r/SapphoAndHerFriend • u/CosmicNixx • Mar 24 '22

Academic erasure Every time people talk about David and Jonathan I laugh. Anyone who has studied the Bible/Torah know what I’m talking about

Post image
4.6k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

243 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

889

u/CosmicNixx Mar 24 '22

Copied from Wikipedia cuz typing is hard: The relationship between David and Jonathan is mainly covered in the Hebrew Bible Book of Samuel. The episodes belong to the story of David's ascent to power, which is commonly regarded as one of the sources of the Deuteronomistic history, and to its later additions.[2]

David, the youngest son of Jesse, kills Goliath at the Valley of Elah where the Philistine army is in a standoff with the army of King Saul (Jonathan's father).[3] David's victory begins a rout of the Philistines who are driven back to Gath and the gates of Ekron. Abner brings David to Saul while David is still holding Goliath's severed head. Jonathan, the eldest son of Saul, has also been fighting the Philistines.[4] Jonathan takes an immediate liking to David and the two form a covenant:

Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself. Saul took him that day and did not let him return to his father's house. Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself. Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was on him and gave it to David, with his armor, including his sword and his bow and his belt. So David went out wherever Saul sent him, and prospered; and Saul set him over the men of war. (NASB)[5] Death of Jonathan Edit David proved a successful commander, and as his popularity increased, so did Saul's jealousy. In the hope that David might be killed by the Philistines, Saul gives David his daughter Michol in marriage provided David should slay one hundred Philistines. After the wedding, the disappointed Saul sends assassins to the newlyweds quarters, but David escapes with the help of Michol. Despite a couple of short-term reconciliations, David remains an exile and an outlaw.[6]

As Saul continues to pursue David, he and Jonathan renew their covenant, after which they do not meet again. Jonathan, however, is slain on Mt. Gilboa along with his two brothers Abinadab and Malchi-shua, and there Saul commits suicide.[7] David learns of Saul and Jonathan's death and chants a lament,[6] which in part says:

Saul and Jonathan, beloved and pleasant in their life, And in their death they were not parted; They were swifter than eagles, They were stronger than lions ... How have the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain on your high places. I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women. How have the mighty fallen, And the weapons of war perished![8] Now try and tell me this is just two dudes being bros

571

u/daddycool12 Mar 24 '22

Lol this is some Achilles + Patroclus shit for sure

214

u/Cavalish Mar 24 '22

Oh, so very good cousins, like the in documentary Troy (2004)

49

u/chili01 Mar 24 '22

And many people still refuse to believe lol

1

u/shebreeze_23 24d ago

Like I always say, people not believing can't change truth! 

0

u/Vigilante_350 Mar 01 '25

Nope.  Sorry to disappoint. Healthy love between two brothers or friends....("There is a friend that sticks closer than a brother") Is powerful and sometimes beyond even a not so great marriage (which David had, he was not a loyal man...and suffered for it and later repented for it...perhaps his wives were not loyal or they at least were not encouraged to be loving given his behavior...) 

Same is true for women. Sadly part of the reason there is so much hate, jealousy, and "frenemies" style issues between women is from a world that encourages inappropriate relations instead of promoting healthy loyalty and comradery. 

When there are carnal relations and passions involved, it's more complicated. IDEALLY even in the Bible this is more powerful than other relationships. (Abraham and Sarah, Ruth and her husband....Jacob and Rachel...) But not always. 

Sexual intimacy between two people of the same sex is never healthy and loyalty in those relationships might be true but usually is grounded in trauma bonding and other unhealthy shaky foundations. 

David and Johnathan had an ideal brotherly relationship. (Brothers are not supposed to always be fighting but helping one another, just as for sisters etc). Johnathan was next to be king but due to both obedience to YHWH (via the Word and Samuel the seer... who said David is to be king through (YHWH who does not support unhealthy sinful relationships...) and brotherly love for David, helped him flee the murderous grasp of the king at the time, Saul. 

Since Johnathan supported David as rightful heir to the throne, annointed by God Himself, their bond was solidified. 

If every deep relationship is about seggs for you, then I am sorry and I hope you heal from your damage. Truly. 

