Chick-fil-A Biblical Family of the Day

Chick-fil-A Biblical Family of the Day October 26, 2012

Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy: “We support biblical families.”

Today’s Chick-fil-A Biblical Family of the Day: David’s dowry (1 Samuel 18:20-29).

Now Saul’s daughter Michal loved David. Saul was told, and the thing pleased him.

Saul thought, “Let me give her to him that she may be a snare for him and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him.”

Therefore Saul said to David a second time, “You shall now be my son-in-law.” Saul commanded his servants, “Speak to David in private and say, ‘See, the king is delighted with you, and all his servants love you; now then, become the king’s son-in-law.'”

So Saul’s servants reported these words to David in private. And David said, “Does it seem to you a little thing to become the king’s son-in-law, seeing that I am a poor man and of no repute?”

The servants of Saul told him, “This is what David said.”

Then Saul said, “Thus shall you say to David, ‘The king desires no marriage present except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that he may be avenged on the king’s enemies.'” Now Saul planned to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.

When his servants told David these words, David was well pleased to be the king’s son-in-law. Before the time had expired, David rose and went, along with his men, and killed one hundred of the Philistines; and David brought their foreskins, which were given in full number to the king, that he might become the king’s son-in-law. S

aul gave him his daughter Michal as a wife. But when Saul realized that the Lord was with David, and that Saul’s daughter Michal loved him, Saul was still more afraid of David. So Saul was David’s enemy from that time forward.



Smart people saying smart things (1.22.19)
"Do it anyway. Try the local offices; they won't answer the phones in DC."

Smart people saying smart things (1.22.19)
"Well I would, but both of my Senators (Braun and Young) are proven Trumpcultists and ..."

Smart people saying smart things (1.22.19)
"If he's going to be interviewed, maybe we'll see him repent if that's the case."

Smart people saying smart things (1.22.19)

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Kadh2000


  • Between the foreskins and the fact that Saul was obviously incapable of not being paranoid, this definitely isn’t your children’s bedtime story. (O.o)

  • Saul, dude… just ah… I know you’re trying to get him killed and all but… foreskins?  Really?  Couldn’t you have gone with something a twinge more… traditional?  Ya know like skulls?

    I mean at least with skulls you can DO something with them afterward.  Cups, bowls – even thrones!  You could have beaten Games Workshop to the punch on “Skulls for the Skull Throne” by like, a few thousand years!

    But no.   You went with foreskins.

    … The fuck dude.

  • Kevin Alexander

    Actually, the foreskin thing makes sense. It’s how you prove that it’s your enemies that get killed since the Hebrews don’t have them anymore.

  •  Bah, there you go using logic again!  >_>

  • Is this how we get the word “tallywhacker”?  “Well, Michal, your father wants me to go whack a tally of… umm….”

  • Akedhi

     … well, actually…

    I can’t remember the press that published it, but I am pretty sure that the entirety of the whole sordid saga was retold in my second or third grade readers, as a homeschooled RTC child in the early nineties. Foreskins and all. (Later, attempted murder! A lot of attempted murder. Also a lot of actual murder.)

    It’s in the Bible, therefore child-appropriate. Or something.

  •  But don’t let those poor kids see two men kissing!  That’d surely scar them for life!

  •  He knew a mohel who would make a really cool wallet out of them.

  •  Even worse, they might like it!

  • D9000

    And if you rub the wallet, it turns into a suitcase.

  •  Like I said,  scarred for life.  (I’d wink, but I honestly suspect many of them think that being LGBT does scar someone for life.)

  • Mathbard

    Yep. And I’m pretty sure it was in one of our Abeka books.

  • Mathbard

    Oh, but do talk about David and Jonathan in terms that any other time are referring to a married couple. That’s in the Bible, too, so it’s totes ok.

  • Fade Manley

    When I was a wee moppet, sitting around bored in church (it was in a language I didn’t speak well, spoken very quickly), I used to read the Bible, because that was the one book I could get away with reading during the sermon.

    Boy howdy did I love Samuel and Judges. All the best stories for a wide-eyed third-grader are in those books.

  • Akedhi

     Was it? If so, they aren’t publishing that set of readers any more. I thought it was A Beka, but couldn’t find them in the catalog.

    Wasn’t Absolom in there too? I think they might have turned the entirety of First and Second Samuel and First and Second Kings into children’s readers.

  • Elizabeth Coleman

    When I asked what foreskins were, I was told (or at least, this what I gathered from what I was told) that they were penises. And so the whole Jews removing their foreskins thing really, really confused me.

  • Mathbard

    I could be remembering wrong, but the A Beka books were our primary reading/language arts books. And yeah, I think they did turn Samuel and Kings into readers. I also recall reading about the Tamar’s (both Judah’s daughter-in-law and David’s daughter) around the same age, so Genesis was probably part of the series, too. Maybe the whole OT, but I don’t remember going through the NT with the same amount of detail.

  • Baby_Raptor

    I’m female, so you guys will have to forgive my ignorance…Does the foreskin really look that different than any other patch of skin? Or did Saul really mean “Bring back the whole penis, foreskin intact”?

