Yahweh Loves Children! (warning: some sarcasm present)

by ringo5 12 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • ringo5
    ringo5

    Whenever I feel myself slipping into a good mood, I can always do some good ol' testament reading, and follow it up with a chaser of WTS spin. It's a sure-fire way to fuel the apostate-fire that's a' brewing inside.

    The account of David and Bathsheba, while basically a good sex yarn, gets real sick and twisted at the end, and guess who is the sick and twisted surprise star? Yahweh! Yah and Weh!

    You all know the basic plot, righteous David, the royal peeping tom, starts off looking at Bathsheba a bathin', gets a royal woody, decides he wants some of that, and does. Unfortunately, the royally educated King does not practice safe sex, and bingo-bongo she gets pregnant. Enter the poor sap of the story, Uriah. Kingy tries a couple schemes to get him to sleep with his wife to cover up the pregnancy (apparently Uriah wasn't in the mood or sumpthin'), but failing that, sends him to the war front for a certain death. The deed being done , he soon sends for the bathin' beauty and marries her in some manner.

    The months pass, and the baby finally shows up. Here comes the star of the show, Yahweh, and he's a little disappointed in David. The bible doesn't go into detail why it took this long for him to act, but you know how god is with time and all. Anywho, you know some body's gonna pay, but you'd never guess who! Alrighty, mighty, maybe you would. Who's the only innocent person left in the story? That's right, the baby! Good thinkin' oh smitey one! That'll learn David, and the baby sure won't get the chance to screw up either!

    Never preferring a merciful death when a drawn out painful one would do, ol' Yahweh smites the kid with an illness. For 7 days David fasts, apparently hoping that Yahweh would be merciful and spare the child, but alas someone has to die.

    The story also has an interesting epilogue. When David finally finds out the baby is dead, he observes the proper 30 second mourning period, has a nice bath, some bread, and goes to help Bathsheba cope with the loss. Now perhaps we will be able to see David's softer side, the sensitive and righteous man that made god love him so much.

    (2 Samuel 12:24) 24 And David began to comfort Bath-she´ba his wife. Further, he came in to her and lay down with her.

    Wha? "Hey baby, I got the cure for your blues right here, a session with my royal staff..."

    A little confused, faith shaken perhaps? Don't worry, let's consult the Watchtower bound volumes to show us what we must have missed, being the uninspired, unholy, sinful humans we are...

    ***

    w608/1pp.479-480 Questions from Readers***

    How can Deuteronomy 24:16, which says, "Children should not be put to death on account of fathers," be harmonized with the fact that the offspring of the adulterous relation between David and Bath-sheba died due to their sin, as shown in 2 Samuel 12:14?—J.B., U.S.A.

    The law, as stated at Deuteronomy 24:16, shows that fathers were not to be put to death for their sons nor were sons to be put to death for their fathers. In man’s administration of justice each was to die for his own sin, and not drag innocent relatives down with him. In this particular case of David and Bath-sheba neither of them had a right to the child and so there was no injustice in their being deprived of it. Besides, as an uncircumcised, unnamed infant it had not as yet developed any personality pattern or consciousness so as to appreciate life. Then again, Bath-sheba could have been stoned to death for her adultery, in which case the unborn child would also have perished. However, as previously noted in TheWatchtower, David was shown mercy because of the Kingdom covenant, which Jehovah had made with him. Nevertheless, to drive home the fact of Jehovah’s displeasure he let the child die, which was a very severe blow to King David. Two similar instances are recorded in David’s life: One was in connection with the death of Uzzah, who tried to steady the ark of the covenant; the other was the destruction of tens of thousands of Israelites because King David presumptuously and proudly determined to number the hosts of Israel. (1 Chron. 15:13; 21:1-27) Such records as these magnify the supremacy of Jehovah God and underscore the words: "He [God] doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?"—Dan. 4:35, AS.

    Just to summarize reasons said baby deserved to die:

    1. Neither parent had a right to keep the baby. (insert supporting scripture here)

    2. Baby was not circumcised. (just in case you were wondering when a baby would be circumcised, it was 8 days. Thus if it had managed to last another day, this reason would have disappeared. It's all about the numbers with Yahweh, remember that)

    3. Baby is being called Baby because of the third reason, it had no name. Which also means no personality or consciousness so as to appreciate life. (don't try to bring up abortion, that's a different part of the Bible, and remember, the Bible does not contradict itself)

    4. Hey, it could have died much sooner if the letter of the law had been followed, by stoning Bathsheba. Thus it was shown much mercy.... moving right along...