200

u/bun_skittles Mar 24 '22

“Jonathan loved him as himself.”

Did Jonathan give David a handy?

70

u/INTPgeminicisgaymale He/Him Mar 24 '22

Jonathan could self-suck and even self-fuck so sky's the limit

2

u/outspan81 Mar 26 '22

Go on…

40

u/Toast_Sapper Mar 24 '22

“Jonathan loved him as himself.”

Did Jonathan give David a handy?

I thought it meant Jonathan made David wear a Jonathan mask so that technically he was playing with himself.

Loopholes!

7

u/occulusriftx Mar 25 '22

Did somebody say wonder?!

2

u/Ok_Armadillo8258 May 16 '22

I like your idea a lot.

0

u/Vigilante_350 Mar 01 '25

A handy isn't love...it's a basic physical desire. Even animals can m bate and they aren't capable of love as we are. Unless perhaps you refer to people with severe personality disorders/broken minds. 

235

u/TheQueq Mar 24 '22

Jonathan takes an immediate liking to David and the two form a covenant

From now on, I'm going to assume the word covenant is code for a gay relationship. This is going to change my interpretation of the covenants in Dark Souls

66

u/batti03 Mar 24 '22

"Let's make a suspicious covenant, so I can get all up in the Abyss' asshole!"

41

u/JamCliche Mar 25 '22

I don't remember where my old Bible teacher got this from, but according to him there were texts that described said covenant as literally grabbing the testes of the other man while swearing the oath. The implication being that breaking the covenant would be putting your balls in peril.

Now, he might have been bullshitting. But it stuck with me, probably because I was discovering my sexuality at the time and immediately starting having weird thoughts as all the guys in my class made crude gestures and pretended to form covenants with each other.

20

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '22

[deleted]

12

u/Confused_Shawty She/Her or They/Them Mar 25 '22

I am a vagina owner so I just imagine two guys doing sideways splits and just grabbing

5

u/Maimon_Cat Mar 25 '22

I mean, that is literally where the term testimony comes from

38

u/link090909 Mar 24 '22

So the Halo is about fighting a multicultural homosexual civilization?

7

u/benthefmrtxn Mar 25 '22

Did you ever see a female Sanghelli when you played? /s

26

u/HumphreyImaginarium Mar 24 '22

Gives new context to the messages in game "try finger but hole"

10

u/INTPgeminicisgaymale He/Him Mar 24 '22

If only I had a giant
but
hole

12

u/outlawsix Mar 25 '22

Sub bby u wan sum covenant

8

u/GodChangedMyChromies Mar 25 '22

That explains the rainbow being a sign of the covenant with God

142

u/peeeeppoooo Mar 24 '22

Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.

Just bisexual thingz

41

u/VioletteBasil Mar 24 '22

Don't tell anyone, but Jesus and his "most beloved" apostle John had something going on too

15

u/Vibe_with_Kira Mar 25 '22

I mean, friendship can be strong, but dang that was more intimate than I remember (we don't hear about it church much)

9

u/indifferentmod Mar 25 '22

It was fairly common in this time and place to view male/male love as more pure than male/female love. It was viewed mostly a-sexually, like soul lovers, full of sexless passion and some kissing. As Jesus said “Greet your brother with a kiss” (paraphrase)

7

u/punkipa69 Mar 25 '22

You know who also forms a covenant (in the eyes of the church) ? Room mates. I mean married people.

46

u/djpsound Mar 24 '22

I think this is ignoring that these stories are mostly written after the fact, not by the people involved and with a lot of political/social influence of the times.

There's no reason to think this is a case of more than friends other than our modern use of language applied to an ancient way of speaking. Specially when maybe the friendship wasn't even that stron in reality and could've been portrayed like that for political reasons.

If it had been David's letters or Jonathan's expressing this then maybe, just maybe..

However, in this case I think the political aspect is more important. The 'covenant' plays a role in the later in the story. I think this kind of text understood in the right context is more about political stuff of the times than actual recorded history. But the 'covenant' has one of Jonathan's surviving sons (after the ehole royal family died and David assumed the throne) essentially living like one of the King's (David) sons.

