Here Charitable Individualism is the key!… nothing less.

Posts tagged ‘king saul’

DAVID, A SHEPHERD?


Christians in their eagerness to believe in MIRACLES make even RESULTS of  EFFORTS, which have fructified thru HOPE, to be classified as MIRACLES.

A good example is the story of KING DAVID, who was the second King of Israel and finds mention in the books of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles of THE BIBLE.

For those not familiar with the story of David, let me recount a brief life story of one of the greatest symbols of Jewish History. His father’s name was Jesse and he had 7 brothers, who were all elder to him. Being the last and and ignored by his father Jesse, DAVID was rather consigned to tending to the few sheep which Jesse had. He was from the tribe of Judah.

David’s sculpture by Michelangelo leaning on one leg with a curled up fingers in the nude oozes with manliness. But his left hand is bent at the elbow with a sling slapped on his left shoulder. For me that sling is the SYMBOL of his skill, which eventually led him to strike GOLIATH and save the Israelites from the Philistines. Has it ever occurred to anyone why DAVID should keep the sling on his LEFT HAND  and SHOULDER? I have a good reason why Michelangelo  made David hold his sling on his left hand – IT SHOWS THAT SKILL OF THE HIGHEST ORDER, SHOULD BE MADE TO SERVE LIFE AND BEAUTY.

Getting back to our theme- David was not a mere shepherd as thought of by some Christians. It was the job assigned by his father and his elder brothers while he was still young. But what did he do while he was ASSIGNED THE ROLE OF A SHEPHERD? He did not fritter away his time chasing shepherdesses and whiling away his time. He developed 2 skills. One was his ability to sling accurately with force and the other was to play the harp. He built up skills during his free time. That was what made God choose him. God can give talents but He sure is not going to multiply it for you. God gave David the talent to be a lyricist (psalmist), a warrior and a musician, but it was left to him to identify what he had received and hone those skills. David sure did that.

DAVID did not have the mentality of a shepherd, he was filled with imagination. His brothers Eliab, Shamma and others scold him saying that he had left the few sheep their father had in the wilderness and had come to watch the war games initiated by GOLIATH. THEY WERE WRONG- DAVID DID NOT COME  TO WATCH THE WAR GAMES, DAVID HAD COME TO GO STRAIGHT INTO THE PALACE AND SHARE THE MATRIMONIAL BLISS AND BED WITH MEHRAB, THE DAUGHTER OF KING SAUL. David’s brothers were curry favouring ABNER, the Chief of the army of King Saul, but our David went straight for the jugular- DAVID wanted MEHRAB and become the son-in-law of the King. David did not go to Abmer to display his skills, he found a way to Saul.

Do you think King Saul would have let David take on Goliath without testing his skills as a slinger? NO WAY. King Saul would have given him 20 stones and put a condition that David had to strike the target set by him all the 20 times without fail. Saul was no idiot to let an untested man up in a battle, where King Saul and his people’s liberty were at stake. I am sure, rather dead sure, that Saul would have tested him thoroughly before sending DAVID up as the challenger to the declarer GOLIATH.The stakes were too hig to have been otherwise.

The rest is history. DAVID was no shepherd, he was a super skilled slinger, an accomplished musician and a great charmer of women- more than anything else, he was an ACCOMPLISHER. A FINISHER OF THE TASK UNDERTAKEN.

After him killing GOLIATH, King Saul does not give Mehrab, he doesn’t sulk, but carries on his mission to get to the palace. Gets foreskins and becomes the husband to Michal and makes it to the palace. That is where the action is. His brothers were still polishing the shoes of Abner, but our David had risen to the level of being perceived as a threat to the kingship of Saul. David befriends Jonathan and gets info on the palace intrigues even when he is forced out. David escapes with the help of Michal. So DAVID was no shepherd, he was relentlessly on his path to KINGSHIP. Saul calls his son Jonathan, ” THOU SON OF A PERVERSE WOMAN, DON’T YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE HELPING DAVID AT THE COST OF YOUR THRONE?” Was David a shepherd? NAY.

Archibald Primrose Rosebery is reputed to have said that he had three aims in life: to win the Derby, to marry an heiress, and to become Prime Minister. He managed all three. There are certain things which cannot be “GOT”, one has to be “PLACED”  to enjoy the benefits there. Like Archibald Rosebery, DAVID knew that early. HE worked hard to become a KING and even harder to stay that way. That is no shepherd trait.

Read Psalm 144:1

Blessed be the LORD my strength which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:

Se the word “TEACHETH”, God can but MAN has to LEARN, that is man’s duty. David learnt the skills and that is what helped him to get there.

Dear Christians, do not believe that God is going to work on the talents given to you, work on it. Prayer is a defence, prayer is a petition but the “will” is God’s- in the meanwhile work on your SKILLS. Miracles do happen in stages also. Get that straight.

There were instances when Jesus told the ones who wanted to be healed “I will, be healed”, but there is also an  instance when he made clay out of his spittle and told the man to go and wash in the pool of Siloam. We do not know what is HIS will, in the meanwhile LET US HONE OUR SKILLS. May be we are lucky like Bartimaeus or otherwise, but we cannot keep waiting for MIRACLES to happen suddenly. MIRACLES could be EVOLUTIONARY too in some cases!

DAVID WAS AN EVOLUTIONARY MIRACLE!

Advertisements

WOMEN’S DAY


This blogger had no clue that it was WOMEN’S DAY this day, and as usual attended the Church Service this morning. Right from the ushers to the offertory collectors, the job was outsourced to women. All the women were dressed in their best and seemed chirpy.

Surprisingly though, the sermon was by Mr. Herbert Samuel and the topic was CHRISTIAN SOCIETY & DOWRY. The reading was taken from Joshua 15:18-27 (the portion where Caleb’s daughter walks back to her father and obtains a “blessing” in the form of a land with springs of water!)

17: And Othniel the son of Kenaz, the brother of Caleb, took it: and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife.
18: And it came to pass, as she came unto him, that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and she lighted off her ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wouldest thou?
19: Who answered, Give me a blessing; for thou hast given me a south land; give me also springs of water. And he gave her the upper springs, and the nether springs.

Please read verse 18 which has been reproduced above, it says

“..as she came unto him, that she moved him to ask of her father a field”, it is clear from the above verse that Achsah asked Othniel to ask her father Caleb for a field, even though the Thamizh translation says, that she took Othniel’s leave for asking her father.

Christians have become ROMANTIC CHRISTIANS. They have lost the capacity to look at things the way ther ARE. Instead, they have started reading meanings and implications that are consistent with their existing theories and doctrines. In the realm of Physics Michaelson and Morley, invented ETHER, which helped them put a lot of niggling questions on hold and continue with their THEORIES. But the invention of ETHER was  a stumbling block for the evolution of Quantum Physics, which  was overcome through  elimination by Albert Einstein. It needed a genius as Albert Einstein to remove the bunkum added to physics. Likewise many additions which, in the name of prosperity and development, have been added to Christianity, has indeed harmed the Christian principles.

The TIME has come for Christians to go beyond the purveyors of ETHER and the concept of ETHER. The ETHER of ROMANTICISM which is  being intricately woven by the Christian preachers, are to be purged. Otherwise we may be blinded by such doctrines, which become  difficult to sustain at the QUANTUM LEVEL.

Coming to our WOMEN’S Day, effort was made to make it seem that DOWRY was evil and society should be purged of it. At least as per the Jewish custom, which is the precursor to the Christian custom, dowry was given by the Bridegroom to the Bride’s father. King David paid 100 foreskins as dowry in return for the hand of Saul’s daughter. The king Saul needed no wealth other than the security of his kingdom, which could be best served by reducing the number of opponents. The opponents were the non-abrahimites, who had not circumcised themselves. So the girl’s father demanded whatever he thought could best compensate for the departure of his daughter from the parental home. Some clever Fathers outsourced their risky tasks to the prospective Grooms- nice policy, either a strong groom for his daughter or a dead person who desired beyond what he deserved!! But those were polygamous days.

It is the policy of the Government that DOWRY should not be demanded by the Groom. Any demand is punishable and in the event of the death of the girl within 7 years of her marriage, a strong presumption in Law is raised that the reason for her death was demand of dowry, by the husband and his  relatives. Despite these laws, certain Christian churches silently support the dowry system and to make matters worse take a 10% cut of the dowry, payable as TITHE! So much for Romantic Christianity.

Let the Christians resolve that the property of the family be apportioned at the time of the marriage of the eldest daughter, between all the siblings and that one equal share, of the existing properties, could be either taken by the girl at the time of marriage , or alternatively, take an equal share of all the properties left behind by the parents after their demise.

The DAUGHTERS want an equal share of the property at the time of their marriage, and upon the demise of her parents come again and litigate against the brothers claiming that the sharing was not EQUAL and want more out of the properties that the boy had earned by working shoulder to shoulder with his parents till their demise. The boys, further, do not get the share till the death of their parents and may end up getting their legacy, like Aurangzeb’s son at the ripe age of 65. To avoid this inequity, it is best that both the options are offered to the girl at the time of her marriage and once she exercises her option, that should be treated as final and binding.

Nothing substantial or of substantive import are being preached in the churches. They are a confused lot. In their act of balancing the Word with the social legislation, they have got themselves into the rut of ROMANTIC CHRISTIANITY.

This is some evolution since Emperor Constantine, from ROMAN CHRISTIANITY to ROMANTIC CHRISTIANITY.

Tag Cloud