Bible verse by verse

[_maklelan]

Actually, you have not.

That's a flagrant lie.

You have merely eluded that there maybe interpretive variables between some particular verses.

Which Bible has the right version and translation of Deut 32:8 or 43? How about of the entire book of Jeremiah? Which one translates the right version? Who killed Goliath according to your Bible's translation of 2 Sam 21:9? Which version of Amos 9:12 is correct, the one in Amos or the one in Acts 15:17? Which one renders Gen 1:1 correctly? Which one accurately translates Exod 21:6 and 22:9? Which translation best renders μορφη in Phil 2:6? Which variant at John 1:18 is correct, and which Bible versions use it? Which version accurately translates Isa 1:12?

I'd like direct answers to each of these questions.

However, the Bible is the sum of its parts and not one verse.

Which is a harmonizing presupposition, because it means you ignore the verses that directly conflict with each other and prioritize a univocal reading. That's a species of the hermeneutic circle, and it's a fallacy. You don't get to the sum of the parts until you have an accurate understanding of the parts, and you don't have that at all.

ALL verses (particularly those with difficulties) need to be interpreted in light of each other and not as an entity unto itself.

Hermeneutic circle. You are required to arbitrarily pick which verses take priority over which others. One has to be interpreted in light of another, instead of the other in light of it. It's impossible to do otherwise, which means you are forced into presupposing certain doctrines.

And the Bible certainly is not at the mercy of modern interpretation or additional non-biblical text/literature.

It is if one let's go of the asinine notion that it's univocal and should interpret itself. That's a silly fallacy.

[_maklelan]

This Psalm was written from David's anguish, not from God's perspective.

No, it was written by angry exiled Judeans, but that's irrelevant. You said the Bible is true, and what the Bible has to say concerning right and wrong is absolute. Would you like to amend that statement?

David wrote it as an expression of his frustrated desire for revenge against the murderous Babylonians, who had destroyed Jerusalem and had killed many of the Israelite babies by dashing their heads against rocks.

So David was living during the exile? You know David died hundreds of years before the exile, right?

David and the rest of Israel lived in a time when justice was seen as "an eye for an eye". He wanted the Babylonians to feel what the Israelites had felt. However, Jesus spotlights God's perspective coming with a higher law of forgiveness. David was upset. and God allowed this expression to show human emotion and not as a demonstration of God's love.

So you're going to amend your comment above?

As for God not caring about the murder of babies, Jesus said that a person who harms a little one would be better off hanging a stone around his neck and throwing himself into the sea. When you read, context is generally important.

Jesus' comments do not in any way constitute the context for an exilic psalm.

David's son Solomon once ordered a baby to be cut in half. Did he actually do it? No, he wanted the real mother to have her baby returned to her. And Solomon did this with a threat to divide the baby. The real mother pleading to rather give her baby away than to have it killed. No one imagines that judges today should be threatening to cut babies in half and use the Bible as their excuse. They would be taking the verses out of context.

Yes, and the pericope itself is actual context. A text from a different religion written in a different culture from 500 years later is not context.

God gave us the Bible to study to find out its deep meaning and not simply laid out on a silver platter. Example: Is the verse about being baptized for the dead a command to get baptized for dead relatives, or is it in fact a declaration to people who would practice such a thing all the while questioning eternal life?

Neither. It's a comment about the fact that the practice demonstrates belief in resurrection.

I believe the deeper intent would be far less superficial...

That's a tautology, but you're just arbitrarily coming up with "deeper intents," and you're ignoring a lot of issues with your hermeneutic along the way. As long as it serves your dogma, it's useful.

[_huckelberry]

So when the psalm blesses the one who crushes the skulls of babies against rocks, you believe that is God telling you in absolute terms that murdering infants is right, provided they are not of your faith?

I'd like a direct and honest answer to this very sincere and serious question.

I suppose trying to drag David into this outburst is a bit of a clunker. Then it seems to me to be a bit of a clunker to suggest that those by the waters of Babylon were complaining of Babylonian theological errors.

[_LittleNipper]

This Psalm was written from David's anguish, not from God's perspective.

No, it was written by angry exiled Judeans, but that's irrelevant. You said the Bible is true, and what the Bible has to say concerning right and wrong is absolute. Would you like to amend that statement?