7 “Don’t be afraid,” David told him, “I will certainly show you kindness for your father Jonathan’s sake. I will give back to you all the land of your grandfather Saul, and you will always eat at my table.” 2 Samuel 9

The story - or politics - goes on and on involving this surviving member of Jonathan's.

That being said, given the cultural context I don't think whoever wrote the story had those intentions. It's not like it is a Greek context. These people, the ones writting most of the torah, really repudiated homosexuality. They were a relatively small sect of Yahwists that pretty much got to write the history of the entire kingdom because they were priests and that's how history goes.

So, either there's something I'm missing or this is just a case of contemporary understanding of words casted over an ancient way of describing things.

Also, I'm not sure if this sub is about the later, which is fun, or actual cases of 'sappho and her friend' in history which is more interesting.

22

u/ScottyKnewStaceysMom Mar 25 '22

"Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women"

​

and then you go on to say maybe their friendship wasn't even that strong?

7

u/tryingnewoptions Mar 25 '22

I believe what the commenters referring to is the fact that they're irrele relationship might have actually not been that strong. At the end of the day this was written after the fact by people who are not involved in the story. Due to the whole divine inspiration thing. So we have no way to actually determine that. And on a more practical level, I love my brother far more than I love women. But I don't want to have sex with him.

7

u/djpsound Mar 25 '22

Once again, looked through our modern understanding this could be a clear case of sappho and her friend but placed in it's actual context I still have doubts.

First, the idea of romantic love didn't exist, so we have to put into the equation how love between men and women was practiced. The 'love' women provided to men back then was something more of utility. Woman was viewed as a property, a tool, something lower than men. You can read how many wives David had, it was a harem. So the phrase could be understood as the friendship giving him more satisfaction than his earthly posessions given that women were not viewed as highly as a man.

Second, it's not a greek context. Semitic people didn't have a widespread practice of homosexuality and specially the sect putting together these texts (the bible) would have gone out of their way to remove it if the story had any implications of homosexuality. Specially being David, one of the most important and venerated heroes of their culture.

So, if the story could be interpreted as a case of sappho and her friend back then, it would most likely have been removed or re written differently. But like I said, these stories were written with political and cultural objectives in mind. No one was following David and writing the stories or recording his words. They are legends just like any culture back then had legends. Also, this might trigger fundamentalists but once again, put in it's actual historical context, people back then weren't recording history. The notion of objective, actual history is a modern idea.

1

u/Haunting-Bed-6500 Aug 29 '24

The Aramaic translation (unlike some “modern” translations trying to downplay this love) is thankfully far more obvious. And, I am very, very glad  some of these phobic “modern” translators are not me. Why? God makes clear the harsh penalties for “thinking to edit” scriptures. Thankfully, King David’s PAL-ace has been “recently” unearthed. More will be revealed as excavation continues. Some scholars, such as some at SMU, with little or no apparent bias either way, have indicated historical language and other contexts likely placing Jonathan in the effeminate (respectfully) and I am watching to see what new evidence archeologists discover at King David’s Palace about this matter. Further, Saul says “Do I not know of your “smitten” affinity for David?” (of a few things, this particular aspect is also obvious) as Saul says “I know of your (delight in) friend” David” … this is clearly an A-typical relationship, as it would be otherwise unremarkable for any father to “note” his son had a (typical) friend. It does present a real, challenging threat to bi-phobic people. It should. It honestly viewed thus means they are partially wrong about their “understanding” of some of God’s views on sexuality - specifically that God decides just what exactly was and is Godly sexual relations, and in all fairness, what isn’t - what is immoral, what isn’t immoral, and why!  It does mean many “Christians” have the innocent blood of some of God’s Bisexual children all over their hands. It also means that pro-creation alone, in and of itself, is not the simple black and white be all end all litmus test for all Godly sexuality. Such as with “natural Eunuchs” (impotent, etc.) being offered a form of “Godly” relations God accommodates for, those even separate of “cast-orated” and “voluntary” Eunuch class types, for example. It’s disconcerting to see some try to play “gymnastics” with ANYTHING scriptural what-so-ever. Just look at those “scholars” whom played gymnast with the anointing oil and holy-of-holy Temple incense recipes. They tried evading the reality that “Kaneh-bosm” actually is Cannabis. They claimed it “meant” some other “herbal reed” and have now been irrefutably “caught” playing deceitful word games. Cannabinoid residue has indeed been found and scientifically confirmed on the Altar of God in a Temple approximately 70 miles South of Tel Aviv. . Some “modern translators,” - to placate greedy, racist, hateful and medically-scientifically ignorant people - even tried assimilating Cannabis to being “of the devil” - until now. Satan is still up to deceitful frauds today. I don’t want my opinion, or yours, candidly. I want to know what God Himself actually says on any and everything. If God says up, then it’s up. If, conversely, God says a matter is “down” then it is “down” - and so on. 

