Skip to main content

Hush Money – Catch and Kill by king David (II Samuel 11-12)

There is always a motive when hush money is involved. Different similes of hush money show that an ulterior motive is the reason for an attempt or thought to make such a payment. Often such motives are either consequential or fatal. It could either be to hide embarrassing details of something disgraceful or terrible that happened that would tarnish someone’s name, image, or religio-politico ambitions or cover up an affair that could destroy someone’s marriage, status, or social influence.

Table of Contents

King David standing before the city of Jerusalem with his people paying their homage.

In this writing, king David will be used as a case study of what could lead to what in this stone age is described as “hush-money” and “catch and kill.” The two phrases are like Siamese.

What is a hush money?

A hush money can be described as a term about an arrangement where a person or party offers another person a huge sum of money or other valuables in exchange for their silence about something illicit, unlawful, shameful action or other fact about the person or the party who is making the offer.

Hush money is not illegal, depending on the circumstances, but it is a way of buying an aggrieved person’s silence to avoid any embarrassing details of a consequential, shameful or stigmatizing action.

Hush money when paid means that the recipient is gagged by a Non-disclosure Agreement (NDA) and punishable by court actions which also can be breached under a court order.

What is catch and kill?

This is secretive method used by some news and media outlets to keep a damaging information of a third party from going public. It may be described as a “cloak and dagger” technique of concealing a damaging story. The media buys the story from an individual exclusively and ensures that the story is never published. The individual is made to sign an NDA and will not speak to anyone about the story again. Not without a court order, anyway.

While a hush money involves bribing the individual by the culprit to intentionally keep quiet about the damaging information, catch and kill ensures that the story never gets published in any newspaper or media.

The next question to ask is: how does this relate to king David?

In second Book of Samuel chapters 11-12, there is a narration of the encounter between king David, Bathsheba, Uriah, and prophet Nathan. The entire narration shows similes of hush money, catch and kill, criminality, sin, murder, repossession, and punishment.

King David and Bathsheba

In the Old Testament, kings were known to join their military in battles. But in that spring, king David remained in Jerusalem. While loitering on the roof of his palace, David saw Bathsheba, a beautiful woman bathing. He was ravished by her beauty. He inquired about her and was told that she was Uriah’s wife, the Hittite. Being a king and knowing fully well that it was against God’s commandment, he slept with her.

After a while, Bathsheba sent words to David that she was pregnant. Now, as king, David began to cover up his tracks. Because he knew that what he did was shameful.

King David plot to kill Uriah

King David planned to cover up his affair with Bathsheba. He sent letter to his army commander, Joab to send Uriah back home. He thought and hoped that while at home Uriah would sleep with his wife and believe the child was his.

But Uriah being a man of integrity, a loyal soldier, who loved his nation and people refused to go to his home nor see his wife while his fellow soldiers were battling in the field. He slept at the palace gates with the king’s officials.

When David was told that Uriah did not go home, David invited Uriah for a sumptuous meal where he got him drunk with the intention that he would go home and sleep with his wife. That was David’s evil technique to pay Uriah a ‘hush money.’ But Uriah did not go home but slept again at the palace gates.

Finally, David sent Uriah back to the battlefield with a signed and sealed death warrant. In the letter, David ordered Joab, his army commander to place Uriah in a dangerous battle position and he was killed in the ensuing fight. That concluded David’s evil plan and that is the way he planned to kill the story from getting out. He murdered Uriah.

No crime goes unpunished. Even the king is subject to the same law, both human and divine. God saw all and sent his prophet, Nathan to David who confronted David with a powerful imagery about a rich man and a poor man.

Prophet Nathan and King David

God sent Nathan to deliver a message to David. Nathan used a parable of two men: one rich and one poor to relay the message. The rich man had many sheep and cattle, while the poor man had only one little lamb that he loved and cared for as if it were his only daughter. Nathan continued and said to David, when a traveller came to the rich man, instead of using one from his many animals to prepare a meal for the traveller, he took the poor man’s only lamb. David sprang up to his feet and was outraged about the rich man’s action. He declared that the rich man deserved severe punishment.

Nathan looked at him and said: “You are the man.” He told David that his actions were like the rich man’s who took something very dear and precious that belonged to another person.

The Punishments of King David

Nobody is above the law in the eyes of God and his judgement is fair. Nathan then passed on to David God’s verdict on his actions for committing adultery with Bathsheba and plotting Uriah’s death:

  • The sword would not leave from David’s house
  • The child born to David and Bathsheba would die

David’s Repentance

David fell to his knees and wept bitterly asking for God’s forgiveness saying: “I have sinned against the Lord.” Nathan assured him of God’s forgiveness but insists that the consequences of his sins must happen.

The child born to David and Bathsheba died to fulfil God’s judgment and the sword never left David’s house. Absolom, one of king David’s sons bore deep hatred for his father and plotted to kill him. Already, Absolom had murdered his half-brother, Amnon. Until his death, his hatred for David made him conduct several plots to dethrone his father, David.

