Interpretation : The David and Jonathan Love Story

1 Samuel 18:1
"...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself." (NIV)

"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (KJV)

1 Samuel 20:41
"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." (NIV)

2 Samuel 1:6
I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.(KJV)

Mokgatla wrote:

1 Samuel 18:1
"...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself." (NIV)
"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (KJV)
1 Samuel 20:41
"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." (NIV)
2 Samuel 1:6
I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.(KJV)

Amazing.

Mokgatla wrote:

1 Samuel 18:1
"...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself." (NIV)
"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (KJV)
1 Samuel 20:41
"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." (NIV)
2 Samuel 1:6
I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.(KJV)

I just checked my KJV and a Sesotho translation. I'd like to correct your last verse, it`s 2 Samuel 1:26.
Ka sesotho ere
Jonathane, moreso, ke pelotlhomohi ka uena, ho `na u no rateha hakaakang! Rato la hau ho`na e ne le le mohlolo, le la basali le a shaitsa.
Ke balile 1 Samuel 20:1-43. Jonathan o bolela lerato la hae ho David (20:17) ere
Jonathane a re Davida a hlapanye hape hore o tla mo rata, hobane Jonathane le ena o rata Davida joalokaha a ithata.
And Jonathan caused David to swear again, because he loved him: for he loved him as he loved his own soul.
Kene kesa hlokomele taba tsena until today. I read the two bibles and I`m convinced this is a same sex love story presented inside the one book used against same sex relationships. The Sesotho version is tries hard to hide this story by using very strange word like ho shaitsa. The meeting in quiet places, the declaration of love on a number of occasions lead me to interpret this as a homosexual relationship. There is somewhere Jonathan's father Saul insults Jonathan calling him sekhaupane for defending David. He went as far as calling him "thou son of a rebellious perverse woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jes`se to thine confusion, and to thine confusion thy mother's nakedness?" (20:30). I think Saul was unhappy with the boy`s relationship so much that he chose to blame Jonathan`s mother for his homosexuality and punish him by withholding his crown.

Mokgatla wrote:

1 Samuel 18:1
"...Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself." (NIV)
"...the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (KJV)
1 Samuel 20:41
"After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with is face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together - but David wept the most." (NIV)
2 Samuel 1:6
I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.(KJV)

1Samuel 20:16 "So Jonathan made a convenant with the house of David, saying, and the Lord will require that this convenant be kept at the hands of David's enemies"

In ancient Israel when two people enterd into a convenant relationship.........it also meant that they would help one another,....and do anything neccessary to meet each other's needs. Joyce Meyer Commentries.(The everyday Life Bible)

1Samuel 20:17 goes further "And Jonathan caused David to swear again by his love for him, for Jonathan loved him as he loved his own life."

I am still trying to make sense of it all.....frankly am speechless.

sister wrote:

<quoted text>
1Samuel 20:16 "So Jonathan made a convenant with the house of David, saying, and the Lord will require that this convenant be kept at the hands of David's enemies"
In ancient Israel when two people enterd into a convenant relationship.........it also meant that they would help one another,....and do anything neccessary to meet each other's needs. Joyce Meyer Commentries.(The everyday Life Bible)
1Samuel 20:17 goes further "And Jonathan caused David to swear again by his love for him, for Jonathan loved him as he loved his own life."
I am still trying to make sense of it all.....frankly am speechless.

I'm also speechless sister. Read 2 Samuel 1:26, also read the Sesoth bible if you have it.

dudu wrote:

<quoted text>I just checked my KJV and a Sesotho translation. I'd like to correct your last verse, it`s 2 Samuel 1:26.
Ka sesotho ere
Jonathane, moreso, ke pelotlhomohi ka uena, ho `na u no rateha hakaakang! Rato la hau ho`na e ne le le mohlolo, le la basali le a shaitsa.
Ke balile 1 Samuel 20:1-43. Jonathan o bolela lerato la hae ho David (20:17) ere
Jonathane a re Davida a hlapanye hape hore o tla mo rata, hobane Jonathane le ena o rata Davida joalokaha a ithata.
And Jonathan caused David to swear again, because he loved him: for he loved him as he loved his own soul.
Kene kesa hlokomele taba tsena until today. I read the two bibles and I`m convinced this is a same sex love story presented inside the one book used against same sex relationships. The Sesotho version is tries hard to hide this story by using very strange word like ho shaitsa. The meeting in quiet places, the declaration of love on a number of occasions lead me to interpret this as a homosexual relationship. There is somewhere Jonathan's father Saul insults Jonathan calling him sekhaupane for defending David. He went as far as calling him "thou son of a rebellious perverse woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jes`se to thine confusion, and to thine confusion thy mother's nakedness?" (20:30). I think Saul was unhappy with the boy`s relationship so much that he chose to blame Jonathan`s mother for his homosexuality and punish him by withholding his crown.

