1 Samuel 17:50  says David killed Goliath.\n2 Samuel 21:19  says Elhanan killed Goliath.\n\nHow do I find out which one is right? Is it a mistranslation or a contradiction?
206839
Elhanan killed the brother of Goliath.  The King James is clear, and this is also a different battle & different location.
34993
1. What scripture verse was translated incorrectly (What did the incorrect verse say)\n\nHERE IS THE WHOLE STORY, FOR THOSE WHO MAY NOT KNOW:::\n\n          Exodus 34:28-35  28 And he was there with the \n          Etrnl forty days and forty nights; he did \n          neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote \n          upon the tables the words of the covenant, the \n          ten commandments. 29  And it came to pass, when \n          Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two \n          tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came \n          down from the mount, that Moses wist not that \n          the skin of his face shone while he talked with  \n          him.  כי קרן עור פניו בדברו אתו׃\n          30  And when Aaron and all the children of \n          Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face \n          shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him. \n          31  And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and \n          all the rulers of the congregation returned unto \n          him: and Moses talked with them. 32  And \n          afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: \n          and he gave them in commandment all that the \n          Etrnl had spoken with him in mount Sinai. 33  \n          And till Moses had done speaking with them, he \n          put a vail on his face. 34  But when Moses went \n          in before the Etrnl to speak with him, he took \n          the vail off, until he came out. And he came \n          out, and spake unto the children of Israel that \n          which he was commanded. 35  And the children of \n          Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of \n          Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon \n          his face again, until he went in to speak with\n          him. \n\nThe verse incorrectly translated is, of course, Exodus 34:29 above, and i have supplied the Hebrew. The word mistranslated is the word, 'KEREN,' meaning 'beam,' like a beam of light. Unfortunately, the word also means horn, as in a 'horn of plenty.'\n\n2. and what is the correct translation?\n\nMay own translation:::\n\nExo 34:29 ויהי ברדת משׁה מהר סיני ושׁני לחת העדת ביד־משׁה ברדתו מן־ההר ומשׁה לא־ידע כי קרן עור פניו בדברו אתו׃\n\nAnd when Moses came down from the Mountain of Sinai, with the two tablets of the testimony in the hand of Moses, when he came down from the Mountain, and Moses did not know that beams of light (keren or) shone from his face when he spoke with Him.\n\nAdditional information:: When i was a kid, i actually had Christians come up to me, asking me where my horns were? Their ministers and their families had taught them that the Jews actually had horns, based on the New Testament quotation, when Jesus calls The Jews children of Satan!!!!
309066
Does this mean that the first man in the holy book was the bastard son of a goddess? Who got her pregnant. I like this story. Was it one of the other Gods?
167085
An observation -- you are clearly arguing that Gen 2:17 is contradicted by what follows.   But don't you find it just a bit odd that the writer (or editor), who clearly is presenting God's words as TRUE, would in such a short span contradict his own story and not even recognize it??   Couldn't it be that, as obvious as it seems to you, there is something going on here that you are unaware of?\n\nIn fact, God's threat IS carried out, and swiftly.  The language he uses is found several other times in the Old Testment, esp. of kings pronouncing sentence or warning that the death sentence will most certainly follow if the person disobeys.\n\nExamples: (using ESV; I ordinarily use NIV, but this was closer to hand on my computer!)\n\nGenesis 20:7)\nNow then, return the man's wife, for he is a prophet, so that he will pray for you, and you shall live. But if you do not return her, know that you shall surely die, you, and all who are yours." \n\nExodus 10:28)\nThen Pharaoh said to him, "Get away from me; take care never to see my face again, for on the day you see my face you shall die."\n\nby Saul:  1 Samuel 14:44,   20:31,  22:16\n\nSolomon's warning to Shimei, in which he puts Shimei under oath, on pain of death, not to leave Jerusalem\n\n1Ki 2:37)  \nFor on the day you go out and cross the brook Kidron, know for certain that you shall die. Your blood shall be on your own head." \n\nAnd when Shimei violates the oath\n1Ki 2:42)  \nThe king sent and summoned Shimei and said to him, "Did I not make you swear by the LORD and solemnly warn you, saying, 'Know for certain that on the day you go out and go to any place whatever, you shall die'? And you said to me, 'What you say is good; I will obey.' \n\nThe point of all these is the DEATH SENTENCE will surely follow. (Solomon even speaks of "the day when", but clearly it is not the day that the violation occurs, but when Solomon apprehends him.)