MinTrut
Diamond Member
- Jun 7, 2021
- 14,327
- 7,875
It's glorifying when it instructs horrendous acts and makes heroes of those who commit them.Let's take a look at that. First, we're talking about the military practices of the Middle East during the Bronze Age, a time that can hardly be compared to the sensibilities of the 21st century Western World, so they routinely did things we would be horrified at today. Second, David was the king of a nation. When the history books talk about Truman dropping the Bomb on Japan, do they talk about his private morality and say he committed a great sin? Do they go into mourning over the dead and injured, or do they point out that dropping the bomb cut short the war and the long, drawn-out horror and devastation that would have been the invasion of the Japanese mainland? IOW, do we glorify death and destruction in our history books when we talk about the atomic bomb or the bombing of Dresden? Thus it is with King David. He was the king of a nation, and he did some very unsavory things that kings often do. Remember, though, that he was prevented from building the temple for God because of the blood on his hands and the violence he had perpetuated. He was not glorified in what he did. In short, by recording what David did, the Bible is not glorifying his atrocities.
So, yes, David did some bad things, but received praise for being a man who sought after God and repented when he was confronted with his sin. I'd like to see the reference you have, though, that says he sexually mutilated bodies. I am very aware that he beheaded the corpses of his dead enemies and put their heads on display to serve as a warning to other enemies. That was not even controversial in his day.
Finally, is it glorifying atrocious behavior to record that it occurred?