Summary: Relevance of king David’s Story to today’s “Hush Money” and “Catch and Kill” Saga

As noted above, no one is above the law, and no one is exempt from moral accountability, legal scrutiny, and public probity. The story paints a picture that there are consequences for transgressions or crimes, even for a powerful and chosen king, president, or religious leader.

It emphasizes the need of repentance and the importance of acknowledgement of one’s sins to get forgiveness. It brought to the fore that God sees and knows of any abuse of power, such as coveting your neighbour’s good or wife and murdering your neighbour to cover up the crime or sin.

Therefore, leaders and people in authority must be accountable and use their authority wisely.

Nathan’s role is imagined in the roles of honest judges, magistrates, attorneys, and other arbitrators of justices of our day to highlight the supremacy of truth-telling and confronting wrongdoing as against truth-killing, and political cult worshipping.

The story of David also brings to the fore the balance between justice and compassion. It emphasizes that humans err and that no one is righteous but God alone. It signals that human imperfection should be their humbling points which should lead to self-reflection, accountability, and dependence on God’s grace in the face of many human imperfections.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: Power, Decay, and the Price of "My Turn"

Title: Emilokon or The Fable of the Termites Author: Joe Barnabas Genre: Political Satire / Literary Allegory In his latest work, Joe Barnabas delivers a biting, visceral exploration of a society in the throes of transformation, and perhaps, disintegration. Emilokon or The Fable of the Termites is not merely a story; it is a mirror held up to the face of modern leadership and the systemic "termites" that hollow out the foundations of our shared home. The Heart of the Fable The title itself, Emilokon , carries the weight of entitlement and historical destiny, while the subtitle provides the darker metaphor. Barnabas masterfully utilizes the image of the termite: a creature that consumes from the inside out, often unnoticed until the structure collapses. This serves as a hauntingly familiar representation of the creeping greed and administrative decay currently plaguing our world. Structure and Pace Spanning 36 meticulously crafted chapters, the book feels lik...

The Self-Alternating Theory (Part II): The Fractured Mirror of Context

In the first iteration of the Self-Alternating Theory, we dismantled the illusion of portable identity. We demonstrated that if you were transplanted into the life of a failed leader, a sex worker, a saint, or an elite athlete, you would not reform or master their world from an enlightened external perspective. You would either crumble under the weight of an alien context or absorb their exact trajectory. Part II extends this radical lens across the fundamental fault lines of human experience: relationships, race, geopolitics, physical embodiment, and the outer boundaries of species existence.                        The underlying principle remains absolute: we do not take our intact "I" into another person's reality. The reality reshapes, overwrites, or breaks the "I." Relational Systems: The Model Partner vs. The Toxic Household We routinely look at fractured marriages...

The Self-Alternating Theory: Why We Can Never Truly Be the Other

We live in a culture obsessed with the exercise of perspective-taking. We tell ourselves to "walk a mile in another person’s shoes," if our core self: our moral compass, our intellectual agility, our refined tastes, and our personal ethics remains intact during the journey. We imagine slipping into the lives of others like costume changes in a play: maintaining our internal "I" while operating the external machinery of someone else's life. The Self-Alternating Theory challenges this fundamental illusion. It posits a sobering premise: you cannot be the other, whether in their best or worst selves. If you were truly transplanted into another person’s existence: inheriting their exact neurobiology, trauma, muscle memory, history, and social incentives you would not reform their life from an enlightened, outside perspective. You would either collapse under the weight of an alien context or become the very thing you previously judged, admired, or misunderstood. ...

Who’s A Rebel? Camus’ The Rebel and the NigeriaSphere

In the contemporary Nigerian landscape, the word "rebel" is often weaponized by those in power. To the state, a rebel is a transgressor of the Cybercrimes Act, a "disturber of the peace," or an agent of destabilization. However, if we look through the eyes of Albert Camus, the 20th-century philosopher of the absurd, we find a different definition; one that validates the citizen’s cry for good governance not as an act of subversion, but as an act of profound affirmation. The Camusian "No": An Act of "Yes" Camus begins his treatise with a startlingly simple observation: "What is a rebel? A man who says no." But this "no" is not a denial of order. When a Nigerian citizen takes to social media to demand transparency or decry the absence of the rule of law, they are saying "no" to a specific limit that has been breached. Camus argues that in saying no, the rebel is simultaneously saying "yes" to the existen...

Accessibility: from Philosophical Perspectives

Introduction This article aims to examine the concept of accessibility from some philosophical principles: Utilitarianism and the principle of ‘one and many.’ Doing this will bring to the fore the reason why accessibility is the cynosure of inclusivity. Understanding Accessibility Accessibility refers to the design of products, devices, services, or environments that are usable for everyone. It ensures that everyone, regardless of their abilities or limitations, can effectively interact with and benefit from a product, technology, environment, or service. The term ‘accessibility’ has its origin in French. It can be said to be borrowed from the French “ accessibilite ,” meaning “the quality of being able to be reached or accessed.” This French term might have been influenced by the late Latin accessibilis , from Latin accessus (past participle of accēdere , meaning “to approach”, “to enter”, “to access”, or “to log in.” According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the ...