"♪onathan: You were very delightful to me; your love was wonderful to me, exceeding the love of women." - Actual BIBLICAL Song lyrics by King David of Israel! (See: 2nd Samuel 1:26) LIARS:
David meant what he wrote! Prince Jonathan - in DIRECT lineage to the throne said that David was going to rule & he would be beside him! Why would a man give up the right to rule a kingdom & then bind his name in covenant to sit beside the King he abdicated to! Think! The term is "Paramour"! Only someone who lacks basic empathy would dare to try characterize such an expression of intimate affection as anything other! But let's look at some of the evidence & combine that testimony with what we know of the practices of the day: The Scripture records: "Then Saul’s anger burned against Jonathan, and he said to him, “You son of a perverse, rebellious woman! Do I not know that you are choosing the son of Jesse to your own shame" - 1 Sam 30a. "Choosing"? What type of "choosing"? And why does Saul connect this "choosing" with "shame"? Let's keep looking. It is written: "...the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. ... Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan took off the robe that was on him and gave it to David, with his armor, even to his sword and his bow and his belt." - 1 Sam 18:1-4 Take a close look at the text that is in crimson. David moves into the king's household to be with prince Jonathan. And they make a COVENANT of LOVE between each other. Are you figuring this out? The last thing we see here is Jonathan disarm & disrobe before David. The implication is that the same clothes Jonathan wears are now for David & that Jonathan's trust is absolute. THEY WERE PARAMOURS...on par with FAMILY. LOVERS (hence that continual commentary about loving each other as they love themselves). A key admonition given to married couples in the New Testament was drawn directly from this example of a same-gender couple in the Old Testament! From the examples given in the Song of Songs, - we know that the Scripture always veils erotic language in symbolism. Such language is never vulgar or direct, but instead - full of symbolism that only a mature, comprehensive mind can understand the implications thereof. Therefore, when the text about David & Jonathan says things such as: "the souls of Jonathan and David were knit together, and Jonathan loved him as himself"; --You need to turn your brain to its full-on mode and ask yourself the question: "What is it that a guy does that is an act of 'love unto himself'"! The relationship between David & Jonathan (a few years older than David) can be described with a great degree of certainty as pederastic by its nature. And contrary to the contempt the modern use of the term has fallen into; - the ancient context was much nobler & so widely practiced (due to that "human-nature" thing) - that it was probably never anticipated that a time would come where the practice would fall into disrepute. THAT is the context of what Saul's comment to Jonathan about CHOOSING David implied. THIS love is why Jonathan was willing to give up a kingdom & support the one who would take it over! And this is what pissed off Saul (a man the Scripture says had abandoned his following of God)! Details matter. Actions matter. And the Hebrew law covers very specific details (for good reasons)! So, let's be direct: According to the Torah - ejaculating onto yourself or being with another when it happens is dealt with by taking a bath. It's NOT SIN because no sacrifice for sin is demanded. Read that until it sinks in. When you understand that AnalSex is a specific act forbidden (under pain of death) - then male/male intimacy can be restored to its contextual & historical place of intimate respect. Once you recognize the relationship between David & Jonathan as pederasty & understand fully what that entailed - then everything else the Scripture tells us about them (including the citation at the top of this page) makes absolutely perfect contextual sense.
|