No I didnt - which one is that?
WT Article - David Versus Goliath—Did It Really Happen?
I'm with the "no it didn't happen" camp, same The Flood, The Destruction of S&G, Lots wife being turned into a pillar of salt, Jonah being eaten by a giant fish etc.
Believers are funny.
I used to be one....
Witness my funny
The writers were not recording literal histroy. They were wrapping religious teachings within a story (parables). This is a simple and effective method for teaching people because they were illiterate. Because they relied on oral communication, a story provided the excellent vehicle for memorising the lessons being taught. A prime example of this is the myth of the Exodus. It provided the vehicle for enshrining religious ideas that were contemporary with the time the events were being written (some 600 years after the "Moses event").
I now feel sincerely sorry for and pity those who believe these accounts as FACTS!
I agree with Jooky. and to add: The older the story, the more exaggerated it is. The flood is pretty over the top. Adam and Eve is beyond belief, other than a fable to prove a point.
Goliath existed? I believe in Shrek if that's the case, because I've seen him on the TV.....so it must be true. You see, I do have faith.
Anders is correct. However, I have faith in my lord Spider-man.
If it's in the Hebrew scriptures, it's part of Jewish mythology. All ancient society's have their mythology so why would the Jews be any different?
like 'stuckinarut2' said 'it must be real if it's in the bible' cause jehober would not let anything unreal be part of his word- don't ya' know?
The writers were not recording literal histroy.
I think this is the number one reason why WT theology is such a tangled knot of complexity - treating every event recorded in the Bible as literal, factual history leads to all sorts of internal contradictions, not to mention conflicts with geography, geology, biology, astronomy, you-name-it-ology.
In Judaism we do not treat this account as literal history. It is more like legends told in American heritage history, like Washington chopping down a cherry tree and confessing it as a youth. The literary device used in Jewish Scripture is somewhat identical in purpose.
The text shows redactions added over the generations until the section was finalized into the form accepted as Scripture. The size of the enemy is obviously a narrative device to compare him to the "tiny" David, but it's creative liberties used to teach reliance on the Hebrew God gets lost when they are minimized or ignored by calling it literal history.
The legendary account actual contains a "legend within a legend." While originally meant to be a story like the young George Washington, the way the original story came to be repeated in Judaism was later added as a secondary addition within the original text. The later redaction is found within the original story, set by the latter author(s) at 1 Samuel 17.12-31, with details added in vss. 50-52 and a conclusion added in 17.55-18.5.