Reimagining Uzzah and the Ark
“David consulted with the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, with every leader. And David said to all the assembly of Israel, “If it seems good to you and from the Lord our God, let us send abroad to our brothers who remain in all the lands of Israel, as well as to the priests and Levites in the cities that have pasturelands, that they may be gathered to us. Then let us bring again the ark of our God to us, for we did not seek it in the days of Saul.” All the assembly agreed to do so, for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people.
So David assembled all Israel from the Nile of Egypt to Lebo-hamath, to bring the ark of God from Kiriath-jearim. And David and all Israel went up to Baalah, that is, to Kiriath-jearim that belongs to Judah, to bring up from there the ark of God, which is called by the name of the Lord who sits enthroned above the cherubim. And they carried the ark of God on a new cart, from the house of Abinadab, and Uzzah and Ahio were driving the cart. And David and all Israel were celebrating before God with all their might, with song and lyres and harps and tambourines and cymbals and trumpets.
And when they came to the threshing floor of Chidon, Uzzah put out his hand to take hold of the ark, for the oxen stumbled. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah, and he struck him down because he put out his hand to the ark, and he died there before God. And David was angry because the Lord had broken out against Uzzah. And that place is called Perez-uzza to this day. And David was afraid of God that day, and he said, “How can I bring the ark of God home to me?” So David did not take the ark home into the city of David, but took it aside to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite. And the ark of God remained with the household of Obed-edom in his house three months. And the Lord blessed the household of Obed-edom and all that he had.” – 1 Chronicles 13:1-14
I don’t recall how many sermons I heard (as a new Christian) on the story of Uzzah and the Ark, but it was quite a few. Typically, they were based upon the 2 Samuel 6 account, which—to my thinking—is not nearly as helpful for understanding the theological significance of the story as 1 Chronicles 13 & 15 are.
Nevertheless, the thesis of these sermons typically boiled down to the following two points: 1.) That while Uzzah was sincere (while he was just trying to prevent the ark from being destroyed—as he reached out to steady it), God condemned his law violation anyway. 2.) That this text teaches that divine judgment is executed even against technical violations. Meaning that any deviation from God’s law, regardless of the reason (e.g. ignorance, inability, etc.) brings God’s condemnation. Good intentions, in other words, matter not in God’s law court. What is required instead is technical precision, a kind of ritualistic perfectionism.
It was not the just the tradition that I came to faith in that offered such punctilious readings of this event. For one finds similar interpretations within the Reformed tradition among Puritans, as well as later British Presbyterians and others. Regardless of its history, however, the God envisioned in this interpretation is deeply problematic. In fact, the understanding of justification it depicts, I would argue, borders on the blasphemous.
Scholar John Mark Hicks aptly describes the draconian despot of this interpretation as the "god of technicalities." A tyrannical taskmaster for whom every technical disobedience is viewed as a brazen act of insubordination. Even if you are an innocent bystander rendering aid (as Uzzah was), the God of 2 Samuel 6 will smite you. To envision Yahweh in such a dim light, however, is to seriously misunderstand not only the nature of his love, but also his holiness.
This is especially true of the God who is depicted in the Book of Chronicles. According to the Chronicler, the God of Israel does not scour the earth hoping to find technical law-breakers, rather he searches high and lo for men after his own heart.
“For the eyes of the Lord move to and fro throughout the earth that He may strongly support those whose heart is completely His.” – 2 Chronicles 16:9
This, in fact, is the thesis of these two books, that "God seeks seekers.”
“And you, Solomon my son, know the God of your father and serve him with a whole heart and with a willing mind, for the Lord searches all hearts and understands every plan and thought. If you seek him, he will be found by you, but if you forsake him, he will cast you off forever.” – 1 Chronicles 28:9
While God certainly punishes those who continuously and rebelliously violate his commandments, he suffers long and remains steadfast in His love for those who seek Him, remitting their sins time and again.
