was not dangerous. He understood there was no danger to Jerusalem because the city housed the Ark. He understood God did not oppose David's bringing the Ark to Jerusalem.
Basically, David declared he was not acting in the capacity of a king, but in the capacity of one who (without shame) honored God. Michal needed to realize that her criticism of King David demonstrated more disrespect to David than the King's actions demonstrated to God.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 11