Strange Story: THERE WERE THREE REASONS MICHAL NEVER HAD KIDS

I Sam 18 & 19, II Sam 3 & 6

King Saul’s daughter Michal was taken from her first husband (David) while he was still alive, and given by King Saul to another husband (Phaltiel). While David was king over one tribe (Judah), he asked for her to be given back to him, and she was (II Sam 3:14-16). But when David brought the ark of the covenant back to Jerusalem with great rejoicing, she berated him for dancing in the streets with total abandon, dressed only in his tunic. She thought it was undignified and disgraceful. David told her, “I will become even more undignified than this.” After this the narrator of II Samuel indicates that she “never had no children till the day of her death” (II Sam 6:23).

We tend to think that David’s wife, Michal, would have borne children if she had not mocked him for dancing publicly in an undignified manner.

But I don’t think that is the case. It is not that simple.

THERE ARE THREE REASONS WHY SHE NEVER HAD CHILDREN

First, it appears that Michal did not have any children while she was married to David. That seems strange because girls usually got pregnant shortly after marriage. We don’t know how long David and Michal were together, but it was probably a few month – long enough for several military crusades against the Philistines and long enough for her to get pregnant when he came home for short visits. (See the story in I Samuel chapter 18 and 19.) Therefore, it appears that she may have been barren from the beginning.

Secondly, giving her to another man as a wife was a violation of the authority aspect of sexual relationships. There can only be one authority figure at a time. Since David was still alive, she should not have been given to another husband. This was a violation of the Law. (see Dt 24:1-4 for a parallel situation). It also appears that she did not have any children while she was married to Phaltiel. Thus, it looks like she continued to be barren during her marriage to her second husband. It was not her fault that she was taken from one man and given in marriage to another; it was her father who did that, and you don’t say “No” to a king. Still it was a state of continual uncleanness, and God was not likely to bring her back to spiritual and physical health while she was in a continual state of uncleanness.  

Michal was given back to David while he was king of Judah, but not yet king over the whole nation (II Sam 3:14-16). After that he became king over all Israel, defeated more Philistines, then he had the Ark of the Covenant brought to Jerusalem. So there was opportunity during this time for her to get pregnant, unless David was avoiding her because she had been with another man, or she was still barren. I think the likelihood is quite high that David did not have sexual relations with her because she had been with another husband and therefore, it was not against the law.

I think that the point of II Sam 6:23 is not that she was childless because of this one act, but that this act of mockery made her ineligible to be healed of the barrenness that had plagued her from the beginning. Apart from this act, it was possible for David to plead to God on her behalf and for God to listen and heal her.

The possibility of a woman being cured of barrenness was known to everyone because many of them had known Samuel while he was still alive. Samuel was the son of Hannah, who had been barren for many years. But God answered her prayer and Samuel was the well-known proof of the change God made in her. So the hope of a barren woman being cured of that disgraceful condition was always present. But in the case of Michal, due to her berating of David’s exuberance in the presence of the Ark of the Covenant, she could no longer hope for such a cure.