Hi. Thanks for your response. Yeah, I did read the text. Let me help you understand some of the nature of prophecy, the character of God, and the way he works.

First of all, the predictive element in biblical prophecy has to be kept distinct from causation, or else it ceases to be predictive. Prophets weren't predicting anything, but merely giving the word of the Lord. The prophecy is God's message, not the prophet's. If predicting is understood to preclude causation, then God cannot predict, for he is the first cause and the final cause. Rather than regarding prophecy as prediction, it is more helpful to consider it as “God’s syllabus.” The syllabus for a course doesn’t “predict” what will happen in each class period of the term, but presents the instructor’s plans and intentions for each period. The significance of the document is that the instructor is in a position to carry it out. Likewise, when a judge passes a sentence on a convicted criminal, he is not “predicting” what will happen to that person. Rather, he is decreeing what ought to be done and is in a position to see that it is done. In prophetic literature, God is declaring his intentions and decreeing his judgments.

Secondly, often the way God works in such prophecies is not by causing the events mentioned, but by withdrawing his hand of protection. The idea is that these terrible things would be happening far more often, but God protects his people and their environs so that it doesn't. Such a view is mentioned about 6 times in the first 12 chapters of Isaiah. In a prophesy such as this one, God "causes" such things just by pulling back his hand. Then Absalom, who was this kind of person anyway, does what he has always wanted to do. God "gave them to him" by stopping to protect David, and Absalom chose to do what he did. Absalom is the perpetrator. God knew it would happen, because he knew about Absalom's intentions and purposes. What God is saying to David is, "Because you did this, I'm going to stop protecting you in these areas, and you'll see the real unfiltered consequences of your own actions and your own example."

You are wrong to perceive that God delivered David's wives to be raped in broad daylight. He didn't "deliver" them in the sense of making people do these awful things. He "delivered" them in the sense that he pulled back his protective wall. Then Absalom did what he intended to do. And yes, this was done in broad daylight, not by God's command, but by Absalom's pride and power-play that God didn't make him do.

Hope that helps. I'm certainly willing to talk about it more.

"You're out of line to suggest that God delivered David's wives to be raped in broad daylight."

Maybe you didn't read the passage. It reads:

"This is what the Lord says: ‘Out of your own household I AM GOING TO BRING calamity on you. Before your very eyes I WILL TAKE YOUR WIVES AND GIVE THEM to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. You did it in secret, but I WILL DO THIS THING IN BROAD DAYLIGHT before all Israel.’” - 2 Samuel 12:11-12

Your argument is directly contradicted in the text. It does not say that God simply "forsaw" it happening. It says quite clearly that god MADE it happen with intent!

Christians don't try to justify this on a moral basis. "God foresaw it happening because of what David had done" is different that "God made it happen"; he doesn't make it happen.The punishment fit the crime, but you're out of line to suggest that God delivered David's wives to be raped in broad daylight.

Back to "the punishment fit the crime." David was responsible for Uriah's death by sword. His children weren't blind and deaf, and they didn't grow up in a vacuum. They learned both good and bad things from their father. David's bad example played itself out in the violence of his family: Amnon (2 Sam. 14.29), Abishalom (18.15),and Adonijah (1 Ki. 2.25).

So also with his royal "rape" of Bathsheba. It's the Bill Clinton syndrome. The whole country found out about that, and people actually used it to justify their own behavior: "Hey, if it's good enough for the president, it's OK for me!" David's son Amnon raped his daughter Tamar.

David showed weakness, and Absalom took advantage of that (2 Sam. 16.21).

It's the tragic effects of sin. There are natural as well as divine consequences for what we do. In this case God didn't make these things happen. There's no evidence of that in the text. It's a foreshadowing of trouble in David's family because of his bad example. He wasn't a very good father. His secret sins became public scandals, and the moral disorder in David's own heart played itself out in moral disorder in all his relationships: personal, family, and civil. The same kind of thing happened in Shakespeare's King Lear, where the moral disorder in the king's life played itself out in the public arena. But it shows an extraordinary misunderstanding of the text to say that God made David's sons murder each other and that he made Absalom rape David's harem.

So after David killed Uriah and took his wife, the punishment that God considered just was to take all of David's wives, who took no part in the crime, and deliver them to be raped in broad daylight while David watched. I'm curious as to how Christians try to justify this on a moral basis? How would you argue that delivering women to be raped is just and morally right?