Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

11

See: 1 Chronicles 21:25: And there was war again with the Philistines; and Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite, whose spear staff was like a weaver's beam. Goliath in Samuel 21 is actually Goliath's brother. It could be that the original audience of the Bible understood that the name Goliath could refer to both ...


11

Not a Hyperbolic Expression The Text of Psalm 51:4: לְךָ לְבַדְּךָ ׀ חָטָאתִי וְהָרַע בְּעֵינֶיךָ עָשִׂיתִי לְמַעַן תִּצְדַּק בְּדָבְרֶךָ תִּזְכֶּה בְשָׁפְטֶֽךָ׃ Explanation 1) "Against you alone" (לְךָ לְבַדְּךָ): This is a prayer of David for repentance (a penitential psalm), and while he sinned against many others in the affair with Bathsheba, ...


9

The question is a good one, and worth discussing. My own sense is that it includes a mis-step, however, which casts a different light on things. My short answer to the question posed ("how does 'foot washing' lead to the act of 'sexual intercourse'?") is: it doesn't! First, though, to pick up a point made in a comment to the question. "Feet" as a euphemism ...


9

I Sam 31 is written in the voice of the anonymous narrator. This narrator writes with the authority of prophecy and so his version of events is the version that we should accept as correct - Saul fell on his own sword as did his armorer. The story told by the Amaleki kid in 2 Sam 1:8 is obviously a lie - the kid claims to David that he identified himself to ...


9

David accepted the death of his child by Bathsheba as punishment for his sin with her and he let that overcome his grief. (The status of the child’s soul is a question for elsewhere.) There was no such consideration in the case of Absalom, and David was overcome by father’s grief. Joab berates him for this, saying that his grief threatens morale. ...


8

Jack Douglas already does a good job of handling the possibility of concurrent causes, so I won't repeat his ideas on the first question. However, I think more can be said in answer to your second question. What's wrong with taking a census? We see in 1 Chronicles 21:3 that what's wrong is not a matter of procedure. The act of taking a census is one that ...


7

I am no dancer, but I don't believe the context can support Mr. Garlock's interpretation: The word in question (karar), is defined by BDB as "to whirl, to dance". However, since the word is only used twice (here and in v. 16), we shouldn't place too much confidence in the lexical precision. Rather, it is the context that clarifies what was going on. In ...


7

While it is true that David was a man after God's own heart, he was also a man who had no scruples about killing. Take, most famously, as an example, Uriah. Uriah was killed for the grievous offense of having a hot wife! In the case of Joab, it was a political revenge killing, pure and simple. David says in 1 Kings 2: 5 “Now you yourself know what ...


7

There are two plausible scenarios: It happened as the Amalekite said. The Amalekite embellished the story thinking he would be rewarded for helping David become king. In scenario 1, though Saul's armourbearer presumed Saul was dead, Saul was 'still kickin' and revived when the Amalekite came by. In scenario 2 the Amalekite came upon the scene and ...


7

And what's wrong with taking a census anyway? I don't believe we are told anywhere that taking a census is wrong. In fact, the Midrash to Numbers 1:1 speaks of 10 censuses of the Jewish people: When they went down to Egypt (Ex. 12:7); When they left Egypt (Ex. 32:28); At the beginning of the Book of Numbers (Num. 1:1); After the report ...


5

There is nothing in the text in 2 Samuel 7 or in subsequent writings within the Tanakh that hints that the Davidic covenant spoken through Nathan was spoken falsely by him or embellished. 1 Kings 4:31 esteems the wisdom of Ethan the Ezrahite pretty highly; his wisdom is the bar by which the author compares Solomon's own wisdom. I mention this because Ethan ...


5

Because Absalom had intercourse with them, it would be detestable for David to do so: But if the second husband also turns against her and divorces her, or if he dies, the first husband may not marry her again, for she has been defiled. That would be detestable to the Lord.— Deuteronomy 24:3-4 I would argue that in the context of the rest of the ...


4

What an excellent question! Aaron had four sons: two died an early death with no survivors, and the other two sons survived:-- Eleazar and Ithamar. Thus the Levites who served as priests at the time of David are all descended from one of these two priestly lines. In the Hebrew Bible, when we see the Ahimelech(father)/Abiathar(son) team, these two are the ...


4

Wiersbe makes an important point that: When he confesses his sins of adultery and murder, David said, "I have sinned"; but when he confessed his sin of numbering the people, he said, "I have sinned greatly" (italics mine).1 But a balanced explanation makes sure to note that neither version of the episode (2 Samuel 24, or 1 Chronicles 21) actually tells ...


4

Excellent question. Let's explore some explanations. 1) The first explanation is simply that they were indeed unlawful priests (c.f. Judges 17). 2) That the text would mention this transgression without consequence seems strange to many commentators who propose a second explanation - that the word "priest" here means "advisor". Let's examine a textual ...


4

The verse is not Proverbs 18:8, but Proverbs 8:8, which states Proverbs 8:8 (NASB) 8 All the utterances of my mouth are in righteousness; There is nothing crooked or perverted in them. The Hebrew word for "crooked" is Hebrew verb פָּתַל, which means "to twist." That is, this word is the Niphal participle, which means "twisted" (or crooked), and is ...


3

First, remember that David was king, and as king he answered to no one but G-d. He could have ordered Uriah killed on whatever pretext and then taken Bat-Sheva. He had that authority. Instead, what he did was rely on the fact that Jewish soldiers going into battle are required to give their wives conditional retroactive divorce papers which in effect say: ...


3

According to the Me'am Lo'ez, some explain the behavior by reference to the following law: if a fast is decreed due to a lack of rainfall, then when it rains, the people should stop fasting. But, if an individual fasts for someone who is ill, and that person recovers, he still must complete that fast (through sundown). In the latter case, there is still a ...


2

Yes, he probably did as the cowardly Ish-Bosheth would never have accused the man he feared without absolute proof. Here is a plausible explaianation based simply on the personalities involved which often serves as a good context to work from. Possibly the key is to recognize that Abner, Saul’s uncle was a powerful and older general who looked down on the ...


2

My understanding, which is not intended to exclude other/different perspectives and answers, is this: Two women were named "Tamar". The historical narratives simply records this fact. If we were intended to draw parallels between the Tamars, the narrative would have emphasized other similarities between them, or at least used similar wording. But apart ...


2

While Joseph's answer has much to commend it, I feel it is headed in the wrong direction. I don't think there is a need to suppose two sets of Abiathars and Ahimelechs where one is father-son and the other vice versa. First, 1 Kings 2:26-27 is clear that it was indeed the so-called "good" Abiathar it's talking about since verse 27 notes that his life was ...


1

The NET Bible tackles both of these statements in their translation and notes. 51:4 Against you – you above all – I have sinned; I have done what is evil in your sight. So you are just when you confront me; you are right when you condemn me. *1. They state the phrase "against you only" is hyperbole as the word used here for sin is ...


1

The most obvious answer is that David is indeed using hyberbole in his desire to acknowledge to God that he understands that he has transgressed His law and offend Him. However, it is possible that David was also using precise legal terminology in describing his sin as being only against God. Consider that it was not Uriah's death that was problematic, but ...


1

One possible way would be to assume a difference in the semantics of the original word(s). As far as I see: This is always true and has to be taken into consideration. (He did not write for us and our time and our understanding. But since this text is so well supported by even the earliest translation up to the latest, it could prove worthwhile to remain ...


1

...I still don't feel that Joab should have been punished... Feelings. Bah. Remember, this was David passing sentence, not God. Nothing says that David has to feel about things the same way you do, especially considering he lived in a very different and more brutal age. For that matter, even if it was God, at no time should we ever be so arrogant to ...


1

If memory serves, in just about every part of the ancient world, a woman who had previously been married to a king (either in full, with the status of wife, or de facto in the lesser status of concubine) could not be remarried to anyone except another king. Remember also that legal rights of a woman were reckoned through her husband, and that divorced women ...


1

Heb 11.13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. We err if we presume that the NT authors gave us ...


1

Sorry to come in late here, but I don't see the ancient Jewish sources cited in any of the answers. There are two issues here: (1) who instigated David to conduct a census and (2) was the sin that David had a census taken, or the way he had it done? First, let's look at the verse in 2 Samuel 24. Translations differ on a key point -- who was it that ...


1

David's dead 7-day old baby was immediately taken into Paradise-- Abraham's bosom (see Luke 19)since the child was not at the age of accountability, not being able to discern right from wrong. God took this baby right into Paradise since the baby was unable to either accept or reject God. However, Absalom, his adult son, most likely rejected the God of his ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible