I was only able to watch the last half of episode two of “The Bible” on the History Channel last night. This series has already developed quite a fan base, attracting 14 million viewers in each of its first two weeks.
In order to give “The Bible” a chance, you have allow the writers lots of leeway to pick and choose which stories they are going to highlight, because ten hours is not much time to depict the entire sweep of the biblical narrative. This is why each episode begins with a disclaimer that the dramatization seeks to maintain the spirit of the Scriptures. Regular readers will recall that my reaction to Episode One was mixed. The liberties taken with the stories from Genesis and Exodus did not, in my judgment, always maintain the spirit of the text, and to some extent actually obscured its meaning. I was more impressed with what I saw of last night’s episode, which did a decent job with the stories of Israel’s first two kings, Saul and David. Both were correctly characterized as tragic heroes. Saul came across as well-meaning but insecure. He let jealousy of his young soldier David cloud his good judgment. David, on the other hand, was portrayed as a just and God-fearing warrior loved by the people. But he let his power mislead him into believing that he lived above God’s law.
The movie focused on David’s relationship with Bathsheba – a married woman whom the King impregnated – and David’s subsequent plot to have Bathsheba’s husband Uriah killed in order to cover up his crime. I was grateful to see that Bathsheba was portrayed as a victim rather than as a temptress. The Hebrew Scriptures are brutally honest about the deep character flaws of Israel’s early leaders, including David, who was revered as the greatest of their kings. Subsequent tradition, however, has tended to smooth out David’s rough edges. When his story was retold in 1 Chronicles, all references to David forcing himself on Bathsheba were removed. And when I learned this story in Sunday School as a youngster, the teacher (no doubt reflecting what she had learned) implied that poor David was the victim of Bathsheba’s sexual advances.
Unfortunately (to my mind) the movie did not follow through with its initial characterization of Bathsheba. By the end of the episode, she, David, and their little boy Solomon looked like a happy nuclear family. Bathsheba seemed pleased to be with David, who appeared to be completely devoted to her. Yet, the Bible tells us that David had many wives and concubines. There is no reason to believe that he had any special relationship to Bathsheba. Nor is there any reason to suppose that she did not live out her life in grief over losing Uriah and shame for having carried another man’s child against her will.
As in the cases of the Genesis and Exodus stories featured last week, this portion of scripture begs for more thorough exploration. The interlocking stories of Samuel, Saul, and David are so rich with irony, intrigue, and study of human behavior that any effort to reduce them to a tidy script is costly. Still, last night’s dramatization provides plenty of fodder for good discussion about how human foibles sometimes detract from, but never ruin, God’s larger plans.
Copyright 2013 by J. Mark Lawson
Comments