by zack 62 Replies latest jw friends
Wafe,
Any more questions?
Well, just the first one that Narkissos posed. You have yet to attend to it.
Please present the conclusive archeological and historical evidence that justifies the existence of an historical figure called King David as presented in the OT. What you represent above does not fulfil the neccessary qualifications needed before we describe something as proved.
Many thanks - HS
I too, personally hated to read anything about King David, he was not an example to follow inho. I always pointed out the killing of Uriah and the taking of his wife whenever he was brought up at the Book Study. I just about refuse to read psalms because I don't want to read anything aboiut or directed by him.
King David at least was humble enough to admit when he did wrong, and always accepted the prophets' counsel and direction. So K.D. was a humble man. And he always loved going to the meetings, as we should. He was always good at giving praise to Jehovah, extolling his virtues and ways. A true model of repentance, even me, DF'd as I am treated. — Fred.
ok, so if your gripe is with him being held up as a great guy and not particularly with him, then don't drive your knives into his gut but instead criticise those who hold him up as a paragon of virtue wow, paragon of virtue he was not!!! and neither am I - and hillary, I can hardly have come across as pious (or whatever you said) when my whole point was that if you condemn David as you patently were doing, then you condemn me because I'm not much better than him!! In OT times, I would've been stoned for some things I've done. This may not impress some of you but I feel that David is a good example - a good example of someone who was inherently flawed and who made the most astounding errors BUT who God nevertheless loved. To my mind, the point of the example of David is not to show how wonderful he is but to show how great is God's mercy - and very obviously his mercy, as Scripture says, is waaaaaay beyond our understanding. You know, speaking purely personally, I like people who are flawed, who are human, and who don't get all pompous and condemnatory. I'm proud of the friends I've made, although hardly any of them are religious or believers in God, because they're human but darn me, they're loyal and warm friends and entirely loveable for all their mistakes. That's how I think of David as well. I'm also laughing my socks off because for all that y'all don't like him, he's surely been the subject of some hot debate - yay for David! |
Serious question:
tijkmo said:
some say sex during menstruation (it's why the kid was sickly!!!),
Can a woman conceive while menstruating? I thought she was cleansing herself post-menstruation.
This brings up another fascinating subplot to the David story. Some scholars have theorized that Bath-Sheba actually seduced David as an opportunistic move to become part of the royal court. The nature of the above-mentioned "cleansing" would encompass more than just the typical "sponge-bath." Bath-Sheba would have been very aware of the fact that her antics were visible to King David.
Comments?
I think David was an interesting fellow. If there was one thing that I have learned from his life (reading the Samuels in conjunction with the Psalms) it is how to repent. Perhaps that is why Paul said that David was justifed, declared righteous, by faith in Romans?
What is more, nearly every Old Testamant hero had foibles. Moses had a temper, Abraham was a liar, Jacob a con man, Isaac played favorites, Gideon was a coward, and Jonah was a bigot. Dare I say that nearly every male hero in the Old Testament had issues? On the other hand how many females are written of negatively in the Old Testament? I can only think of one, Jezebel. Interesting for a book that so many on this forum call misogynist and chauvenistic.
Oh, and it was Saul that demended the foreskins, not YHWH. The amount of Scripture misquoting that happens here is equal to the amount on the pages of the WT ragazine.
alotlikemay,
wow, paragon of virtue he was not!!! and neither am I - and hillary, I can hardly have come across as pious (or whatever you said) when my whole point was that if you condemn David as you patently were doing, then you condemn me because I'm not much better than him!! In OT times, I would've been stoned for some things I've done.
I did not use the term 'pious', I used the term 'self-righteous'.
I did not condemn David, and would be happy for you to show me why you suggest that I did. I do not believe that King David as portrayed in the OT existed as anything but a mythological figure, so condemning the myth would hardly make sense!
As to you 'hardly coming across as pious', you can hardly be the judge of that, your audience however can. Bearing in mind that I suggested that your post comes across as 'self righteous', I will just requote what you concluded in your original post.
grow up, you people! yeah, I'm serious! you sound like children
I think the children here are those who take a story from a book and build a life on it.
HS
alotlikemay,
Why is this subject bothering you so much? The question isn't "is there any hope for flawed people?", it's "why is King David held up as a great guy?" So, why does it worry you that some of us have the opinion that he wasn't a great guy? He isn't someone that I think should be held up as an example to be followed. As a warning example, yes. But not, an example of good behaviour. So he's sorry when he gets caught. So what, I'm sorry when I get caught too. But I don't think I'm some sort of righteous example because of that.
This is in no way a judgement on people who make mistakes. We all make them. And, the whole point is; David is not a shining beacon of righteousness. He's an ordinary, flawed person like you and I. The fact that I dislike the character portrayed in the stories is besides the point.
Cellist
i have been thinking about this today
i think that david was an imperfect man whose heart was in the right place...and i also think that a lot of what he did was because he wanted to protect bathsheba who he had fallen in love with..
if it were possible for him to have taken the blame without involving her i think he would have.
what is quite interesting though is nathan being sent to chastise david..
in effect jehovah could see that david had got himself into one big mess and he didnt know what to do or who to speak to and everything he did after that would seem to compound the wrongdoing..but jah told nathan go speak to david he is my friend save him.
now what if nathan had said yeah that'll be right..im not saving him - if he doesnt grovel, if he doesnt beg, if he doesnt cry like a baby, if he doesnt satisfy my criteria for contrition then i know better than god and i will tell him he is scum and beyond salvation.
clearly such a representative of jah telling david this would destroy him since he would know that jah had abandoned him even though he knew that he was repentant..
but what would jah do to nathan???
and what will he do to elders who have acted in exactly that manner.
(especially to me.)
to hillary_step
May we all be children and follow the book, just as Jesus did and encouraged.
