Changes

While the relationship of David and Jonathan only makes evident strong platonic love between two like-hearted men of faith and commitment righteousness, pro-homosex proponents labor to construe it as a physically homoerotic affair, and charge the writers of the Bible with homophobia for covering it up, as it lacks the necessary descriptions used elsewhere to denote eroticism.  In response, traditional exegesis evidences that the Bible makes basic laws as well as human sexual behavior (in particular) evident, in their respective contexts, with David and Jonathan's love being manifest as an supreme example of non-sexual brotherly love, with all accounts of their affection critically lacking the descriptions needed to postulate or establish the erotic.

While the relationship of David and Jonathan only makes evident strong platonic love between two like-hearted men of faith and commitment righteousness, pro-homosex proponents labor to construe it as a physically homoerotic affair, and charge the writers of the Bible with homophobia for covering it up, as it lacks the necessary descriptions used elsewhere to denote eroticism.  In response, traditional exegesis evidences that the Bible makes basic laws as well as human sexual behavior (in particular) evident, in their respective contexts, with David and Jonathan's love being manifest as an supreme example of non-sexual brotherly love, with all accounts of their affection critically lacking the descriptions needed to postulate or establish the erotic.

Horner,<ref>ibid. pp. 38-63</ref> with the aid of a secular psychiatrist, sees the description as homosexual, with the words such as ''knit'', “soul” ''love'', ''covenant'', “delighteth” and ''chosen'', being focused upon by him and others as conveying a desired sexual meaning.  Horner also enlists radical revisionists,<ref>Susan Ackerman, When Heroes Love:. The Ambiguity of Eros in the Stories of Gilgamesh and David, pp. 82, 165-231</ref><ref>Nardel, Homosexuality and Liminality in the Gilgamesh and Samuel (Amsterdam, Hakkert, 2007), pp. 28-63li</ref> who perceive sex in pagan fictional poetry such as Gilgamesh and Enkidu, and believe that redactors encrypted same-sex allusions into Biblical text (though there is disagreement here about which one played the female part).  Horner also thinks that a similar story "must have" happened many times in royal courts in the Middle East in all periods. Greenberg<ref>Steven Greenberg, Wrestling with God and men, pp. 99-104</ref> sees homosex is in many places in the Bible and the [[Talmud]], and a sexual triangle between Saul, David and Jonathan, and from the outset asserts the latter was erotic.   

Horner,<ref>By Thomas Horner, Jonathan loved David,  pp. 38-63</ref> with the aid of a secular psychiatrist, sees the description as homosexual, with the words such as ''knit'', “soul” ''love'', ''covenant'', “delighteth” and ''chosen'', being focused upon by him and others as conveying a desired sexual meaning.  Horner also enlists radical revisionists,<ref>Susan Ackerman, When Heroes Love:. The Ambiguity of Eros in the Stories of Gilgamesh and David, pp. 82, 165-231</ref><ref>Nardel, Homosexuality and Liminality in the Gilgamesh and Samuel (Amsterdam, Hakkert, 2007), pp. 28-63li</ref> who perceive sex in pagan fictional poetry such as Gilgamesh and Enkidu, and believe that redactors encrypted same-sex allusions into Biblical text (though there is disagreement here about which one played the female part).  Horner also thinks that a similar story "must have" happened many times in royal courts in the Middle East in all periods. Greenberg<ref>Steven Greenberg, Wrestling with God and men, pp. 99-104</ref> sees homosex is in many places in the Bible and the [[Talmud]], and a sexual triangle between Saul, David and Jonathan, and from the outset asserts the latter was erotic.   

   

   

In response, the means of traditional exegesis evidences that the Bible makes basic laws as well as sexual human behavior (in particular) versus platonic actions evident, in their respective contexts, with David and Jonathan's love being a supreme  example of non-sexual brotherly love.  As manifested by his sacrificial loyalty to David, holy brotherly affection, and commitment to the future of the kingdom, Jonathan's love for David is seen as being of a superior platonic kind than that the mere romantic or erotic “love of women”.<ref>Matthew Henry</ref> And all such accounts  are critically lacking the descriptions needed to postulate or establish erotic love.  And which (homosexual) expression would be radically contrary to explicit commands and the transcendent ethos of Israel. The divestiture of Jonathan to place upon David is evidenced as being partial and having a clear ceremonial precedent. The assertions of pro-homosex grammatical attempts are examined and found to be forced, and the strong emotive language expressed by David towards Jonathan is seen as being akin to that of platonic expressions in the Bible, (Gn. 33:4; 45:14,15) as in more expressive cultures,<ref>[http://www.tektonics.org/gk/gaydavid.html Were David and Jonathan Gay Lovers?, James Patrick Holding]</ref><ref>Regan, P. C; Jerry, D; Narvaez, M; Johnson, D. Public displays of affection among Asian and Latino heterosexual couples. Psychological Reports. 1999;84:1201–1202</ref>while the political/social ramifications of pro-homosex polemics are pointed out as presenting insurmountable problems.<ref>The Bible and Homosexual Practice, 146-54; http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm, Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon</ref><ref>Markus Zehnder, "Observations on the Relationship between David and Jonathan and the Debate on Homosexuality," Westminster Theological Journal 69.1 [2007]: 127-74)</ref><ref>Thomas E Schmidt, "Straight or Narrow?"</ref>  