Indeed, this characteristic of God as seeker is first revealed all the way back in Genesis 3. When God first places man in the garden he commands Adam that "[he] must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when [he eats] of it [he will] surely die" (Genesis 2:17). Given this clear command and consequence, we are unprepared for what comes next in the narrative when God goes looking for Adam after his sin, calling out to him "Where are you?” Meaning that instead of forsaking Adam, God seeks after him. And not to put him to death ultimately, but to reestablish a relationship with his fallen image bearer.
God, who is love, will not allow sin to stand between himself and his beloved. So, he personally bridges the gap. A principle demonstrated time and again in the events recorded in Chronicles:
Rehoboam in 2 Chronicles 2:12
Asa in 2 Chronicles 15:1-15
The northern pilgrims in 2 Chronicles 30:11,18-20
Manasseh in 2 Chronicles 33:12)
And Josiah in 2 Chronicles 34:27
Therefore, reading Chronicles should not create in us consternation over our lack of perfect compliance, but rather confidence that God will not count our ritualistic incompleteness against us if we seek him with all our heart.
One passage which powerfully demonstrates this principle is 2 Chronicles 30, which recounts Hezekiah's restoration of the Passover. Following the kingdom's rupture, Israel suspended regular festal observance. Thus, for decades the people of God were prevented from receiving the spiritual nourishment of the annual feasts: Passover, Pentecost, the feast of Booths, etc.
Hezekiah, the King, resolved to rescind this moratorium. To usher the people of God back to the Lord’s table to partake of his banquet. However, his route to restoring the Passover, due to his unique situation, was quite unconventional. The problem was that the priests “had not consecrated themselves in sufficient numbers, nor had the people gathered in Jerusalem" in time for the normal observance. In addition to this, many of the Jews arrived ceremonially unclean. They had not carried out the rituals of preparation, for they knew not what they were doing. The customs had been lost to them.
And so, in this extraordinary circumstance, Hezekiah applied the Law’s precepts “creatively.” For example, the King reinstituted the feast even though the day and month that the Law prescribed had already passed. For those who were ceremonially unclean he appealed to God for instantaneous cleansing.
“May the good Lord pardon everyone who prepares his heart to seek God [but you hadn’t prepared their body], the Lord God of his fathers, though not according to the purification rules of the sanctuary.” – 2 Chronicles 30:18c-19
Hezekiah is essentially asking the-God-most-high to overlook the nations disregard of his law. Essentially saying to the Almighty, listen, we are going to ignore your clear instruction and we want you to make it okay. It’s a little bit like when Christians sit down to partake of a meal that is nothing but junk food, and they ask God to bless it to the nourishment of their bodies. Consider the hubris of that for a moment. I’m too lazy, or indulgent to eat the healthy food your earth provides, instead I just want you to fix it by divine fiat. Let us sin so that grace may abound! Usually, it would be wrong to petition God to sanctify a transgression right before you do it.
Therefore, upon what possible grounds could Hezekiah justify such an audacious prayer? Upon what principle could he permit these permutations to God’s clear commandments? Carrying on the Passover celebration even though the law forbade it? For did not such technical disobedience demand divine retribution, as in the case of Uzzah? Why does scripture refer to Hezekiah as an obedient king rather than one who was filled with damnable hubris?
The key to the king’s confidence (his brashness) was his deep understanding of the divine nature. Hezekiah knew, from experience, that God was a loving and merciful God, one who is ready to receive all those who earnestly desire to return to his favor (i.e. that God was a seeker of seekers). We see such insight in his call to the nation to come and renew the Passover celebration.
“For if you return to the Lord, your brothers and your sons will find compassion before those who led them captive and will return to this land. For the Lord your God is gracious and compassionate, and will not turn His face away from you if you return to Him.” – 2 Chronicles 30:9
Hezekiah was right about God. The Lord heard his prayer and cleansed the people. And the nation kept the Feast of Unleavened Bread seven days “with great gladness, and the Levites and the priests praised the Lord day by day, singing with all their might to the Lord.” (2 Chronicles 30:21)
The celebration was so edifying, in fact, that Hezekiah extended it for an additional week. Clearly, for this radical restorer, "the gracious renewal of fellowship with God [was] more important than the particulars of the Passover," as one writer put it.
THE LETTER AND THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW
What the king knew is what the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus day had forgotten. That the Passover was made for man, not man for the Passover. Meaning that God's intention with regard to the Passover law trumps obedience to the 'letter of it'.
Just think, for example, of how David was allowed to eat the shewbread (when he and his men were in great need of food, again, extraordinary circumstance—this is not license to ignore God’s law when you feel like it, only when required) even though He was not a priest? (Technically, only the priests were allowed to eat that food.) The reason he is allowed to eat it is because in this situation, the “spirit” of the law trumped the “letter” of it.
The law concerning the shewbread was given for man's good and thus if adherence to it causes man true harm (his men were to starve to death) then that adherence would go against the law’s intended purpose. This is the exact reasoning that Jesus also uses to defend his healing on the Sabbath. The point being that if one is forced to choose between the “spirit” and the “letter,” he is to choose the “spirit” every time.
A crude illustration of this is to consider the minimum speed limit law that some counties have. Is the intention of this law (again created for man's wellbeing) that one should not drop below the minimum speed even if there is a person on the road in front of their vehicle? The minimum speed limit law was created to keep people safe, and thus if in your strict (legalistic) adherence to it you injure someone else you have missed the spirit of that law. You have chosen the “letter” over the “spirit”.
But, if this is the case, then why was Uzzah struck down? If he was simply trying to prevent the ark from falling on the ground and being destroyed (the “spirit" of the commands concerning the care and transportation of the ark), then why was he punished for failing to obey the “letter"? To answer that question, it’s necessary to consider the details of the event a bit further.
First of all, it’s clear that Uzzah violated the “letter” of the law. According to Numbers 4:15, touching the ark (even by those who were decreed to carry it - a group of Levites of which Uzzah was not a member— sons of Kohath) was a crime punishable by death.
“And when Aaron and his sons have finished covering the sanctuary and all the furnishings of the sanctuary, as the camp sets out, after that the sons of Kohath shall come to carry these, but they must not touch the holy things, lest they die.” – Numbers 4:15
No one was to touch the ark, for it was holy. Indeed, it was the holiest object on the planet at the time. The very place where heaven and earth came together. The high priest, once a year—on the day of Atonement—entered into the divine presence in the holy of holies and sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice upon the lid of the ark, the mercy seat. Indeed, you might say that the ark was the holy of the holy of holies. Therefore, no one was to defile it by touching it. To do so was a capital offense.
However, there is much more going on here than just Uzzah and his actions. For the larger procession was actually King David’s responsibility. He was the king and it was his decision to go and retrieve the ark so that it might be returned to Jerusalem. Which is why he takes responsibility for Uzzah’s death later in 2 Chronicles 15:13. A concession which came after he consulted scripture concerning the proper procedure for transporting the ark—something he had failed to do the first time.
“Because you [the sons of Kohath] did not carry it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us, because we did not seek him according to the rule.”
This means that Uzzah’s act was not an isolated one—for the entire procession was an affront to God’s holiness. David was leading the first pride parade, you might say. As he arrogantly danced before the ark disregarding God’s decrees.
Therefore, Uzzah’s action could certainly have been motivated by good intentions (for he was not the one responsible for insuring that the procession was scriptural, that was David’s and the commanders’ he consulted responsibility) which would then make Uzzah’s touching of the ark a mere “technical” violation of the law. Instead, it was David himself who had violated both the “spirit” and “letter” as he oversaw the transportation of the ark on a "new" cart. Instead of having it carried on poles, as God’s law had commanded.
And this wasn’t the only aspect of the law which he neglected. The ark was also supposed to be covered. Everyone other than the sons of Kohath were to keep their distance from it, instead of dancing around the sacred object in careless celebration. Here we being to see the striking difference between David’s sinful disregard for God’s decrees and Hezekiah’s pious passing over of them.
