Davidian and Solomonian Politics

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.

 

Actually, it was polygyny that was allowed.

 

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 ?

 

If it would please you Bro Curtis. But Mr. Bush left that up to the Iraqi Courts to decide.

 

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 ?

 

You mean like with sword, sticks and stones?

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Yes, kill them if they are our sworn enemies. I agree with you Bro. Curtis.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.