David wrote it as an expression of his frustrated desire for revenge against the murderous Babylonians, who had destroyed Jerusalem and had killed many of the Israelite babies by dashing their heads against rocks.

So David was living during the exile? You know David died hundreds of years before the exile, right?

David and the rest of Israel lived in a time when justice was seen as "an eye for an eye". He wanted the Babylonians to feel what the Israelites had felt. However, Jesus spotlights God's perspective coming with a higher law of forgiveness. David was upset. and God allowed this expression to show human emotion and not as a demonstration of God's love.

So you're going to amend your comment above?

As for God not caring about the murder of babies, Jesus said that a person who harms a little one would be better off hanging a stone around his neck and throwing himself into the sea. When you read, context is generally important.

Jesus' comments do not in any way constitute the context for an exilic psalm.

David's son Solomon once ordered a baby to be cut in half. Did he actually do it? No, he wanted the real mother to have her baby returned to her. And Solomon did this with a threat to divide the baby. The real mother pleading to rather give her baby away than to have it killed. No one imagines that judges today should be threatening to cut babies in half and use the Bible as their excuse. They would be taking the verses out of context.

Yes, and the pericope itself is actual context. A text from a different religion written in a different culture from 500 years later is not context.

God gave us the Bible to study to find out its deep meaning and not simply laid out on a silver platter. Example: Is the verse about being baptized for the dead a command to get baptized for dead relatives, or is it in fact a declaration to people who would practice such a thing all the while questioning eternal life?

Neither. It's a comment about the fact that the practice demonstrates belief in resurrection.

I believe the deeper intent would be far less superficial...

That's a tautology, but you're just arbitrarily coming up with "deeper intents," and you're ignoring a lot of issues with your hermeneutic along the way. As long as it serves your dogma, it's useful.

The Bible has lots of prophetic messages and David has been allowed by God to deliver the prophetic future events that are to come to pass. The Bible is not just a book of recorded history.

[Guest]

Actually, you have not.

That's a flagrant lie.

You have merely eluded that there maybe interpretive variables between some particular verses.

Which Bible has the right version and translation of Deut 32:8 or 43? How about of the entire book of Jeremiah? Which one translates the right version? Who killed Goliath according to your Bible's translation of 2 Sam 21:9? Which version of Amos 9:12 is correct, the one in Amos or the one in Acts 15:17? Which one renders Gen 1:1 correctly? Which one accurately translates Exod 21:6 and 22:9? Which translation best renders μορφη in Phil 2:6? Which variant at John 1:18 is correct, and which Bible versions use it? Which version accurately translates Isa 1:12?

I'd like direct answers to each of these questions.

However, the Bible is the sum of its parts and not one verse.

Which is a harmonizing presupposition, because it means you ignore the verses that directly conflict with each other and prioritize a univocal reading. That's a species of the hermeneutic circle, and it's a fallacy. You don't get to the sum of the parts until you have an accurate understanding of the parts, and you don't have that at all.

ALL verses (particularly those with difficulties) need to be interpreted in light of each other and not as an entity unto itself.

Hermeneutic circle. You are required to arbitrarily pick which verses take priority over which others. One has to be interpreted in light of another, instead of the other in light of it. It's impossible to do otherwise, which means you are forced into presupposing certain doctrines.

And the Bible certainly is not at the mercy of modern interpretation or additional non-biblical text/literature.

It is if one let's go of the asinine notion that it's univocal and should interpret itself. That's a silly fallacy.

Sorry, but you are the liar. You lie to your self concerning the truthfulness of your own Mormon beliefs. If you were half as diligent concerning Mormonism as you were trying to discredit real Christianity, you couldn't possibly remain a Mormon. Prop up the Book of Mormon, but don't try to discredit the true interpretation of the Bible in order to attempt to uplift yourself.

Deut 32:8 You pick the one that is different I see no real problem

New International Version
When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.

English Standard Version
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.

New American Standard Bible
"When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, When He separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples According to the number of the sons of Israel.

King James Bible
When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance and divided the human race, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the people of Israel.

