Davidian and Solomonian Politics

Discussion in 'Politics' started by UnchartedSpirit, Mar 13, 2006.

  1. UnchartedSpirit

    UnchartedSpirit
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok so I read the CHristian Century on rephrasing the teachings of Jesus....and that does have notghing to do with this topic directly

    Would a kingdom like davids or solomons be more profitable than democracy, even if the characters themselves didn't uphold them?
    Say, would our military be more effective and humane at the same time?

    Oh, and why was polygamy allowed?
     
  2. Rocko9

    Rocko9
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    While David's Kingdom started out very successfully it eventually divided in itself.
    I do think that David's role in military matters was more appropriate than modern methods of today, specifically regarding the torture issue.
     
  3. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, it was polygyny that was allowed.
     
  4. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hey Rocko, do you think it would have been O.K. for ole' Dubya to remove Sadaam's head, and carry it around to his U.N. meetings ? You know, use it for leverage when he asks another nation to abide by what he said was the law ?
     
  5. Rocko9

    Rocko9
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    If it would please you Bro Curtis. But Mr. Bush left that up to the Iraqi Courts to decide.
     
  6. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Just curious, 'cuz you seem to say that if we fought like King David did, we'd be better off. Am I way off base ?
     
  7. Rocko9

    Rocko9
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean like with sword, sticks and stones?
     
  8. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
  9. Rocko9

    Rocko9
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, No, Bro. Curtis. I think we should do things your way and put you in charge of torture.

    But on the other hand, I think that in the begginings of the Davidian Kingdom David relied on God more than himself and I see no example of where David used torture.
     
  10. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    But you DID read where he kept Goliath's head, and showed it around, right ? he wasn't king, yet, when he cut the head off, so he had to have kept it for a long time. N'est pas ?

    David's enemies rarely survived long enough to be tortured. That's how it should be done.
     
  11. Rocko9

    Rocko9
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    But Goliath wan't tortured was he? You can't torture dead people.
    David wasn't King but he did have the blessings of Saul to go out there and defeat the Giant.Using the head of Goliath to cause fear in the enemy worked well then. Today we have other means of proving our might without cutting off heads. You don't have to have the world's strongest army to be enabled to torture, anybody can do that.
     
  12. Rocko9

    Rocko9
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,621
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, kill them if they are our sworn enemies. I agree with you Bro. Curtis.
     
  13. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    To answer the original post, I think O/T Israel was a religious theocracy. They prospered, but fell apart due to the leaders disobeying God's law.

    Militarily, we would be much more effective, and much less humane. Our own population would always come first.
     
  14. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, militarily speaking, you think Sherman's march through Georgia was correct?

    What effect do you think that sort of brutality has on the aftermath of the war? Do you think a properly subjugated people are easier to manage or just subversively rebellious?

    I suppose if we were really biblical we would enslave the losers until each could ransom his way to freedom (or not)....except, of course, if God ordered all men, women, children and livestock to be slaughtered. I don't know if I'd really trust Bush on that one.
     
  15. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    Daisy, I trust the biblical accounts of O/T Israel to be accurate. I cannot say I trust my American history books. I don't know an awful lot about Sherman, but on the surface, it sure looks like he was wrong.
     

Share This Page

Loading...