\n\nAnd the sentence DID follow in Genesis -- God pronounces sentence in Genesis 3:17-9:\n\nAnd to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. \nBy the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return." \n\nNow there IS indeed a delay in the 'final execution' of this sentence, but as God as said, it most surely does happen -- he passes sentence, and Adam DOES die.   In fact, the genealogy of Genesis 5 makes a great point of this, for it ends each entry (with the notable exception of Enoch, who "walked with God") with "and he DIED". \n\nBut there is something more immediate.\n\nYou note the reference to the tree of life, and others comment that if man had eaten from it he would live, which 'proves' what God had said wasn't true.  But God did NOT say the sentence would be automatic --as if the fruit was POISON.  Rather, he would pronounce SENTENCE, that HE would carry out.   His BLOCKING the way to the tree of life is PART of God carrying out thesentence!   Thus man CANNOT eat of it and will, instead, die.\n\nThere's even more to it than that.   Some have suggested that Adam "died spiritually" that day.  There is something to this, but again it fails to see that the DEATH sentence was something GOD was passing and seeing to the carrying out of.   So, what did God do THAT DAY?   He CAST Adam & Eve OUT of the Garden (in which the tree of life was found!),  from the special place of HIS presence...  into a place of hardship and ultimately death. \n\nThe rest of the OT builds on this picture -- that 'real life' is living i
650269
No where in the Bible did Jesus command his disciples to kill in the name of Jesus Christ. \nYou are right though, the Quran encourages it's followers to fight nonbelievers...........\n\nFight those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the last day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and his messenger(Muhammad) (4) And those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (ie. Islam) among the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah [tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.\n-Surah 9:29\n\nWhen Muslims use the sword, they are practicing what the Quran teaches. \nThe evils done by Christians were by name only. They disobeyed the word of Christ. Because of this, you will see no difference between Muslims who kill, and the Christians who kill. The difference is in whether or not they are following the example of their leader.\n\nThe fact is that every person who participated in the Crusades was going against the teachings of Christ. However, when Muslims overthrow a Government by force, they are following both the teachings and example of Muhammad.\n\n\nTo Taimur, let me ask you, what would happen to you if you lived in a Muslim country and tryed to convert to Christianity?
475793
revenge is mine says the Lord, I will repay\n\nthe proper translation is: thou shall not MURDER\n\nthere are three reasons to kill someone, biblically\n1 act of war\n2 self defense\n3 execution of criminals\nthese are not murder, the hebrew word murder and kill are different
561739
Interesting, but my translation says "God takes his stand in his own congregation".  (New American Standard).  We would need to discuss it with an expert in ancient hebrew to form an informed opinion, so take it easy.
127409
The Bible does not say "thou shalt not kill"\n\nThe Bible does say... Thou shalt not murder..\n\n... there is a large difference between the two, and the line of duty i believe (in a just matter), would be the difference.\n... God has given commands to kill, but never to murder.
295282
Dude, if you would have read two verses earlier, you would have answered your own question:\n\n 18"As for his father, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was not good among his people, behold, he will die for his iniquity. \n\n 19"Yet you say, 'Why should the son not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity?' When the son has practiced justice and righteousness and has observed all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. \n\n 20"The person who sins will die The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
277160
You jackass. the verse (8:68) refers to distribution of spoils of war. Now, anymore FAKE KORANIC VERSES I NEED TO READ?\n\nWho's the one embarrased now?\n\nEDIT:I want to make it clear. This verse is not taken out of the context because IT WAS NEVER IN THE CONTEXT!! It's fictitious.
