Posts
David and Jonathan seem to be a couple. Thought God frowned on the gays.
Saul continues to hate David and David is fearful of Saul.
It doesn't stop either of them from killing scores of Philistines during the chase.
My question is; What is this story trying to tell us? David is not looking very "kingly" at this point.
I was Jonathan to your David... you're still king.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/embed/yNy04MwhziY
But srsly.
ReplyDelete@ 19:16 Michal uses the household shrines (teraphim) to form the shape of a sleeping David.
I read an author who argued that this meant that "teraphim" referred to large objects, but it is plural here.
Small statues identified as these "teraphim" are well attested archaeologically, although IIRC they drop off towards the end of the Judah monarchy.
In ch. 19 Saul's epileptic seizures are again seen as prophetic episodes. This also gives us a *second* explanation for the phrase "is Saul also among the prophets?"
20:41 is the place to be for hot David/Jonathan action. The word translated as "kiss" also means "drink", so I think they were really going at it.
No but seriously, the verb is usually used with relatives greeting each other (ie Gen 27:27), I don't see it having any romantic connotation. As much as I would LOVE Jonathan and David to be gay lovers, I doubt that was the original message. Wouldn't have survived redaction, surely.
21:11, second of three references to this famous phrase.
"Am I short of madmen that you bring this one to plague me?" = favorite line.
David takes his family to Moab, which makes no sense, but implies some sort of connection between him and Moab. The Book of Ruth, as we saw, makes his great-grandmother a Moabite.
22:5, who the hell is this Gad dude, popping up out of nowhere?
David now has a band of rogues and is on the run. I love it! Such a dynamic character.
1 Samuel 20:30-31 seems to me to be the best evidence that there was something going on between David and Jonathan.
ReplyDelete"...do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?"
Strikes me that Saul is talking about sexual confusion here ... and is fully aware of what is going on between the two. I'm thinking these boys were an item.
All of David's subsequent wives? A little over-compensation maybe?? :)
Aaannnnndddd we're back to killing ... with 'the edge of the sword'. With all the smiting in this book, seems someone could've come up with some more metaphors.
That KJV verse is pretty intriguing. My Bible has a less interesting translation:
ReplyDelete"You son of a crooked and unfaithful mother! You have made friends with the son of Jesse only to bring shame on yourself and dishonour on your mother."
The "nakedness" is the same nakedness that Noah's son's "cover" when he passes out drunk. Seems to be a metaphor for dishonor.
The word "confusion" בשת is most commonly translated as "shame".
"Chose" is the same verb as God "chose" Israel.
Saul is basically saying that Jonathan brought dishonor on himself and his mother for "choosing" Jonathan.
Which is still pretty interesting.
In 2 Samuel you'll meet a guy named "Ishbosheth"
ReplyDelete@Abbie
ReplyDeleteThanks for the breakdown of the Hebrew. I need some sort of Hebrew dictionary, bible translation sort of thingy. I find that stuff really interesting. (Wow - that was eloquent. I'm clearly a linguistic prodigy in the making. ugh)
@David,
ReplyDelete"...do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?"
(MHC)
A bastard: Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman; that is, according to the foolish filthy language of men's brutish passion now a day, "Thou son of a whore." He tells him he was born to the confusion of his mother, that is, he had given the world cause to suspect that he was not the legitimate son of Saul, because he loved him whom Saul hated and supported him who would be the destruction of their family. 2. A traitor: Thou son of a perverse rebellion (so the word is), that is, "thou perverse rebel." At other times he reckoned no counsellor or commander that he had more trusty and well-beloved than Jonathan; yet now in this passion he represents him as dangerous to his crown and life. 3. A fool: Thou hast chosen the son of Jesse for thy friend to thy own confusion, for while he lives thou shalt never be established. Jonathan indeed did wisely and well for himself and family to secure an interest in David, whom Heaven had destined to the throne, yet, for this, he is branded as most impolitic.
I think you are reading this with the understanding of perverse relations between men today. Granted this is not a recent issue, it also was a problem in the past, however with the children of God you would be dead. And that would have given Saul reason to kill both, and if so why is that not mentioned? And do you honestly think God would uphold a person that participated in that act that He declared was an abomination(Leviticus 18:22)?
We will read the sins David commits and God deals with him, however if your interpretation of this is true, the God is not being consistent. Remember He destroyed two cites over this kinda stuff(Genesis 19:24).
In 2 Samuel you'll meet a guy named "Ishbosheth"
ReplyDeleteGlad you point that out. (בשת= Bosheth, for those who can't read Hebrew.)
Somewhere in Chronicles you'll find out his original name was Ishbaal!! A late editor of Samuel (the Deuteronomist?) was like "Oh crap, I explained away Jerubbaal, but this is too much, we can't have that" so he replaced "baal" with "shame". The editor of Chronicles didn't.
Thanks for the breakdown of the Hebrew. I need some sort of Hebrew dictionary, bible translation sort of thingy
For my Hebrew Bible navigating I use the software available at this handy site: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm
I learned the basics of Hebrew at http://www.hebrew4christians.com. There's only 22 letters, the hardest part is getting the vowels and syllable structure. I can pronounce pointed Hebrew slowly and roughly, but I haven't learned much grammar.
I think you are reading this with the understanding of perverse relations between men today. Granted this is not a recent issue, it also was a problem in the past, however with the children of God you would be dead. And that would have given Saul reason to kill both, and if so why is that not mentioned? And do you honestly think God would uphold a person that participated in that act that He declared was an abomination(Leviticus 18:22)?
ReplyDeleteI've always assumed that the Jonathan and David story can't be romantic, because if so it wouldn't have made it past the editing process.
But here's an idea: modern Christians assume it's a bromance, a strong friendship, and the idea that David and Jonathan were lovers is so crazy and absurd that it's not considered. What if that was already the case with the Deuteronomical editor, or whoever compiled the stories into the book of Samuel?
Interior: Scribe house, 6th century Jerusalem
Joe-baal: "Hey, Bob-shemesh, I'm reading that scroll you want me to edit, but we might have a problem... it's this story about David with Saul's kid... um... I think it might be kind of gay."
Bob-shemesh: "What? Why would they write a gay story about King David? That's ridiculous."
Joe-baal: "I don't know, Bob-shemesh, it seems pretty obvious to me. It's love at first site, and then they make out an awful lot. I know David already has wives in the other stories, but maybe he's bi or something."
Bob-shemesh: "Lemme see that... jeez, you idiot, they're just friends. Obviously. Don't you listen to the priests? That shit's evil! King David wasn't no queer. You're reading too much into it."
Joe-baal: "Well, okay, but this scroll is pretty old, maybe they didn't know it was sinful when they wrote it."
Bob-shemesh: "That's ridiculous. Look, the story is fine! Intermingle it with the other David/Saul material. We need the padding, since you went and lost the Book of Jasher on me. If you fall asleep with the candle burning again I swear I'm selling you to the Midianites."
And... scene.
@Abbie
ReplyDeleteBrilliant! I love it!!!
Absolutely: homosexual behaviour comes in and out of vogue over the centuries; could easily have happened that way
ReplyDelete@Abbie,
ReplyDeleteNice story, however you are missing God. Not sure if you think He exists or not, i think you believe not, however i believe He does. And He would know, and if this was so it would not go very long before God dealt with it. Don't we all know by this point that God does not tolerate people disobeying His rules?
Also where is the evidence of a later editor? I think you and i both have to approach this with faith. :-D
Again nice story.