 |
| I couldn't find a picture of a hemorrhoid... |
I actually was enjoying reading Samuel. I don't know if I just resigned myself to the violence and chauvinism of it all and am looking at it as one crazy story, or if it was actually better. I'll have to think about that, I suppose. Let me know what you think. Was this reading better or has it all been on par with the previous books.
Anyway, my highlighter got some use as I made it through these two Books of Samuel and I'll get to covering what struck me (good or bad) as I was reading:
So basically after the Israelites were defeated by the Philistines and they lost the Ark, the Lord dealt with the inhabitants of any city the Ark was moved to harshly. What did he do? He "ravaged and afflicted the city and its vicinity with hemorrhoids; he brought upon the city a great and deadly plague of mice that swarmed in their ships and overran their fields." (Samuel I, 5:6)
And so the Philistines moved the Ark from city to city with the plague of hemorrhoids and mice following along. So the Philistines asked their fortune-tellers, " 'What shall we do with the ark of the Lord? Tell us what we should send back with it.' They replied, 'If you intend to send away the ark of the God of Israel, you must not send it alone, but must, by all means, make amends to him through a guilt offering...' " (Samuel I, 6:3) And what was the guilt offering? Five golden hemorrhoids and five golden mice! I'm still trying to figure out what their golden hemorrhoids looked like. That gave me a good giggle!
So the Israelites then decide they want a king to lead them, which naturally ticks the Lord off to no end, but being the overly-indulgent Father that he is, he granted the request, but at the same time telling them that the king will eventually subjugate/oppress them and when they cry out for help, God will not answer. Cool.
Fast forward and Samuel is telling Saul a message from the Lord regarding attacking Amalek, "...'Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' " (Samuel I, 15:3). Yikes! I really get some indigestion over this whole killing everything crap. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've seen the movies where they say that if you leave one infant alive s/he may rise up as an adult and try to avenge the death of family, but really...whatever! I'm not all about this massacre everyone bullshit. This doesn't bring me any closer to my faith. It shocks and disturbs me instead.
So Saul does actually spare Agag (King of Amalek) and the best animals (no mention of sparing any of the women and children though), so God rejects Saul as ruler and it's all downhill from there for Saul!
"Do not judge from his appearance or from his lofty stature, because I have rejected him. Not as man sees does God see, because man sees the appearance but the Lord looks into the heart." (Samuel I, 16:7) I just really liked that quote. Too bad people don't follow that now. All we seem to do is judge by appearances. Sad.
"All this multitude, too, shall learn that it is not by sword or spear that the Lord saves. For the battle is the Lord's, and he shall deliver you into our hands." (Samuel I, 17:47) Now this is something that I can find inspiring. Is this the first time I've said it since we started? It feels like it.
So David marries Saul's daughter, Michal. Saul is jealous and despises David for his favor with God and his prowess in battle. He plans to kill David and Michal (who loves David), helps her husband to escape. Very nice indeed, however, I found trouble with the passage, "Michal took the household idol and laid it in the bed, putting a net of goat's hair at its head and covering it with a spread." (Samuel I, 19:13). Household idol? OK, this really should have been explained earlier, because I didn't think that this would be allowed? And if it isn't allowed, why would David as God's chosen ruler for the Israelites tolerate such an idol in his house? I mean it's just mentioned like it's something everyone had. Hmmm.
I noticed that in Chapter 21 there was a subheading of "The Holy Bread" and after reading it I immediately thought of communion. While I understand that communion is the body of Christ and that wasn't the intent here, I have to think that it may have had some tie-in.
Also, noted that in Chapter 28 there was a subheading, "The Witch of Endor". Witches? Fortune-tellers? So is the bible saying that these are real? If so, apparently saying they are real, but don't use them, or better, destroy them. K...
Chapter 31 dealt with the death of Saul and his sons. So the Lord apparently had enough of his crap and said that Saul and his sons would die. Of course, Jonathan was killed too. OK, now Jonathan was protecting David from Saul thus betraying his father, but serving David and the Lord...and he gets killed for it? Seriously, Shakespeare is downright cheerful compared to this!
In the capture of Zion I was a bit disturbed by the phrase, "The lame and the blind shall be the personal enemies of David." (Samuel II, 5:8). Well, isn't that sad. As if the lame and blind didn't already have problems!
A prediction of Jesus? (Samuel II, Ch 7:12-16) "And when your time comes and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your heir after you, sprung from your loins, and I will make his kingdom firm. It is he who shall build a house for my name. And I will make his royal throne firm forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. And if he does wrong, I will correct him with the rod of men and with human chastisements; but I will not withdraw my favor from him as I withdrew it from your predecessor Saul, whom I removed from my presence. Your house and your kingdom shall endure forever before me; your throne shall stand firm forever."
Later in Chapter 13 we've got one of David's sons, Amnon, raped his sister Tamar. This pissed off their brother Absalom who he has him killed which pisses of David. Really? OK, if you had punished Amnon for being a little rapist shit, he might still be alive. Holy cow this part pissed me off!
In Chapter 21 Goliath of Gath reappears. Resurrected from the dead or just same name different dude?
That's pretty much all I highlighted. More in Samuel I, I know, but despite the sarcasm and irritation in my post, I found the reading more enjoyable. At least not painful.