  • Dmoore970

    This is not as far from our experience as you might,like to think. Dont forget that in colonial times the British and French offered bounties on Indian scalps. I will admit, though, I cant see a colonial governor pimping his daughter for 100scalps.

  • Akedhi

     I don’t think we got all the way to the prophets in those readers either, and not so much with Exodus. I do remember Jael being in there, with the whole spike through the head of the enemy general thing.

  • Nirrti

    Only the foreskins?

    I would hope my father would think I was worth at least the whole genitalia, not just the foreskins.

  • flat

    well we can  say David liked to work hard even when facing stiff oposition.

  • Fusina

    Okay, stop it. Now. Stop being so silly. .  .  Nah, bring it on. I need a few good belly laughs!

  • Sircool2320

    Funny thing is, a number of Bible translations have actually tried to censor the kiss between David and Jonathan in 1 Samuel 20. Where exactly is their consistency there?

    Personally, I think they know what’s going on between David and Jonathan. And it horrifies them to think that these two men, lauded throughout the Bible as paragons of virtue and faith, completely destroy all their objections of “God hates teh ghey.”

  • Sircool2320

    Do you refer to this?

    So many people resort to the “polygamy in Genesis” arguments to somehow shoot down “traditional marriage” arguments, and it only makes anti-gay preachers and churchgoers say, “But polygamy was still always between a man and a woman! There’s never EVER any record of God blessing a ‘marriage’ between two men or two women.”

    Well… Here’s a handy rebuttal to the “marriage = 1 man 1 woman” argument that allows no room for evasion (not that people still don’t try).

  • SisterCoyote

    Some of my favorite moments in The Daily Show are when he makes references like this, and the audience goes “hahaha… wait, what? That’s from what?”

    Saul was a dick, man.

    …no pun intended.

  • Ben English

     I didn’t learn what circumcision was until I was in the sixth grade, except given that I was at a parochial school, the teachers were reluctant to use the word ‘penis’. So they said it was the outer skin the male private parts.

    Now, seeing as I was already circumsized as a baby (for some reason) I had no frame of reference to know what a foreskin was. I knew, however, that what I thought of as the outer skin of a penis couldn’t just be removed without irreparably damaging the organ, I assumed then that circumcision referred to some sort of hypothetical outer layer of the scrotum.

    Needless to say, the thing I believed circumcision was at the time ended up far MORE horrifying than the real thing.

  • Mathbard

    Huh. Didn’t know that much detail about it, but, yeah, that’s what I was referencing. Thanks for the link.

  • Jurgan

    Worst fetch-quest ever.

  • wendy

    This is a good place to mention that all 12 episodes of “Kings” are available on Hulu….

  • The_L

    I know that their Primary Bible Reader is just the KJV of Gen. 1-3.

  • The_L

    This is why it bugs me when adults won’t answer a straight question like that. The simple addition of “Yours probably got cut off when you were a baby and you don’t remember it” would have saved you a lot of horrifying questions later on.

  • phranckeaufile

    The foreskins were a bride price, not a dowry. So it’s really not weird at all.

  •  In Vietnam they used ears.

  • (accurate but a cross-section in false colour, so ~SFW) He’d probably thread them on a stick. You can’t do that with any other part.

  •  The foreskin is the best part.

  • Funny, most bibles say he brought back TWO hundred:
    27 Wherefore
    David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two
    hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in
    full tale to the king, that he might be the king’s son in law. And Saul
    gave him Michal his daughter to wife. (KJV)So before the allotted time elapsed, 27 David took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. (NIV) 

    I just goes to show that the things that yo’ li’ble to read in the Bible, they ain’t necessarily so.

  • vsm

    As I understand it, there’s no scholarly consensus on whether ancient Hebrews would have read David and Jonathan’s relationship as gay, really goddamn gay the way we do, and I wouldn’t put the platonic interpretation necessarily down to homophobia either. You don’t need to go very far in history to find people describing their same-sex friendships in ways we’d never use for anyone we weren’t sleeping with, yet they raised no eyebrows among their contemporaries. Tennyson wrote an enormous poem consisting of 133 cantos about the death of his male bestie, using very emotional language (‘Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all’ is originally from it), and rather than derision, it earned him wide acclaim and a position as the Poet Laureate.

    Of course, we can still totally ship David/Jonathan and Tennyson/Hallam.

  • Sofia

     I was in about sixth grade when I finally learned the difference between circumcision and castration.  I demanded that my (male) Sunday School teacher explain to me how God could promise that Abraham’s descendants would be as numerous as the stars while preventing him from having any kids.  He was naturally very confused, and probably embarrassed having to explain male anatomy to a classroom with mostly female middle schoolers (including me).  Looking back, I feel really bad for the guy.  But I did have that misconception corrected.

    It’s weird, but I think overall, I got much better sex education at church than at my public school (that had an abstinence-only curriculum… big surprise).

  • flat

    Well atleast they were willing to be honest and clear about it.

  • Heh, I can relate to your then-teacher.  In college a couple of years ago, I did a talk about female genital mutilation and hymen-worshipping for my class, which was probably around 2/3 women, mostly around 20 years younger than I am.  Somehow, I managed to get through it without dying of the bash* first.

    * That of which bashful people are full.