88438
TO Cooooool: Here're some errors in Qur'an, if you want more - there're plenty of scholar websites on the web showing this. Other Historical Errors\n\nDoes the reader believe that Abraham did not offer Isaac, but Ishmael, as a sacrifice? This is what all Muslim scholars say. Do you know that the Qur'an claims that Haman was pharaoh's prime minister even though Haman lived in Babylon one thousand years later? Yet the Qur'an says so. The Qur'an says that the one who picked Moses from the river was not his sister but his mother (28:6-8), and that a Samaritan was the one who molded the golden calf for the children of Israel and misguided them, and the golden calf was lowing (refer to chapter 20:85-88) though it is well-known that Samaria was not in existence at that time. The Samaritans came after the Babylonian exile. How could one of them have made the golden calf for the people of Israel?\n\nConcerning the birth of Christ, the Qur'an teaches that the Virgin Mary gave birth to him under the shade of a palm tree and not in a manger of sheep (refer to Mary 19:23). The Qur'an ignores all the documented historical evidence available to all people across the ages and brings us new discoveries!\n\nThe Qur'an claims (Chapter 2:125-127) that Abraham and Ishmael, his son, are the ones who built The Ka'ba in Mecca in Saudi Arabia. The late Dr. Taha Husayn (the most famous professor of Arabic literature in Egypt) acknowledges that the information recorded in the Qur'an pertaining to the construction of Ka'ba at the hand of Abraham and Ishmael is not historically documented. He said:\n\n"The case of this episode is very obvious because it is of recent date and came into vogue just before the rise of Islam. Islam exploited it for religious reasons" (quoted in Mizan al-Islam by Anwar al-Jundi, p. 170).\n\nThis declaration invoked the rage of the Muslim scholars against him. The former president of Tunisia did the same thing when he stated that the Qur'an contains mythical stories. Muslim scholars revolted against him and threatened to kill him because these are Muhammad's orders - kill anybody who insults the Qur'an. So what could Taha Husayn or Abu Ruqayba [better known in the West as Bourgiba] (or we) do if the Qur'an rejects the most scientifically documented historical stories? Are we supposed to shut up our mouth and close our minds lest we be killed?
284439
Question: "What does the Bible say about the death penalty / capital punishment?"\n\n \n\nAnswer: The Old Testament law commanded the death penalty for various acts: murder (Exodus 21:12), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), bestiality (Exodus 22:19); adultery (Leviticus 20:10); homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), being a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:5), prostitution and rape (Deuteronomy 22:4), and several other crimes. However, God often showed mercy when the death penalty was due. David committed adultery and murder, yet God did not demand his life be taken (2 Samuel 11:1-5, 14-17; 2 Samuel 12:13). Ultimately, each and every sin we commit should result in the death penalty (Romans 6:23). Thankfully, God demonstrates His love for us in not condemning us (Romans 5:8).\n\n \n\nWhen the Pharisees brought a woman who was caught in the act of adultery to Jesus and asked Him if she should be stoned, Jesus replied, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her" (John 8:7). This should not be used to indicate that Jesus rejected capital punishment in all instances. Jesus was simply exposing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. The Pharisees wanted to trick Jesus into breaking the Old Testament Law...they truly did not care about the woman being stoned (where was the man who was caught in adultery?) God was the One who instituted capital punishment: “Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6). Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17). Therefore, I would say that Jesus would support capital punishment. Jesus also demonstrated grace when capital punishment was due (John 8:1-11). The Apostle Paul definitely recognized the power of the government to institute capital punishment where appropriate (Romans 13:1-5).\n\n \n\nSo, basically, we are back to were we started. Yes, God allows capital punishment. But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due. What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be, then? First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word; therefore, it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than He or be more kind than He. God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect. This standard applies not only to us but to Himself. Therefore, He loves to an infinite degree, and He has mercy to an infinite degree. We also see that He has wrath to an infinite degree, and it is all maintained in a perfect balance
108997
People have correctly suggested that writing "G_d" is a practice based on the 3rd commandment ("You shall not take the name of YHWH [probably to be pronounced 'Yahweh,' traditionally ' translated as 'the LORD'] your God in vain.")    But why and how did this PARTICULAR way of trying to keep the commandment come about?\n\n(In its original context the command likely had, first of all, to not dishonoring God by such behavior as lightly taking OATHS in his name and not keeping them, by extension to speaking or acting "in his name," whether claiming to speak for him, as his representative, or by claiming to follow him, but living in a way that brings dishonor to \nhim.)\n\nBut one significant expression of attempting to guard and honor the sanctity of the divine name (sometimes called the "tetragrammaton" after its four letters: Y-H-W-H) that we find many expressions of after the Babylonian Exile (6th century BC) is in special treatment of the spoken and written name(s) of God, beginning with "YHWH", and at times extending to other names and titles.\n\nWe see it in how the name was written in the scrolls of the Hebrew Bible, as well as in their early Greek translations. After the Babylonian Exile the Jews adopted the Aramaic letter forms in place of their own earlier forms.   But among the Dead Sea Scrolls we find Scriptures written in the Aramaic letters, but with the divine name (which in English may be rendered YHWH) written in the older "paleo-Hebrew" script.     Many early Greek translations (some as late as the 4th century AD) have the divine name written either in the Hebrew letters, or using Greek letters that LOOK like the Hebrew word.  (If read as Greek one would say "Pipi", but there is no evidence such a pronunciation was ever intended.)\n\nAnother way of honoring the name YHWH that grew up at the same time was to avoid SAYING the name by substituting another Hebrew word (for Greek speakers it might be the Greek equivalent).   For example, we find references to "the Name".    This was at times extended to other divine names.  So, for instance, in place of "God" one might say "heaven".   We find some reflections of this in the NT, esp. in the gospel of Matthew, who (writing chiefly to JEWISH Christians) ordinarily speaks of the "kingdom of heaven" where other gospels use "kingdom of God".  \n\nThe most important substitute was that of the word for "Lord" in place of the name YHWH.   The Hebrew word was "ADONAI", Greek speakers used their equivalent, "KYRIOS".    In fact, the NT throughout uses "Lord" (kyrios) when quoting OT passages that use the divine name YHWH.  (This is important in connection with the claim of Christians that Jesus is divine -- calling him "Lord" was not just honoring him as "Master" but applying the divine name to him.)    This practice has continued to be followed in most Scripture translations from the Hebrew, including the use of "the LORD" in most English translations.  (Usually small caps are used to indicate that the original used "YHWH" not "Adonay".)     \n\nEvidence for the Jewish practice is found in the customs of the Masoretes -- Hebrew scribes who carefully preserved the Hebrew text of Scripture, and added an involved system of markings, including accents and vowel-markings to preserve the traditional understanding of the text.   In the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible the name YHWH is marked with an unusual set of vowels, which if we tried to pronounce them would yield "Yehowah' [in later English, Jehovah"].   But that is not what they intended. Rather they marked the word with the vowels from "Adonay" to indicate that THIS was the word to be spoken when you came to the divine name.\n\nThe form "G_d" imitates this sc
644385
That's nothing compared to the story of Bathsheba. He thought she was beautiful, so he wanted her for his wife. Alas, she was married to one of David's loyal soldiers, so David arranged for Uriah to be sent to the frontlines of a battle, where he was killed. Then he took Bathsheba as his own. She, of course, had no say in the matter. This sort of wonton cruelty was very typical of David, yet he is called a man of God and was always one of God's favorites--indeed, Jesus Christ is proudly proclaimed to be descended from this murderer! Throughout the O.T., God favors those who are crafty, cruel, and devious, and David fits the bill on every point.
60400
Ha, what a pile of garbage. True the messiah was supposed to be a descendent of king David but that decent is patrilineal (from father to son) Mathew in the first part even shows how jesus was this though his father Josef. But wait. I thought that Jesus was the son of G-d so he cant be a descendant of king David. Strike one. They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isaiah 2:4. This is Isaiah’s prediction of what the messiah supposed to do. Basically world peace look around you. Strike two. The messiah was also supposed to restore the temple in Jerusalem and gather the Jews back to Israel. The temple still has not been built and more than ½ of Jews today don’t live in Israel. Strike three. Jesus is out of there.\nThe truth is Jesus did not fulfill ANY of the requirements to be the messiah. And NO WHERE dose it say any in the writings before Jesus thing about someone coming to cleanse sin or getting a second chance at it latter. (if you want the bible quotes to support the rest of my augment email me at Gratvol@yahoo.com)\n\n\n\noh and dcomputerman if all you needed to be was the son of a woman descendant of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and from the tribe of Judah line of King David I have just a good chance of being the Messiah as Jesus did.
593565
Someone posted a question trying to justify incest with his daughters using the OT example of Lot as an example. I spent quite a time answering this, only to find the next morning that the question had been removed. Just in case anybody else has problems with the passage, here's my answer anyway.\n\nLot and his Daughters\n\nThank you for raising this question, it's caused me to get my Bible out and read the story again for myself. If anybody is actually interested in understanding it properly, they need to go back to Genesis 11 and start from the beginning.\n\nAn old pagan called Abram is worshipping one day at the local ziggurat in Ur of the Chaldees and Yahweh comes and reveals Himself to him. The Bible doesn't tell us that Abram did anything special to earn or merit this revelation, just that God, for His own reasons, chose to reveal Himself to him. This really upset the religious locals, who followed a mixture of astrology and Babylonian mystery religions. Abram was rejecting their pantheon of Gods and going round telling people there was only one true God. Talk about upsetting the neighbours. And you should have heard the gossip!\n\nAbram leaves Ur with his father Terah, his nephew Lot and their households. They passed through the Euphrates (a type of baptism) and arrived at Harran, where they got too comfortable and stayed until Terah dies. At this point Yahweh gives Abram a kick up the backside and points him towards the Promised Land.\n\nSome time after they arrive in Caanan there is a famine, and what happens next has a direct bearing on Genesis 19 as cited.\n\nAbram, taking Sarai his wife and Lot with him, goes down into Egypt (always a type for the world). Here they encounter all the corruption of Pharaoh’s court and the fleshpots of the most advanced nation on earth. After moving back to Caanan, Lot sits round the campfire and dreams of the forbidden things he has seen. If you carefully read the start of chapter 13, you will see that when Lot separated from Abram, he looked to the east, towards Sodom, and chose that because it reminded him of Egypt and the forbidden pleasures that he had been dreaming of.\n\nFast forward now to chapter 19 and Lot has given up farming on the plains outside of Sodom and has allowed the lure of sin to draw him inside the city. Lot had abandoned his God to the extent that he was prepared to allow his daughters to marry those that God called detestable, but even so, God did not abandon him.\n\nWe know what happened next, but if you really think that God condoned the sin you have to be crazy. The offspring of those illicit unions went on to form the Moabites and the Ammonites, two of the most cursed tribes in history.\n\nThis is a classic morality tale of reaping that which you have sown and is recorded not only as historical truth, but as an admonition to all of us. Genuine queries on any of this are welcome.
563237
First 7::::Gen 29:18  And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter. \n\nhe earned Rachel.....but got Leah::::Gen 29:25  And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me? \n\nSo the 2nd 7 years::::Gen 29:27  Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. 28  And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week: and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also. \n\nAnd the third 7 :::::i guess was having the kids, both the children kind, but also the better, healthier lambs and goats:::::Gen 30:42  But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: so the feebler were Laban's, and the stronger Jacob's. 43  And the man increased exceedingly, and had much cattle, and maidservants, and menservants, and camels, and asses........\n\nand raising them, and then going back home to re-acquaint himself with Esau......???