Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

11

There have been several proposed reconciliations of the Matthew and Luke genealogies. Among the popular ones are: Matthew's genealogy traces legal heirs; Luke's traces biological ancestors. Matthew's genealogy traces the ancestry of Joseph; Luke's traces the ancestry of Mary. This view takes the phrase "as was supposed of Joseph" in 3:23 as a parenthetical ...


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, ...


10

Jesus is quoting a version of Psalm 8 that corresponds to the Septuagint (Greek translation), which does contain significant variations from the Masoretic (Hebrew version). The Masoretic is used for most versions of the Christian Old Testament in English. The Septuagint was completed roughly two centuries before Jesus did his teaching. Psalm 8.31 εκ ...


9

David, in convincing Saul why he should be allowed to be Israel's representative on the battlefield says, "Your servant has struck down both lions and bears, and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be like one of them, for he has defied the armies of the living God." And to Goliath he says, You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a ...


9

According to the Talmud, certain things specifically associated with the king’s person (his horse, e.g.) are forbidden ever to be used by a commoner. Specifically, the widow of a king is forbidden to marry anyone but another king. And if the next king is his son, she can’t marry him either—the laws in Leviticus still apply. Avishag was not married to David, ...


9

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 ...


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. ...


9

Idols were commonplace in David's time, perhaps his wife Michal went out and purchased one to help cover up his escape. Another possibility is that other residents in his household worshiped the idols and David never expressly forbade idols from his household, thus Michal may have borrowed or moved an idol from elsewhere in the house.


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 ...


8

It is important to remember that the "historical books" of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings are better called "the earlier prophets." They teach from the prophetic point of view, not simply chronological events. From Hard Sayings of the Bible. It is more important to group things by importance than it is to lay it out chronologically. 17:55–58 Why ...


8

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 ...


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

hekal(הֵיכָל) means 'palace' or 'temple'. It is used to refer to the Solomon's Temple but also (for example) the house at Shiloh in David's time, here in 1 Samuel 1:9 After they had eaten and drunk in Shiloh, Hannah rose. Now Eli the priest was sitting on the seat beside the doorpost of the temple of the Lord. ESV Among other usages, it can also refer ...


6

David attacks the Geshurites, the Gezerites and the Amelikites, all traditional enemies of Judah and Israel and potential allies of Achish to the southwest. He left no one alive so that no prisoners would tell Achish who David was really attacking, that's the trick. When asked, David says that he attacked to the south (actually southwest) of Judah, south of ...


6

Here is a list of possible answers: The author has to integrate a lot of oral tradition from opposing sides in what was in fact a civil war; northern anti-monarchy tribal federalists backed by some heavy hitting prophets, pro-monarchy Kish clan proponents, and pro-monarchy Ishai clan proponents. No one comes out of I Samuel smelling like roses. The author ...


6

A supplement to Mark Edward's answer: Though "strength" and "praise" are two very different words, the "strength" in Ps 8 in the Hebrew text comes from "mouths", and the psalm is about praising God. It is not a stretch to think that the psalm talks about praise from the infants' mouths. Moreover, the New Testament seldom quotes the Old Testament word for ...


5

At the outset 1 Kings, King David is near death and he hasn't explicitly chosen a successor. David's first three children, Amnon, Absalom, and the unnamed child from II Samuel 12 are dead, so Adonijah is next in line for the throne. Adonijah thinks he will be king and he has an entourage, but he doesn't have the support of the whole nation (1 Kings 1:5-10). ...


5

The portrayal of David in the books of Samuel and Kings is ambivalent. In the current idiom we might say "conflicted". There is much positive material, but also a vast amount of negative material. The ambivalence is consistent throughout the narrative, almost from David's first appearance. This last picture we get of David epitomizes the ambivalence, and it ...


5

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

All Psalms are poetry, which demands a different set of rules than we normally use for hermeneutics. Most of the Psalms attributed to David are additionally prayers to God. (We see an example of how a psalm was used in prayer during that time period in 1st Samuel 2:1-11.) Psalms appeal to emotion as well as reason. So we need to use somewhat specialized ...


4

I think this question must be broken down in two: Why did Jonathan and David make up this plan? Why did the author of the book include this detail in the narrative? The first question has never really bothered me, thus this answer is not the result of extensive study, nor have I consulted any commentaries. I have always envisioned that they made the plan ...


4

I would identify at least two purposes: The author shows that in all of David's endeavors leading up to his becoming king, he attempted to avoid bloodshed, particularly with the house of Saul. His enemies were not his kinsmen; but his enemies were those who attacked his kinsmen (i.e. the Philistines and the Amalekites). David uses trickery to avoid ...


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 ...


3

Shlomo ("Solomon"), the son of David, continued to go whoring after gods other than YHVH (1 Kings 11:1-10). This was exacerbated by his numerous foreign wives of whom God warned Shlomo that they would cause him to go astray and commit idolatry. Consequently, YHVH told Shlomo that he would rend the kingdom from him, except that He would leave one tribe (the ...


3

No, David is not The Godfather - at least not in the Don Corleone sense of a family head establishing his dynasty through corruption and murder. A dynasty is established - the chapter indeed concludes: "The kingdom was now firmly established in Solomon's hands." But the previous commands of David are introduced to explain that Solomon's rise to power is not ...


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 ...


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

The simple answer is yes to your question, they are the same. Nebuchadnezzar attacked Jerusalem 3 times and he took captives when he did so. God also promised to keep the captives safe and prosper them. This is Nebuchadnezzar the second who reigned from 605 BC – 562 BC, while Nebuchadnezzar the first reigned from 1126–1103 BC. So there isn't a son with the ...


3

They are certainly referring to the same individual. The name is the same Briefly addressing this point. The name for 'Nebuchadnezzar' is spelled a variety of ways in Hebrew, sometimes ending with 'rezzar', but even within the book of Jeremiah we find alternate spellings: -rezzar נבוכדראצור: Jeremiah (1) נבוכדראצר: Jeremiah (28), and Ezekiel (4) ...



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