International Standard Version
When the Most High gave nations as their inheritance, when he separated the human race, he set boundaries for the people according to the number of the children of God.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
When the Most High gave nations their land, when he divided the descendants of Adam, he set up borders for the tribes corresponding to the number of the sons of Israel.

Jubilee Bible 2000
when the most High caused the Gentiles to be inherited, when he separated the sons of men, he set the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel.

King James 2000 Bible
When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

American King James Version
When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

American Standard Version
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, When he separated the children of men, He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the children of Israel.

Douay-Rheims Bible
When the Most High divided the nations: when he separated the sons of Adam, he appointed the bounds of people according to the number of the children of Israel.

Darby Bible Translation
When the Most High assigned to the nations their inheritance, When he separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the children of Israel.

English Revised Version
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, When he separated the children of men, He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the children of Israel.

Webster's Bible Translation
When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.

World English Bible
When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the children of men, he set the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the children of Israel.

Young's Literal Translation
In the Most High causing nations to inherit, In His separating sons of Adam -- He setteth up the borders of the peoples By the number of the sons of Israel.

[_LittleNipper]

Deut 32:43 (What don't you understand? What confuses you?)

New International Version
Rejoice, you nations, with his people, for he will avenge the blood of his servants; he will take vengeance on his enemies and make atonement for his land and people.

English Standard Version
“Rejoice with him, O heavens; bow down to him, all gods, for he avenges the blood of his children and takes vengeance on his adversaries. He repays those who hate him and cleanses his people’s land.”

New American Standard Bible
"Rejoice, O nations, with His people; For He will avenge the blood of His servants, And will render vengeance on His adversaries, And will atone for His land and His people."

King James Bible
Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Rejoice, you nations, concerning His people, for He will avenge the blood of His servants. He will take vengeance on His adversaries; He will purify His land and His people.

International Standard Version
"Sing for joy, nations! Sing for joy, people who belong to him! For he'll avenge the blood of his servants, turn on his adversary, and cleanse both his land and his people."

NET Bible
Cry out, O nations, with his people, for he will avenge his servants' blood; he will take vengeance against his enemies, and make atonement for his land and people.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
Joyfully sing with the LORD's people, you nations, because he will take revenge for the death of his servants. He will get even with his enemies and make peace for his people's land.?and[ his people.">]

Jubilee Bible 2000
Rejoice, O ye Gentiles, with his people, for he will avenge the blood of his slaves and will render vengeance to his enemies and will reconcile his land, to his people.

King James 2000 Bible
Rejoice, O you nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.

American King James Version
Rejoice, O you nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful to his land, and to his people.

American Standard Version
Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: For he will avenge the blood of his servants, And will render vengeance to his adversaries, And will make expiation for his land, for his people.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Praise his people, ye nations, for he will revenge the blood of his servants: and will render vengeance to their enemies, and he will be merciful to the land of his people.

Darby Bible Translation
Shout for joy, ye nations, with his people, For he avengeth the blood of his servants, And rendereth vengeance to his enemies, And maketh atonement for his land, for his people.

English Revised Version
Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: For he will avenge the blood of his servants, And will render vengeance to his adversaries, And will make expiation for his land, for his people.

Webster's Bible Translation
Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful to his land, and to his people.

World English Bible
Rejoice, you nations, [with] his people, for he will avenge the blood of his servants. He will render vengeance to his adversaries, And will make expiation for his land, for his people.

Young's Literal Translation
Sing ye nations -- with his people, For the blood of His servants He avengeth, And vengeance He turneth back on His adversaries, And hath pardoned His land -- His people.'

[_LittleNipper]

2 Samuel 21:19 (YLT) | In Context | Whole Chapter


19 And the battle is again in Gob with the Philistines, and Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim, the Beth-Lehemite, smiteth [a brother of] Goliath the Gittite, and the wood of his spear [is] like a beam of weavers.

[_ludwigm]

I am not maklelan, but...

2 Samuel 21:19 (YLT) | In Context | Whole Chapter
19 And the battle is again in Gob with the Philistines, and Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim, the Beth-Lehemite, smiteth [a brother of] Goliath the Gittite, and the wood of his spear [is] like a beam of weavers.

Do you know the whole story in context?