    5. What better way to punish David, than to kill the one thing that would remind him of his misdeed?

    6. Aren't 5 reasons enough? Who are you to even ask Yahweh? You should feel ashamed for even asking, infidel.

    Feel better?

    Actually, I do now , a little.

    Ringo5

  • BabaYaga
    BabaYaga

    Wow. That's absolutely stinkin' stunning.

    Thanks, Ringo, I feel better now, too.

    *whew*
    Baba.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Cruelly well written...

    Yahweh was not "good" by any stretch but he did look more like real life, didn't he?

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    I like your witty style, ringo5. Of course, the Society's "explanation" dissolves under critical inquiry. The usual historical explanation is straightforward. The story about David took shape at the time of the Yahwist-Elohist law-code (conventionally dated to the eighth century BC), which states: "I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me" (Exodus 20:5). This stance on jurisprudence was common throughout the ANE (cf. Herodotus, Historia 3.119, Esther 9:13-14, Daniel 6:25), and reflects the cultural legacy that Israel inherited from her neighbors. Other stories that reflect this theological view can be found in 2 Samuel 21:1-9 concerning the sons of Saul and 1 Kings 21:20-21, 2 Kings 10:1-11 concerning the sons of Ahab. The legal reform under King Josiah (seventh century BC), which produced the Deuteronomistic code, emphasized individual responsibility, and thus set aside the earlier stipulations: "Fathers may not be put to death for their sons, nor sons for fathers. Each is to be put to death for his own sin" (Deuteronomy 24:16). However portions of the old law-code were incorporated into Deuteronomy nonetheless with some tension between the two (cf. 5:9, which allows Yahweh to reserve the right to exact vengeance). The Deuteronomistic perspective is reflected in later stories in the History, such as 2 Kings 14:6. This doctrine on individual responsibility is adopted by the priestly class in the exilic period (sixth century BC), cf. Ezekiel who was adamant that Yahweh "will no longer require" punishment on children for their fathers' sins (ch. 18), even making the compassionate Yahweh declare: "I take no pleasure in the death of anyone" (18:21). This is a considerable theological development from the "jealous god" of Exodus 20:5. The theme of Yahweh's compassion was carried even further in the post-exilic period; the book of Jonah (fifth-fourth century BC) in particular is notable for portraying Yahweh as repenting from his threat on destroying a Gentile city, showing compassion on little children ("who cannot tell their right hand from their left") and even the animals of the city (Jonah 3:7, 4:11).

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    As Leolaia pointed out, the biggest problem is the coexistence of a notion of divine transgenerational justice (denied in Ezekiel 18) and the affirmation of human strictly individual justice within the Torah as it stands, suggesting that those notions were compatible for the times/circles responsible for its final edition. The harmonising addition in Exodus 20:7 // Deuteronomy 5:9, "punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me" (suggesting that the punished generations are guilty too) is absent from Exodus 34:7.

    Here's an interesting online article on this topic:

    http://www.law.umn.edu/uploads/images/2072/Levinson_Numen_article.pdf

  • Jourles
    Jourles

    7. Yahweh makes the rules, not humans.

    8. If, as a human, you do not agree with rule number 7, please refer back to rule number 6. Continue cycling through the rules until you "get it."

  • jambon1
    jambon1

    Its this kind of thing that really got me asking questions of 'god'.

    They told me to read my bible daily. I really did at one time. Then after a short time I left the org as a result.

    Great work brothers!

  • robhic
    robhic

    This is very much like rock star- and professional athlete-immmunity today. They don't play by the same rules as the rest of us. Go do some petty (or even not so petty) crime. Then compare it to what hapened to ___________ (insert offending rock star or athlete name) when they did some criminal deed. Same result? No, I think not. David was the rock star of his day. Heck, even jehoobah was his biggest fan! "David, you screwing around?" "Uh, yes, but I feel really, really bad about it." "OK, well try to be a better boy. And don't do it again!" "All right, I will try not to..." "Good. Oh, and I really loved your latest album."

  • robhic
    robhic

    This also reminded me of the Ray Stevens song from the 70's or 80's (?): Jesus loves the little children. All the little children of the world. Be they yellow, black or white they are precious in his sight, Unless it's King David's from making nasties with that girl...

  • loosie
    loosie

    I have seen this point brought out to me in around about way but none the less.

    Your first born died?!?!!? what sin did you commit?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit