That was exactly my point. You pick and choose how things hafte be interpreted. This constantly changes (basically less and less should be taken literally) and if there is no way it can be "interpreted" OK, it's wronly translated. But stragley of the ~100 (made up number) english translation there is no right one.
I do not pick and choose, if there its not literal then it's, and it's generally pretty obvious when the intent is literal.
Just wow.
But talking about "the truth ever makes everyone happy".
Would I be happy if there where an after live?
Would I be happy if good people get rewarded after death and bad punished?
Of course! But just that this would make me happy dosn't make it the truth.
You people have been complaining about the God of the bible for the entire thread. Don't give me this "oh it sure would be nice if ..." just after you get through raging about the bible.
Like I said I completly took it out of context. But yet even in this artikle it's arguet again how it should be interpreted.
Or it is just what is written there: A ballad of blind rage.
It's you who is cherry picking.
Ok, there's a lot of things about christianity that's argued, happy? But a ballad of blind rage, it is definitely not. It's basically describing the defeat of some of Israel's enemies. For that matter the Canaanites were fairly cruel people, the psalmist was not likely feeling sorry for them in the day of their demise.
Forgive me, but it sounded as if you were being sarcastic :p