Hezekiah knew both the “letter” and “spirit” of the law. David, in this case, knew neither. Hezekiah had great affection for God’s precepts and wanted to faithfully keep them. David couldn’t care less for them. And not only did Hezekiah know both “letter” and “spirit,” he knew that he was obligated to keep the “spirit” even if he couldn’t keep the letter. He understood that there is a hierarchy when it comes to God’s laws. If the scenario is such that the letter and spirit come into conflict, the spirit is always to be given priority.
David, of course, thought nothing of such things. All of which is to say that Hezekiah was a seeker and David was not. And the reason David was not seeking God is because he didn’t fear him. (Seems paradoxical. If you truly fear God you would flee from him. But there is a sense in which the opposite is actually the case.) Hezekiah feared God knowing that he better reinstate the Passover regardless of the people’s ritual imprecision. For God desired for the true purpose of the Passover to be fulfilled. Which is the renewal of his people.
Indeed, what made Hezekiah so bold was his fear of the Lord. He feared the Lord more than his lack of technical obedience. He feared the Lord more than his poor ritualistic performance. (I went to the Bell County Republican Convention yesterday for the first time. And I got the sense that there are some scribes and Pharisee types in my party who care more about following Robert’s Rules of Order to the letter than they do about creating the policies that those rules are supposed to help generate. In other words, they fear a failure in procedural precision more than a failure to bring God’s will on earth as it is in heaven.) The problem with all such scribes and Pharisees is not that they fear God too much, but too little.
Another thing this tells us is that knowing the rules is not enough. I mean it is better than not knowing the rules. But it’s not enough just to know God’s precepts. For true obedience also requires knowing the spirit behind those precepts. The “why” behind the “way.” Which means ultimately that your faithfulness is based upon your understanding of the nature of God. For his precepts are simply an expression of his heart.
Jesus’ ultimate critique of the religious experts of his day was that they didn’t know the Father. That their hearts were far from him. This is why they prioritized the dead letter over the true spirit.
A TRUE AND BETTER UZZAH
As the superintendent of this debacle then, David was in full violation of God’s law, and yet he was not struck down. Neither was the nation as a whole. Only Uzzah was. The question is why? Why does Uzzah alone receive the punishment? Why is he singled out? A truth that should stir in our hearts righteous indignation.
For it would be unfair to punish one man for the sins of his nation. Or, perhaps worse, for the sins of his King. To punish the commoner for the transgressions of their king would be the very definition of oppression and injustice. And, yet ultimately, I believe that’s the point of this story. Meaning that the best explanation for the punishment of Uzzah is that he served as a scapegoat for his people. He was punished in their stead.
Notice David’s language in speaking about God’s punishment:
“Because you [the sons of Kohath] did not carry it the first time, the Lord our God broke out against us, because we did not seek him according to the rule.”
In striking down Uzzah, God was striking out against the nation’s disregard for his law. But, instead of destroying the nation, he poured out his wrath upon one man. Who in touching the ark served as their representative. The whole nation, in other words, touched that ark when Uzzah did.
Many throughout church history have viewed Uzzah as the ultimate villain. As an exemplar of shameful insubordination. We have considered him punished by God, stricken and afflicted. But what if we are to draw a different conclusion from this text? The story of one man satisfying the wrath of God on behalf of his people? God laying upon him their inquiry? Imputing to him the punishment which brought them peace? Is it so hard to imagine?
If the story of David and Goliath, as many have pointed out, is ultimately a picture of Jesus defeating the principalities and powers of this world… If Jesus is the true and better David, is it impossible to believe that Jesus is the true and better Uzzah? Is it possible that Uzzah will be listed among the heroes of faith in the final tally instead of the villains of unbelief?
God seems to delight in shattering our expectations. Such a typological reading, according to my lights, best resolves the tensions in this text. And how fitting a story it would be to dwell upon as we head toward Good Friday. As we celebrate the lamb of God who takes away the sin of world through his sacrifice.
“You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.” – Jeremiah 29:13
Video Link: Resurrection Power: The Christian Privilege - YouTube