NOM

There is a series on TV about King David that I haven't watched yet, but I'm thinking about David and thinking he was probably really a shyster, especially if he really murdered Uriah and stole Bathsheba. My hypothesis is this: for propaganda reasons and because he was viewed as composing the early Psalms, Old Testament redactors decided to make him a hero, and even more Jehovah's favorite dude- even the "anointed one."
Anybody who could even think about the Uriah murder was a real sicko.

When you are the one in charge of writing the history, you can spin it however you want it to sound.

Exactly. The Bible is likely full of propaganda. As is the Quran, The Book of Mormon, and all other "scripture."

deacon blues wrote: ↑Thu Dec 04, 2025 11:23 am Exactly. The Bible is likely full of propaganda. As is the Quran, The Book of Mormon, and all other "scripture."

Many Bible scholars say that much of the Bible is (totally fictional) stories meant to unite different people into one nation with one national identity.

The stories of David however have some truth. There really was a king named David at about the correct date, who united those various different cultures into one kingdom. Other than that, eh? There are also elements of truth in the story of Danial, at least there was a real king named Darius who transformed his country from polytheism to monotheism. But the religion is unrecognizable to Jews and Christians, and Danial never got mentioned, so real history mingled with the philosophy of God.