Given the Israelite's culture at the time and Moses' law explicitly condemning same sex relationships its possible the historical writers (and/or subsequent translators) chose to disguise the true nature of that relationship, firstly to avoid tainting the repute of possibly Israel's greatest king and secondly to ensure the bible maintains a consistent view on the subject of homosexuality. But one is inclined to think the total exclusion of such relationship (or further extenuation of the circumstances thereof) would have served the purpose better.

Regardless of the aforementioned possibility we need also acknowledge that people of the same sex are capable of having a meaningful and intimate relationship that is strictly platonic and free of sexuality or associated feelings.

Moleko-o-dieta wrote:

<quoted text> Given the Israelite's culture at the time and Moses' law explicitly condemning same sex relationships its possible the historical writers (and/or subsequent translators) chose to disguise the true nature of that relationship, firstly to avoid tainting the repute of possibly Israel's greatest king and secondly to ensure the bible maintains a consistent view on the subject of homosexuality. But one is inclined to think the total exclusion of such relationship (or further extenuation of the circumstances thereof) would have served the purpose better.
Regardless of the aforementioned possibility we need also acknowledge that people of the same sex are capable of having a meaningful and intimate relationship that is strictly platonic and free of sexuality or associated feelings.

Ntate Moleko, in as much as same sex relationships were forbiden then and are still frowned against today, i think you would agree with me that when it came to this particular sripture they made a terrible job at hidding it.
Granted people of same sex are able to have a non sexuall, intimate relationship, but society seems to support that only in relation to the females.As soon as males potray a platonic relationship unlike females it becomes a taboo.

As 'm'e Dudu suggetsed i went on to 2Samuel1:26 and it reads as thus " I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me. Your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of Women"

The above verse implies that David had been with women prior to Jonathan but he enjoyed the latter more......

sister wrote:

<quoted text>
Ntate Moleko, in as much as same sex relationships were forbiden then and are still frowned against today, i think you would agree with me that when it came to this particular sripture they made a terrible job at hidding it.
Granted people of same sex are able to have a non sexuall, intimate relationship, but society seems to support that only in relation to the females.As soon as males potray a platonic relationship unlike females it becomes a taboo.
As 'm'e Dudu suggetsed i went on to 2Samuel1:26 and it reads as thus " I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant have you been to me. Your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of Women"
The above verse implies that David had been with women prior to Jonathan but he enjoyed the latter more......

The very fact that 'they made a terrible job at hidding it' is one of the legs upon which my disinclination to agree with the proposed explanation rests. As previously mentioned, and as you yourself noted, the scribes and/or translators could have done a better job at downplaying the circumstances surrounding the friendship, or better still, they could have omitted it altogether. Why didn't they? Perhaps there was no need.

That society frowns more upon intimate relationships between men than women, does not exclude the possibility of such happening particularly given the circumstances. You will recollect that Jonathan had, in more than one ocassion, saved David's life to the detriment of his relationship with his father. It isnt unthinkable then than the two would have a friendship stronger than normal.

Also, 2Samuel 1:26 as quoted above is not the words of David to Jonathan but rather part of 'Song of the Bow' where David was lamenting Jonathan's (and Saul's) death. I disagree then that it implies a homosexual relationship for in the song David also says 'Saul and Jonathan were BELOVED and pleasant in their lives', clearly this isn't a sexual kind of love.

Lastly, 2 Samuel 11:2,'Then it happened one evening that David arose from his bed and walked on the roof of the king's house. And from the roof he saw a woman bathing, and the woman was very beautiful to behold' The woman in question is Bathsheba and the intent is to further contextualise David's sexuality so as to have a more holistic picture.

