In 1Samuel 18, we are finally introduced to the close relationship between David and Jonathan. The SAB takes the approach that so many do, assuming the implication that Jonathan and David were lovers. Now, whereas it's certainly possible, of course the conservative assumption among both Christians and Jews is that this is not the case. The fact is, there really needs to be a stronger case made if a reader of the Bible is to accept this claim. I think a lot of what is used by people to make this case is more of an implication from our own modern American biases, which frankly tend to be a bit homophobic.
People can love one another deeply and have it be a non-sexual love, even two heterosexual men. Taking off one's clothing in the presence of another is likewise not an instant implication of something sexual going on. (It's not clear whether Jonathan is stripping entirely nude here anyway, but rather he may be giving over his armor.*) I truly believe in this case, the fact that Jonathan took off his armaments and gave them to David implies that Jonathan is trying to symbolically affirm the fact that David is his superior (being now the true king of Israel), and someone that he trusts with his life. In many cultures of the world, it is common for men hold hands, embrace one another, and even kiss without it being considered at all sexual, and I think we'd be overstepping any clear understanding of ancient culture to assume more than what is explicitly stated here.
Now, there soon comes to be some sort of thing going on where the women of Israel are heard to say "Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands." The SAB claims that this is the result of some sort of contest, but there are two things to say about this. First of all, no such "contest" is mentioned (although given the political situation, it might not be wrong to say that there was a prestige contest between these two men). Secondly, while they may indeed have slaughtered quite a few of their enemies, the saying is almost certainly hyperbolic in nature, still being early enough in David's military career that it's unlikely he has killed more than a few hundred at most, I would think. Essentially, David's reputation after killing Goliath has caused people to claim that David is ten times the warrior that Saul ever was.
The claim that Saul was taken by an "evil spirit from God" that made him prophesy is a strange one, and not actually a completely unique idea in the Bible. I'd stand on my previous comments concerning Saul's torment by spirits and prophesying.
Oddly to me, the SAB makes no note of violence for Saul trying repeatedly to kill David. I guess in the midst of all the warfare and slaughter, we're supposed to hardly notice a single murder? I don't know. (Discussion on this matter is in the comments below.)
Anyway, Saul wants to get rid of David, so he comes up with a plan that he figures will cause David to be killed my the Philistines. Saul says David can marry his daughter, but instead of a dowry, he will accept a hundred Philistine foreskins. David goes above and beyond, and brings two hundred. What can I say about this crazy story? The SAB labels this passage with the icons for Absurdity, Violence, Sex, Women, Family Values, and Injustice. Let's take them in that order: Absurd? Agreed heartily. Violent? Yes, but once again, this was in the middle of a war between Israel and the Philistines. Sex? Not particularly sexual other than the fact that it involved genitals, so if that's enough for you, so be it. Women? I assume we're once again talking about the idea of a person buying a wife, and yes, it's strange to our modern value system, but common in those days, so I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say. Ditto on Family Values. Injustice? Well, unjust to whom? To the Philistines? I'd assume these were soldiers, who had to accept the possibility they were to die in war. To David? He didn't seem to mind. To Michal? That goes back to the previous issues. I'm simply not sure what the deal is here; this seems as just as anything else in time of war.
The fact that David is successful is apparently taken as a sign to Saul that God is with David, and as He clearly is not with Saul any longer, he suffers from a great deal of envy, becoming David's enemy from that time forward.
* Overall, the Bible has a number of interesting allusions to the symbolism of clothing. Note how in 1Sam.15:27-28, Samuel uses the tearing of his garment as an illustration of the tearing of the kingdom from Saul. In chapter 17, David is offered Saul's battle garb and rejects it, but here, he accepts Jonathan's. In the next chapter, Saul ends the story stripped naked. This is part of a longer literary thread in the Bible that goes from the creation of garments for Adam and Eve, to the life of Joseph which is punctuated with repeated awarding and losing of clothing, to the creation of special priestly garments for the Levites, to the passing of Elijah's cloak to Elisha, to Christ's robe being taken from him before He is placed on the cross, and so forth, to name a few. There are many more.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
Oddly to me, the SAB makes no note of violence for Saul trying repeatedly to kill David. I guess in the midst of all the warfare and slaughter, we're supposed to hardly notice a single murder? I don't know.
Oh, I think you know, Brucker.
I don't highlight Saul's attempts to kill David because Saul was not one of God's favorites and God didn't approve of or inspire his actions (except maybe when God sent him some evil spirits to play with).
