Famine, Flight, or Pestilence?

[blhowes]

This morning in my daily Bible reading, I was finishing up 2 Samuel. In the last chapter, David does a census and is then given a choice of punishments:

2Sa 24:13 So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him,
[1]Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or
[2]wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or
[3]that there be three days' pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

David chose the 3rd one and verse 15 says:

2Sa 24:15 So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning even to the time appointed: and there died of the people from Dan even to Beersheba seventy thousand men.

Wow! 70,000 men died.

Do you think David made the best choice? If you were David, which do you think you would have chosen and why?

[Edited on 12-17-2004 by blhowes]

 

[sastark]

This may sound cold hearted, but I think David made the wisest choice. Here's why: Seven years of famine would have resulted in many more deaths than just 70,000. Plus, the economic impacts of a 7-year famine would be profound.

Fleeing for 3 months before enemies implies that David would not be ruling effectively for 3 months. A land without a king for three months is a land in chaos. Not only that, but any land that enemies conquered during those three months would have to be re-won at the end of the three months. The re-winning of those lands could result in more than 70,000 deaths. Also, any land lost would not produce food or any other economically useful items while the land was in enemy hands.

So, as heartless as it may sound, I think David made the right choice.

Just my initial thoughts....

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

I agree. Of the three choices, only one actually exposed himself to danger, the one that David chose. Therefore, he truly did not want others to suffer on his behalf or the cause of God to suffer harm. The fact that many died as a result and he suffered no personal harm is due to God's mercy. In fact, it could have been worse, much worse.

See Matthew Henry's commentary: http://www.ccel.org/h/henry/mhc2/MHC10024.HTM