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.

Deuteronomy, Chapter 25 is another list of arbitrary rules that leave me wondering what situation created a need for them in the first place?

Rule 1.  If a judge convicts someone as guilty in a dispute, the judge can issue no more than 40 lashes by a whip.  Anymore than that would be publicly humiliating.

Rule 2.  Don't muzzle an ox while he's working; in other words, let the ox eat while it works.

Rule 3.  When one brother dies, his wife must marry his brother (whether she likes him or not?).  It says, "If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry ... her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her."  A husband's duty, according to this passage, was just to have sex with his wife.

Rule 4.  If the MAN doesn't want to have sex with his brother's wife, then the wife should go to the elders, remove the man's shoe, and spit in his face.  Huh?

Rule 5.  When two men are fighting, and a wife helps her husband by grabbing the other man's balls, then she should have her hand chopped off.  What?!?

Rule 6.  Be honest when doing business with others.

Rule 7.  Hate the Amelekites. 

Okay, so in Deuteronomy Chapter 25 the rules are all over the map, and they're all arbitrary.  The one rule that is actually halfway decent is the sixth one I list above, which is Deuteronomy 25:13-15, about not cheating when doing business with others.  Letting an ox eat while it works is nice, but I'd be inclined to say its unimportant.  And the other stuff, stopping at 40 lashes, hating the Amelikites, chopping a woman's hand off for protecting her husband, is just wrong.  And weird! 

Deuteronomy 24 is fun, because it is weird.  There is no unifying message behind this chapter, except maybe advice on how to resolve disputes.  I think.

1.  The first lesson is about divorce and remarriage.  If the man doesn't like her for some "unclean" reason, he can divorce her and then she can remarry.  But if the second husband doesn't like her for some "unclean" reason, then the first husband CANNOT take her back.  I wonder what situation occurred where such a rule should ever even be addressed?

2.  The second lesson is that a newly wed man can not go to war or be bothered with business matters.  He has to spend the whole year trying to make his wife happy.

3.  Anyone who steals slaves should be executed.

4.  Do what the priests tell you to do, or you'll get leprosy.  That's an awesome rule, and such a guilt trip!

5.  Don't oppress the poor, whether they be slaves or just poor.  That's actually a decent rule!

6.  You shouldn't kill the father for the crimes of the child, and vice versa.  This is such a good rule, but it contradicts other Biblical teachings that the criminal's progeny should be punished.  That's the whole concept of original sin, isn't it?

7.  Finally, the last rule is to treat kindly strangers, orphans, and widows; and share whatever you have with them.  Another nice thing to practice.

In summary, we went from divorce and marriage; to treating strangers kindly.  And there isn't a real thread of unity between the two subjects.  I think that this document was an attempt to legislate random occurrences that just happened.  But the solutions are so arbitrary and don't really solve the problem, or are just completely ignorant.

Here are some more rules as laid out in Deuteronomy, Chapter 22.  Notice how they get more morbid as they progress.

1. Look out for your brother's animals and keep them harm.
2. Transvestites are an abomination.
3. If you come across a birds nest, you can take the eggs and the chicks, but not the mother.
4. When you build a house, make sure the roof is strong.
5. Don't wear garments of mixed fabrics (i.e. cotton and linen).
6. Don't plow with an ox and a donkey together.
7. You should put fringes on your clothes.
8. If your wife isn't a virgin on her wedding day, take her to her father's doorstep and kill her.
9. Adulterers should be executed.
10. If a woman is raped in the city, and doesn't cry for help loud enough, she should be executed.

I wonder, what events happened in order for the author to even come up with these rules?  Whoever it was, he had to be really uptight, and a little eccentric.  Kill women who don't scream loud enough, don't plow with an ox and a donkey together, but do wear fringes on your outfit!

Above: Woman with leprosy in Nepal

"Command the children of Israel, that they put out of the camp every leper, and everyone that has an issue, and whoever has been defiled by the dead." In other words, abandon the sick to suffer and die alone. Shouldn't the Creator have just introduced rifampicin and dapsone, the drugs used today to effectively treat leprosy?

I probably hyped up God's crusade against lepers. That's actually the extent of it. But Numbers does continue on in true Leviticus fashion.

There's very little transitional material in the Bible, and in this chapter we jump from lepers to adultery - which is one of the accepted reasons to have an abortion. Yahweh, who is undoubtedly male, gives the Israelites a special magical ritual to discern who is an adulterer and who is not.

If a man suspects his wife is cheating, he approaches a priest. The priest gives her "bitter water" (Numbers 5:18). If she cheated on her husband, this bitter water will make her "thighs rot" and her "belly swell." If this happens, the woman is then excommunicated from the community. If nothing happens, well - I guess the man just has to throw his hands up in the air and say, "Oh, my bad!"

More than likely, this is actually a reference to abortion - a morning after pill.

The message to take from this is, obviously, if a woman becomes pregnant by cheating on her husband - by all means, abort it! And you know what? I have no problem with abortion (within the first trimester), but I do have a problem with this scenario. This is basically a priest conducting an abortion on the husband's whim, with the woman having no choice in the matter.

The whole procedure is called the "Law of Jealousies".

What about men? In this particular chapter, Yahweh is silent.