David exposes himself? (2 Samuel, Chapter 6)

Uzzah tries to keep the ark steady because the oxen shook it.  For this, God smites him.  From ldsseminary

2 Samuel, Chapter 6 - This is kind of a weird chapter.  It starts off with David gathering 30,000 Israelites and marching off with the Ark of the Covenant.  The ark was in a brand new cart and was driven by two individuals, Uzzah and Ahio.

At a particular part of the road, known as Nachon's Threshingfloor, the ark began to shake because of the oxen.  Uzzah tries to steady the ark so it doesn't fall and ZAP!  God kills him.  It says God killed Uzzah "for his error".  I guess the error may have been the placement of his hands?

King David started to fear the Ark of the Covenant, and didn't want to bring it into his city.  Instead, he left it at some guy named Obededom the Gittite.  Obededom actually capitalized off this, because in the three months that Obededom possessed the Ark, God blessed him and his family.

After hearing that Obededom was being blessed, David sent for the Ark to enter into the city of David.  To honor the entrance of the ark, David sacrificed "oxen and fatlings".  Fatlings!!!  I had to look that up in the dictionary.  A fatling is a young animal that was fattened for slaughter, perhaps similar to veal?

What happens next is even more bizarre.  Apparently, as the Ark is being brought into the city, David was dancing and I think his junk must have been hanging out!  Michal, the daughter of the previous King Saul, looked out the window and saw him.  Later, when she met David, she said, "How glorious was the king of Israel today, who uncovered himself today in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovers himself!"

David replies with what seems like a taunt, "God chose me before your father, and before all his house, to appoint me over all the people, over Israel, so I will dance and play before the Lord." 

His last retort before the end of the chapter, "I will be more vile than this, and will be base in mine own sight: and of the maidservants which thou has spoken of, I will have them in honor."

Wow!

And then, for no apparent reason, the chapter ends like this:  Therefore, Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.  

David asks for his wife, whom he'd originally bought for 200 foreskins

Above: David asks for his wife, whom he had paid 100 Philistine foreskins for.  

Oh wait, that's wrong - he actually paid 200.  From Sparklesdelicious

2 Samuel, Chapter 3 - This chapter is basically about the civil war between the up and coming House of David, and the ever-weakening House of Saul.  David has about seven wives by now, and is pumping out children like no other.  This news of giving birth to more children was probably great news in the Bronze Age; nowadays people wouldn't be nearly as excited.  In any case, I think the news of all these children is a sign that the House of David is gaining power, and is in favor with the big guy upstairs, also know as God or Yahweh.

Finally, Abner (the last of the House of David) asked for a truce between he and David.  David agrees, but with a very odd term.  Abner may not see David's face until he brings Michal, the daughter of Saul.  Michal was David's previous wife, whom he had actually bought for 200 Philistine foreskins (although it says 100 in this particular section), and then later "gave" her to a gentleman named Phaltiel.  So, Abner fetched Michal to give to David, and her husband Phaltiel followed behind crying.  That's just messed up.

Later, Abner is assassinated by the brother of Asahel, whom Abner had killed in the preceding chapter.  King David was pissed at this, and basically cursed the assassins for their deed.  He cursed them and all their descendants to a life of being poor lepers.

Possible Gay Couple in the Old Testament! (1 Samuel, Chapter 18)

Jonathan and David

There may not have been an Adam and Steve, but there was a Jonathan and Dave.  Chapter 18 opens up with the understandably little known story of Jonathan and David, and it reads like they were gay lovers of the type found in Athenian or Carthaginian soldiers, like the Sacred Band of Thebes.

Now, I'm sure there's plenty of apologetics out there trying to explain this away, so here's the facts, not the spin.  18:1 says that their souls were knit together.18:3 says David loved Jonathan as his own soul.  18:4 says Jonathan took off all his clothes and armor and gave it to David.

It's ambiguous and the point can be argued either way, but it is at least suspicious to the average reader, which I purport myself to be.  I'm just reading the Bible again just to make sure I didn't miss anything.  This second time around is obviously a lot more engaged then previous times.

Also in this chapter, Saul, who I guess has not been told yet that he's not the king that Yahweh (God) wants, is becoming jealous of David.  Apparently, they start a contest on who can kill the most people in the name of God.  This is like the wet dream of the most religious people alive today!

King Saul engages in a little bit of deception.  Saul saw that David was enamored with his daughter, and figured that giving her to David would calm him down.  Saul said David can have his daughter (named Michal), and he didn't need a dowry.  However, he did want 100 Philistine foreskins.

Think about that.

A lot of people give their wife a wedding ring, in some cultures the groom is expected to give the family money or gifts (a dowry), but in this case David is asked to bring 100 FORESKINS!

Well, David wanted Michal so bad that he went and killed 200 Philistines, and brought back 200 foreskins.  Piles of foreskins seems to be a fairly common thing in the Old Testament!   Paying 200 foreskins for a bride is a rather odd price, and it's also very weird.  That's why I find it interesting that this story isn't as well-known as it ought to be.

It almost seems like our own modern morality causes Bible readers to ignore these passages.  Not me.  I find these passages immensely interesting, and at the same time it just cements my personal belief that Bible is not a guide to morality, but "empty bleatings of a barbaric tribe", as Christopher Hitchens might put it.