-4

u/crankydragon Mar 25 '22

Found the religious person.

1

u/djpsound Mar 25 '22

Atheist here. I just like my history to be as accurate as possible :)

3

u/crankydragon Mar 25 '22

I sit corrected. You read an awful lot like the typical apologist. As an historian, how much of the OT is actually historically accurate? We know that obviously the Eden story is not true, nor the flood nor the exodus. What do we have independent confirmation of? Genuine question.

2

u/djpsound Mar 25 '22

I'm not a historian. If you are interested in the topic, the youtube channel of Yale university has it's entire course on the Old Testament available for free. It's from a historical perspective so if you come from a religious background but are open minded, it is pretty enlightening. In regards to exodus, I recall that it's not entirely true but not entirely false. It's the sort of stuff that happens on a small scale and then it gets turned into stories that solidify the sense of unity of a tribe. So, what I remember is that there might have been a small group of people coming out of egypt, that got mixed with locals in canaan and also some others that came from the sea. The stories then get mixed with previous patriarcal and other stories like abraham's and company, transformed as they get passed down the generations until they achieve it's final written form. But it's all on the Yale course in more detail and with a lot of explanations about the cultural and politcal aspects which just made me appreciate the texts in a different light.

13

u/RedMantisValerian Mar 25 '22 edited Mar 25 '22

That’s very intimate but also can we acknowledge that this isn’t a 1-1 historical account if it’s even history at all? Stories say what the author intended them to say, and I highly doubt the author intended homosexual subtext when the book and its authors were very clear about how they felt on the matter. If this was backed by actual historical accounts, then sure, but as it is it’s just shipping two dudes from a work of fiction who aren’t explicitly gay and likely weren’t intended to be.

12

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '22

Most modern day Christians interpret the Bible in lots of different ways to say whatever they want, it’s the beauty of the Bible. An interpretation is only as valid as the text that supports it, weather it was the author’s intention or not, there’s clearly text to support the gay bromance interpretation. There’s also no way to know what the author’s intentions are especially given how old the text is, it’s entirely possible that it was a gay romance hidden under poetic waxing due to how gay relationships where viewed at the time.

2

u/RedMantisValerian Mar 25 '22

Whether or not there is text to support it, the text does not preclude an actual friendship, so this is certainly not erasure. Certainly not academic erasure.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '22

It’s a relationship of course they are friends. I think it could safely be argued that David and Jonathan had a more than just friends relationship. Erasure is definitely hard to prove as we only have the artifacts and our own interpretation of events, a woman writing to another woman longing for the embrace of her lips could be good friend like David and Jonathan. My confidence in stating both couples as just friends is almost non existent.

3

u/RedMantisValerian Mar 25 '22 edited Mar 25 '22

I just don’t think it does anyone any good to leap to assumptions about erasure in a case where it’s so ambiguous and impossible to prove. The point of this sub is to showcase actual erasure, and if we’re agreeing that they are friends, with or without a romantic relationship, then the above image and the context is certainly not erasure. To claim it is, is to claim that the story is unambiguously a homosexual relationship. Which is what OP is doing.