Wow! One size fits all…that’s the Bible.

A lot of thugs start their business with a bible reading AND prayer…for blessings.‘Nete e tla hlaha fela mohla kotulo

When all is said and done, NATURE shall always come above everything else. I despise not what and how people chose to lead their lives. However, my sentiment is when they fail to live according to the prescripts of their choices.

And so did we not chose to write the most controversial literature of all times amongst humans - the Bible. Indeed, for it is written by man of the experiences of man, it is bound to note however scinically, the good and twisted ways of man.

MOANANONG wrote:

Wow! One size fits all…that’s the Bible.
A lot of thugs start their business with a bible reading AND prayer…for blessings.‘Nete e tla hlaha fela mohla kotulo

Isn't it just, I am also looking forward to judgement day.

It will be interesting to see how things unfold, hopefully they will be serving some wine too!

MOANANONG wrote:

Wow! One size fits all…that’s the Bible.
A lot of thugs start their business with a bible reading AND prayer…for blessings.‘Nete e tla hlaha fela mohla kotulo

You must not worry about novelistic parts of the bible, my compatriot, for they will not benefit you! Worry about what GOD wants you to do! Even the world acclaimed evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, fell from disgrace and watched ponography being called a man of GOD!

Now, who is David? Isn't he that sinner like us who slept with other men's wives?

Rona bo-Matala khale re bonela batho!

You must not worry about novelistic parts of the bible, my compatriots, for they will not benefit you! Worry about what GOD wants you to do! Even the world acclaimed evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, fell from disgrace and watched ponography being called a man of GOD!

Now, who is David? Isn't he that sinner like us who slept with other men's wives?

Chitja wa Botha Bothe wrote:

You must not worry about novelistic parts of the bible, my compatriots, for they will not benefit you! Worry about what GOD wants you to do! Even the world acclaimed evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, fell from disgrace and watched ponography being called a man of GOD!
Now, who is David? Isn't he that sinner like us who slept with other men's wives?

My admiration and respect for you grows with each new comment.

This is how I understand the relationship between David and Jonathan:

David slain Goliath and that led to victory against the Philistines. Jonathan was also a soldier fighting against the same enemy. He developed a liking for David’s bravery and liberation. That is when they developed a homosocial (same-sex relationships that are not of a romantic or sexual nature). The covenant was informed by politics of the time and the fact that they were both soldiers.

David’s popularity concerned Saul and he plotted for him to be killed. David had to run away into the wilderness after being warned by Jonathan. This angered Saul very much as he believed it was betrayal from his own son. Hence he said “ thou son of a rebellious perverse woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jes`se to thine confusion, and to thine confusion thy mother's nakedness”. These words were not directed to homosexuality but to the platonic relationship that David and Jonathan shared.

David or Jonathan are not mentioned in the bible as having issues in married lives. David had many wives and concubines. He also committed adultery with Bathsheba.

Chitja wa Botha Bothe wrote:

<quoted text> You must not worry about novelistic parts of the bible, my compatriot, for they will not benefit you! Worry about what GOD wants you to do! Even the world acclaimed evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, fell from disgrace and watched ponography being called a man of GOD!
Now, who is David? Isn't he that sinner like us who slept with other men's wives?

correction: fell from grace

Lengau wrote:

<quoted text>
correction: fell from grace

In the words of Mokhatla 'my admiration and respect for you diminish with each new comment'.

Chitja wa Botha Bothe wrote:

You must not worry about novelistic parts of the bible, my compatriots, for they will not benefit you! Worry about what GOD wants you to do! Even the world acclaimed evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, fell from disgrace and watched ponography being called a man of GOD!
Now, who is David? Isn't he that sinner like us who slept with other men's wives?

True.

Moleko-o-dieta wrote:

<quoted text>In the words of Mokhatla 'my admiration and respect for you diminish with each new comment'.

Correction my Brother! Mokgatla (Motswana) and not Mokhatla (Mokhatla)...Mokhatla is the name I used to go with bfore I switched to Moananong for obvious reasons. The two are two different people with far different tastes...