1st version (main):

3. And the Philistines stood on a mountain on the one side, and Israel stood on a mountain on the other side: and there was a valley between them.
4. And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span.
5. And he had an helmet of brass upon his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail; and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of brass.
6. And he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass between his shoulders.
7. And the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before him.
8. And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me.
9. If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants: but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.
... in the next verses, that Goliath is called "the Philistine" ...
39. And David girded his sword upon his armour, and he assayed to go; for he had not proved it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved them. And David put them off him.
40. And he took his staff in his hand, and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in a shepherd's bag which he had, even in a scrip; and his sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine.
41. And the Philistine came on and drew near unto David; and the man that bare the shield went before him.
42. And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance.
43. And the Philistine said unto David, Am I a dog, that thou comest to me with staves? And the Philistine cursed David by his gods.
44. And the Philistine said to David, Come to me, and I will give thy flesh unto the fowls of the air, and to the beasts of the field.
45. Then said David to the Philistine, Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied.
46. This day will the LORD deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel.
47. And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD's, and he will give you into our hands.
48. And it came to pass, when the Philistine arose, and came and drew nigh to meet David, that David hasted, and ran toward the army to meet the Philistine.
49. And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.
50. So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David.
51. Therefore David ran, and stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword, and drew it out of the sheath thereof, and slew him, and cut off his head therewith. And when the Philistines saw their champion was dead, they fled.

2nd version (your one):

And the battle is again in Gob with the Philistines, and Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim, the Beth-Lehemite, smiteth [a brother of] Goliath the Gittite, and the wood of his spear [is] like a beam of weavers.

1. What does "[is]" mean? (No, it is not about Bill Clinton, it is about YOU.)
2. What does "[a brother of]" mean?

In both case, the [any text] means something can not be found in original. Like italics. One can imagine it to there...

Who did smite Goliath?
David?
Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim, the Beth-Lehemite? (names, names, names...)

[_LittleNipper]

This is a very logical explanation: Pulpit Commentary

Verse 19. - Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, a Beth-lehemite, slew Goliath the Gittite. The words "the brother of" are inserted by the Authorized Version in order to bring this place into verbal agreement with 1 Chronicles 20:5, where we read that "Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite." The Jewish Targum had the same reading as that still found in the text, but regards Elhanan, "God is gracious," as another name for David, and, instead of Jair or Jaare, reads Jesse. Its translation is as follows: "And David the son of Jesse, the weaver of veils for the sanctuary, who was of Bethlehem, slew Goliath the Gittite." Possibly the Authorized Version is right in concluding that the present text is a corruption of that in 1 Chronicles 20:5. For, first, the repetition of oregim, "weavers," is suspicious, the Hebrew being, not "weaver's beam," but the plural "weavers' beam," menor oregim. Next, Jaare is a transposition of the letters of Jair (in the Hebrew) made probably in order that the compound Jaare-oregim may obey the rules of Hebrew grammar. More important is it to notice that Lahmi is part of the word "Bethlehemite" (Hebrew, Beth-hallahmi), and might thus easily suggest to the eye of a scribe the completion of so well known a word. We must add that among the thirty Gibborim is "Elhanan the son of Dodo of Bethlehem." Whoever slew Goliath's brother would certainly attain to high rank among the heroes, but if the name Jair is right, the Elhanan there spoken of is not the person who slew Lahmi.

I believe that Goliath had a brother or brothers and that they were all big boys is the logical explanation. There was more than one giant and Goliath became the name meaning huge.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Sorry, but you are the liar.

Yeah, right. Nipper, please tell us more about how this ideogram...



...mandates a literal interpretation of the story of the Tower of Babel.

You lie to your self concerning the truthfulness of your own Mormon beliefs.

That's a pretty strong accusation, Nipper. Can you back it up? No? You can't? Sigh...

If you were half as diligent concerning Mormonism as you were trying to discredit real Christianity, you couldn't possibly remain a Mormon.

Nipper, if you were half as diligent about studying the Bible you wouldn't be a Biblical literalist.

Prop up the Book of Mormon, but don't try to discredit the true interpretation of the Bible in order to attempt to uplift yourself.

Nipper, Biblical literalists (like you) are your own worst enemy. You do more damage to your cause than anybody else in this forum.