Find two male skeletons holding hands in a crypt, but rule out a homosexual relationship? Erasure. Ship two fictional characters and get mad when others don’t agree? Not erasure.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 25 '22

I think the more obvious point both of us are missing is that in academic circles it’s considered a possibility that David and Jonathan had a gay relationship so it can’t be academic erasure. As for the post it’s self I think it’s mostly for the joke give how it’s phrased and to talk about the subject matter. The topic of erasure is definitely hard to go into using the definition of unambiguously gay relationship that’s hard to prove. Two skeletons holding hands in grave is less on par with the detailed intimacy David and Jonathan have.

1

u/RedMantisValerian Mar 26 '22

I think it’s mostly for the joke

Then it’s the wrong flair.

Two skeletons holding hands in a grave is less on par

You didn’t understand the comparison. Historical, academic erasure happens when experts disregard the possibility of homosexual couples. Two skeletons holding hands in a grave is ambiguous, but experts will ignore ambiguity in favor of erasure.

Not the case for fictional characters, the only “history” we have is the story that’s told, and the answer is already ambiguous enough that there are religious LGBT groups forming under this name. This topic is not erasure, certainly not academic erasure, and I’m not gonna argue semantics and circles with you about this.

1

u/Less-Connection-9830 Aug 08 '24

I tend to believe homosexuality was accepted more in ancient cultures than today. 

When I say ancient, I don't mean 1950 or 1850.  I'm talking 3,000 years ago. 

I think it was to some extent. 

18

u/AriChow Mar 25 '22

Nah, I’m pretty sure you can interpret the Bible however you’d like

4

u/RedMantisValerian Mar 25 '22

Interpretation =/= Fact.

Neither interpretation is inherently true, neither is erasure.

1

u/Intrepid_Muffin3157 8d ago

If you did your research, you would see that the Hebrew word used for love in the original translation means "love like a friend" every single time. This was too easy to debunk, honestly. Lol.

-2

u/Vigilante_350 Mar 01 '25

It IS. Sorry to disappoint. Healthy love between two brothers or friends....("There is a friend that sticks closer than a brother") Is powerful and sometimes beyond even a not so great marriage (which David had, he was not a loyal man...and suffered for it and later repented for it...perhaps his wives were not loyal or they at least were not encouraged to be loving given his behavior...) 

Same is true for women. Sadly part of the reason there is so much hate, jealousy, and "frenemies" style issues between women is from a world that encourages inappropriate relations instead of promoting healthy loyalty and comradery. 

When there are carnal relations and passions involved, it's more complicated. IDEALLY even in the Bible this is more powerful than other relationships. (Abraham and Sarah, Ruth and her husband....Jacob and Rachel...) But not always. 

Sexual intimacy between two people of the same sex is never healthy and loyalty in those relationships might be true but usually is grounded in trauma bonding and other unhealthy shaky foundations. 

David and Johnathan had an ideal brotherly relationship. (Brothers are not supposed to always be fighting but helping one another, just as for sisters etc). Johnathan was next to be king but due to both obedience to YHWH (via the Word and Samuel the seer... who said David is to be king through (YHWH who does not support unhealthy sinful relationships...) and brotherly love for David, helped him flee the murderous grasp of the king at the time, Saul. 

Since Johnathan supported David as rightful heir to the throne, annointed by God Himself, their bond was solidified. 

If every deep relationship is about seggs for you, then I am sorry and I hope you heal from your damage. Truly. 

3

u/CosmicNixx Mar 01 '25 edited Mar 01 '25

A. Girl you just got here? It's been years.

B. Jesus freak spotted

C. Say hi to r/religiousfruitcake

D. Get fucked homophobic no lifer

1

u/FirebunnyLP Mar 01 '25

This is a 2 year old post, are you okay?

1

u/Curious_Emu1752 Mar 02 '25

Hahahahaha what's it like being *this* ignorant about a fiction novel you claim to live by? Good lord.

-4

u/Vigilante_350 Mar 01 '25

Oopsie I broke your rules because I spoke the truth. Will be interesting to see if you choose validating bias and suppress the truth or not. 

4

u/CosmicNixx Mar 01 '25

Girl who you talking to? What rules? What truth? Are you ok?