In response, the means of traditional exegesis evidences that the Bible makes basic laws as well as sexual human behavior (in particular) versus platonic actions evident, in their respective contexts, with David and Jonathan's love being a supreme  example of non-sexual brotherly love.  As manifested by his sacrificial loyalty to David, holy brotherly affection, and commitment to the future of the kingdom, Jonathan's love for David is seen as being of a superior platonic kind than that the mere romantic or erotic “love of women”.<ref>Matthew Henry</ref> And all such accounts  are critically lacking the descriptions needed to postulate or establish erotic love.  And which (homosexual) expression would be radically contrary to explicit commands and the transcendent ethos of Israel. The divestiture of Jonathan to place upon David is evidenced as being partial and having a clear ceremonial precedent. The assertions of pro-homosex grammatical attempts are examined and found to be forced, and the strong emotive language expressed by David towards Jonathan is seen as being akin to that of platonic expressions in the Bible, (Gn. 33:4; 45:14,15) as in more expressive cultures,<ref>[http://www.tektonics.org/gk/gaydavid.html Were David and Jonathan Gay Lovers?, James Patrick Holding]</ref><ref>Regan, P. C; Jerry, D; Narvaez, M; Johnson, D. Public displays of affection among Asian and Latino heterosexual couples. Psychological Reports. 1999;84:1201–1202</ref>while the political/social ramifications of pro-homosex polemics are pointed out as presenting insurmountable problems.<ref>The Bible and Homosexual Practice, 146-54; http://www.robgagnon.net/NewsweekMillerHomosexResp.htm, Prof. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon</ref><ref>Markus Zehnder, "Observations on the Relationship between David and Jonathan and the Debate on Homosexuality," Westminster Theological Journal 69.1 [2007]: 127-74)</ref><ref>Thomas E Schmidt, "Straight or Narrow?"</ref>  

Rather than denoting a better form of erotic love, the phrase that Jonathan's love surpassed that of women best conveys the opposite, that the platonic love as manifested by Jonathan in helping David escape Saul's wrath on his way to replacing him was far superior to the erotic or romantic “love of women,” as true sacrificial love is manifested and realized in a far more comprehensive and deeper manner than simple sexual love, and the latter may often fail to even qualify as true love. Moreover, David and Jonathan's battle-proven and loyalty-tested love in a very close friendship would easily be far more rare, needful and appreciated than of the women we see that David had known.  

Rather than denoting a better form of erotic love, the phrase that Jonathan's love surpassed that of women best conveys the opposite, that the platonic love as manifested by Jonathan in helping David escape Saul's wrath on his way to replacing him was far superior to the erotic or romantic “love of women,” as true sacrificial love is manifested and realized in a far more comprehensive and deeper manner than simple sexual love, and the latter may often fail to even qualify as true love. Moreover, David and Jonathan's battle-proven and loyalty-tested love in a very close friendship would easily be far more rare, needful and appreciated than of the women we see that David had known.  

Finally, the fact that both Jonathan (who had a child) and David were both married to women (David many times), and had children by such testifies to their heterosexual sexuality, and in David's case it is further affirmed not only by his many wives, 1Sam. 30:5;  2Sam. 5:13) but also (in a negative context) by his adulterous affair with Bathsheba.  Thus, while pro-homosex polemicists must strive and contrive to make David and Jonathan sexually involved, the Bible makes that sexual relations evident when they do occur, and that it was not men that David that he was sexually attracted to, but woman (2Sam. 11).  Moreover, if Jonathan and David were in a homosexual relationship through the years, then they would have been adulterous bisexuals, and which have been scandalous in the household of Saul and kingdom of Israel.

Finally, the fact that both Jonathan (who had a child) and David were both married to women (David many times), and had children by such testifies to their heterosexual sexuality, and in David's case it is further affirmed not only by his many wives, 1Sam. 30:5;  2Sam. 5:13) but also (in a negative context) by his adulterous affair with Bathsheba.  Thus, while pro-homosex polemicists must strive and contrive to make David and Jonathan sexually involved, the Bible makes that sexual relations evident when they do occur, and that it was not men that David that he was sexually attracted to, but woman (2Sam. 11).  Moreover, if Jonathan and David were in a homosexual relationship through the years, then they would have been adulterous bisexuals, and which have been scandalous in the household of Saul and kingdom of Israel.

==Summation==

==Summation==