Positive Biblical depictions are deemed “unlikely.” To McKenzie, the ark is “a northern artifact” and the northern tribes were David is called a mafioso, a terrorist, and worse, while McKenzie’s estimations of what David stood to gain from such enormities. Much of the guilt behind these assertions is thoroughly circumstantial and based upon Villages, he “murdered Nabal and seized his wife, Abigail, and his property,” he was responsible for King Saul's death, and he The psalmist-king are these: he was a soldier, his failed coup earned Saul's enmity, his outlaws plundered and annihilated Judean Among the accusations McKenzie levies against Saga centuries later than previously supposed for political reasons of his own. On the contrary, after deemingĭavid historical enough to malign, McKenzie uses a “Deuteronomistic History” theory to date a hodgepodge writing of the David Of guilt, and ascent to the throne as simply the second bookend of the Judah epic of Genesis. McKenzie refuses to consider David's sexual misconduct, unplanned self-incrimination, loss of sons, courageous admission Not already long-established as a clothesline of dirty laundry pinned up for moral lessons in personal responsibility and divine He gleefully points out David’s recorded and fictional stains, as if the Bible were Paul-after his vision on the road to Damascus. A strenuously speculative biography of a cherished Biblical figure, equated here to Saddam Hussein.īible scholar McKenzie (The Hebrew Bible Today, not reviewed) attacks King David with a vehemence worthy of St.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |