The Bible states how a Jew should treat a slave and even has laws somewhat ‘protecting’ slaves with some form of human right: Ex 21" 20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result,
21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.
They came back and killed King Saul in battle. That says a lot. It was the end of one battle but not the war.
That they really weren’t all that worried about Saul’s God?
I guess they were godless hypocrites. Fear god one day and ignore him the next. Much like many people today. Oh those Philistines!
The Astros will deal with them!..
…what?!?
Slings were real,deadly weapons used in battle. This isn’t just a sling shot some kid made.
The sling is mentioned as early as in the writings of Homer,[14] where several characters kill enemies by hurling stones at them.[11]
Balearic slingers were amongst the specialist mercenaries extensively employed by Carthage against the Romans and other enemies. These light troops used three sizes of sling, according to the distance of their opponents. The weapons were made of vegetable fibre and animal sinew, launching either stones or lead missiles with devastating impact.[15]
Xenophon in his history of the retreat of the Ten Thousand, 401 BC, relates that the Greeks suffered severely from the slingers in the army of Artaxerxes II of Persia, while they themselves had neither cavalry nor slingers, and were unable to reach the enemy with their arrows and javelins. This deficiency was rectified when a company of 200 Rhodians, who understood the use of leaden sling-bullets, was formed. They were able, says Xenophon, to project their missiles twice as far as the Persian slingers, who used large stones.[16]
Various Greeks enjoyed a reputation for skill with the sling. Thucydides mentions the Acarnanians and Livy refers to the inhabitants of three Greek cities on the northern coast of the Peloponnesus as expert slingers.
Greek armies would also use mounted slingers (ἀκροβολισταί).[17]
Roman skirmishers armed with slings and javelins were established by Servius Tullius.[11][18] The late Roman writer Vegetius, in his work De Re Militari, wrote:
Apparently they were also highly accurate with enough practice, which David did claim to possess this skill to Saul. Some youtube’s demonstrate what one can do with it, here is one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28r-MQejnHg&ab_channel=WannabeBushcrafter and at 4:10 he sums up his ability which by our standards is very good (and he may have been able to off Goliath), but clearly infers that his skill is at a child’s level to a true master at it. If such a statement is true it appears David not only could be expected to win, but perhaps came with too many stones to this battle, and the fight was over before it started.
Another aside as the Bible makes a point of stone selection that David made, and that does prove itself in other youtube vid’s as they talk about how important the proper size is to accuracy.
I thoroughly disagree. Slung stones go about 100 miles per hour, or the speed of a MLB fastball. At a distance of 60ft, a person who knows the projectile is coming (and Goliath knew a projectile was coming) has a reasonable chance to get out of the way, and close the gap in moments. At a minimum they can protect their head. Extend that distance to 120ft, and nobody who is paying attention should be unable to avoid it. It’s not a weapon optimized for one on one combat.
There’s a reason why the people of the time thought the scenario was a mismatch, and proof of God’s intervention, and it isn’t because the kid with the sling had a major advantage from the start.
Did they think it’s a mismatch? If so why would King Saul stake his very kingdom on David then? Surely King Saul would have had what he considered more capable warriors for this task and employed them considering the cost of losing? Not to mention the warriors had a high stake in the outcome too and wouldn’t want their fate determined on someone without a chance. Reading of it one might assume that David had to prove his ability to some extent for Saul to allow this, though one can make the case that God did something here to force it like how God hardened Pharos heart to delay the Israelites from leaving early. It does say that David stated his skill in the sling and it’s use.
David was brought to Saul’s attention by the prophet Samuel from Bethlehem. David explained to Saul how God helped him defeat a Lion and Bear through faith. Saul believed in God and believed he would receive the blessings of God by choosing David to fight Goliath. He choose David because he thought he had something to gain from God by doing so.
Little did Saul know that God’s plan was to have Saul killed in battle, clearing the way for David to become the King of Israel. He moves in mysterious ways.
Again, remember that this is a bible story. And some things will not make sense to people who either don’t believe in God or don’t have faith in God.
I wouldn’t call “falling on your own sword” being “killed in battle.”
After his three sons were killed in the battle and after he received mortal injuries. He chose a quick death vs a lingering death by infection or beheading by the victors.
The devil is in the details.
You brought up a good point, Saul did know David when David was in Saul’s service as chief evil spirit dispeller, so Saul did know about David’s faith in God and God’s working through David. So that does go a long way to explain why Saul would have allowed this contest against Goliath.
However Samual did not introduce David to King Saul as Samual met David and anointed him King (Sam 16:12) after Samual and Saul parted for the last time (Sam 15:35). Attendants of King Saul were the ones to inform the king of David.
Did anyone consider that Saul didn’t like David for some reason and wanted to get rid of him? Maybe he was not only surprised that David won, maybe he was really disappointed also.
Quite the opposite, Saul employed David to dispel an evil spirit that haunted Saul, here the the account of how David did there:
Sam 16:21 David came to Saul and entered his service. Saul liked him very much, and David became one of his armor-bearers. 22 Then Saul sent word to Jesse, saying, “Allow David to remain in my service, for I am pleased with him.”
Also Saul’s kingdom would have went into servitude if David lost as terms of the combat.
Additional, Saul did not know that David was the anointed king.
That assumes a lot. How do you know Saul didn’t know David was the anointed king? Seems like a pretty good motivation to have the kid offed. And servitude too? That’s why I think it was all rigged. Nobody agrees to servitude on the outcome of two guys fighting.
It seems pretty clear from the text, here is Samuel’s take on what would happen if Saul found out: 15:2 But Samuel said, “How can I go? If Saul hears about it, he will kill me.”
It’s 3 chapters 15-17 (15,16 being the background story and 17 being the fight).
Nope. They were all too scared. Goliath was a genuinely terrifying warrior.
“And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together. When Saul and all Israel heard those words of the Philistine, they were dismayed, and greatly afraid. . . And the Philistine drew near morning and evening, and presented himself forty days” (I Samuel 17:10, 11, 16).
Goliath’s challenge stood for 40 days(!) before David came on the scene.
It’s been a long time since I last read the books of Samuel, but wasn’t there a time after David’s defeat of Goliath when David had to deflect to the Philistines to hide from Saul? IIRC he fought in their ranks against Saul for a while.