Now David is another matter. God is all over that guy. He buys a wife with 200 foreskins and God (and you) say that "David behaved himself wisely in all his ways, and the Lord was with him.")
So God was with David when he killed and cut off the Philistine soldiers' foreskins so that David could buy himself a wife. He was behaving wisely and the Lord was with him. (And you're okay with that.)
Is there a God-inspired act that is so disgusting or absurd that you wouldn't be okay with, Brucker? Why do you bother with the dishonest exercise of calling such crap good, wise, beautiful, and true?
Two things to say about that:
First, all I'm pointing out is that there ought to be consistency, in my view. If you're pointing out violence, then point out all instances of violence. As far as I am aware, God chose both Saul and David, and while indeed Saul is (at this point in time) out of favor with God, so was David when he had Uriah killed, whch I'm guessing you did mark. There's a difference between the books of Moses, which are law, and this book, which is history. If someone does an action in this book, unless we are given indication one way or another, we can only speculate as to whether God approved. After all, Saul threw the spear because he was in torment, and supposedly he was being tormented by God, so it could be argued within reason that it was God's will that Saul try and kill David, but not succeed.
Secondly, I think I have pointed out places where I claim that I do not understand the morality of God's actions, and certainly within the next book, there will be many actions of David that I will condemn as immoral, as I believe God does Himself. As for absurdity, I generally tend to either don't see it as you do or at least don't see why I should care.
I generally tend to either don't see it as you do or at least don't see why I should care.
You should care because you should value the truth. When you ignore, refuse to recognize, or care about the God-inspired cruelty and absurdity in the Bible, you are being intellectually dishonest.
The Bible says twice in this chapter that "David behaved himself wisely in all his ways; and the LORD was with him" (v.14) and "the LORD was with David" (v.28).
Was the Lord with David when he bought his wife with 200 Philistine foreskins? Was this "wise behavior" on David's part?
If an American soldier in Iraq bought a wife with 200 Iraqi foreskins, would you say God was with him and call it wise behavior?
>>>You should care because you should value the truth. When you ignore, refuse to recognize, or care about the God-inspired cruelty and absurdity in the Bible, you are being intellectually dishonest.<<<
I'm talking specifically about the "absurdity", not the "cruelty". On the latter, I agree.
>>>Was the Lord with David when he bought his wife with 200 Philistine foreskins? Was this "wise behavior" on David's part?<<<
Well, let's think about it. Hmmm... He wanted to marry Michal, he had to do what he did to marry Michal, he was in the midst of a battle against the Philistines, so he was going to kill them anyway (and thus they weren't going to need their foreskins anymore) so... A weird thing to do, but in context it makes sense.
>>>If an American soldier in Iraq bought a wife with 200 Iraqi foreskins, would you say God was with him and call it wise behavior?<<<
Aside from the fact that most Iraqis are Muslims, and therefore are probably circumcised... No, it wouldn't make sense. The War in Iraq isn't about driving the people away, it's about trying to establish peace. Unlike the ancient war between the Israelites and the Philistines, American soldiers aren't there to do as much damage as they can; quite the opposite. Now, if some radical Imam told his followers that they could buy a ticket into paradise with 100 American foreskins (surely some U.S. Soldiers are not circumcised), then if their follwers believed this statement, it would be wise for them to go collect them, as nasty as it sounds.
To protect myself from sounding anti-Muslim, let me say that we could potentially say the same thing on the reverse side: imagine an American General saying, "I'll grant an honorable discharge to any soldier who collects 100 Iraqi penises," he'd be crazy, but some soldiers would do it.
A weird thing to do, but in context it makes sense.
I didn't ask if it was weird. I asked if the Lord was with David in the whole foreskin-wife-buying episode. Was he? Did God approve of this "wise behavior"?
I don;t know, but I'm willing to guess the answer is "Yes", as God seemed to be in favor of the extermination/expulsion of the Philistines.
Okay. So God approved of David's foreskin-wife-buying adventure.
I know the text says that "the Lord was with David," but do you think he participated or just watched? Did he hold the penises while David cut off the foreskins, or vice versa?
I see I never answered this question from 2009, but perhaps I just felt it was a silly one. Of course God simply watched, although he may have supernaturally guided David's sword in battle, possibly.
Father Nathan Monk disagrees with my assessment of David and Jonathan's relationship, and makes a good case. I still think this is largely imposing modern American social norms on a different context, but it's not out of the question, of course.
Post a Comment