The Masoretes did not work with the Greek manuscripts as far as I know. They worked exclusively with the Hebrew manuscripts. The Vulgate is not a manuscript but a translation of manuscripts. Could you show me an example of the Masoretes adding punctuation to a Greek manuscript? My memory is not what it use to be but I just can't see the Masoretes working with any manuscripts other than the Hebrew manuscripts.
Is it possible to lose salvation?
- Thread starter LoveYeshua
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Once again, all accepted definitions of Adelphos include fellow country men or fellow believers, so it isno surprise you see it used many times of non biological relations. I knew that long before you tried to pretend to educate me.
If you are trying to prove adelphos can mean more than just biological siblings, I knew that decades ago. If you aretrying to prove that in the context of Luke when Mary and Jesus are referred to and then Jesus half brothers and sisters are mere cousins or whatever, you have failed to indoctrinate me with the Romanist belief I toseed decades ago. context proves you wrong!
And as I showed you from Koine Greek experts, when the Septuigant was written they did not have the word syngenes or synopsis in Koine Greek yet so they used the best term they could find in ?Greek to translate from teh Hebrew. sorry yo love denying the facts.
Yes and who were these Adelphoi? It couldn't mean fellow Jews or fellow believers because after the crowds told Jesus HIs family was outside, this is what jesus said:
Matthew 12:47-50
King James Version
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Couldn't be fellow Jews for the whole crowd was Jews.
Couldn't be a few believers, cuz many in the crowd were already followers of Jesus
If they meant cousins, they would have used the commonly accepted word- syngenes, or synopsis.
Whenj I lose I do accept my defeat like a man, but you should take your own advice. Context dear child, context!
Not all, but some, who had fled the romanist teaching and still held to many of their dark doctrines. Besides why would you even want to quote peole who were declared "anathema" by your roman ist church and pope?
I expect it would not make sense to you . You have been thouroughly indoctrinated in the Romanist reintperpretation and allegorical musings of the Scriptures. but the Greek grammar puts a spike in the heart of your false teaching.
I provided the evidence, you provided vague implications and crafty interpetations.
But Mary is called the New Eve, She is also called the Ark of the New covenant, and she is also called the eastern gate because from her vagina came Jesus.
So that makes Her the last Adams wife, though she isn't.
Tha tmakes her the spiritual temple for her vagina is the eastern gate which is part of the temple.
That makes her the third ark.
She also is called Queen of Heaven though she is not married to the King of Kings nor is she married to God the Father the King over all!
All these are promulgated by inference vague comparisons that are tenuous at best! You would think that god in all His omniscience, who made perfectly plain the character and nature of Jesus, would have done the same for Mary seeing she holds such an enormous lofty place in romanist teaching! But no! Instead we have to paste and cut all her supposed magnificence through vague ness, implication and shake inferences.
Now you are showing your stupidity like you did with your example of Michal. did you toss out your ability to think when you asdopted Romanism?
We are called to pray for others so I do! but no where is it even hinted at we should go to people whose bodies are in the ground and their souls and spirits in heaven and pray to them to intercede for us!
Sorry moldy bread. But Jesus was preached long before the Catholic (big C) church was even a thought. and if romanism never existed the gospel still would have gone out. You think too much like a man and not a believer.
Remember your romanist church condemned those who dared read the bible without a priest interpreting it for them and made anathema anyone reading the bible in their common language!
Why Christians Were Denied Access To Their Bible For 1,000 Years
Wouldn't you assume that the newly established Church would want its devotees to immerse themselves in the sanctioned New Testament, especially since the Church went to great lengths to eliminate competing Gospels?
Your romanist church tried to suppress the good news for individuals so they could keep their money making schemes going full tilt!
Sacramentals, indulgences, penances etc.
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 22,505
- 3,785
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Then WHY do you keep whining and vomiting out blatant LIES, like the following from post #3514:
“But as the times of Jesus did not rely on AI, adelphos was ALWAYS familial brethren genetically. “
NOT according to what YOU said above . . .
If you aretrying to prove that in the context of Luke when Mary and Jesus are referred to and then Jesus half brothers and sisters are mere cousins or whatever, you have failed to indoctrinate me with the Romanist belief I toseed decades ago. context proves you wrong!
And as I showed you from Koine Greek experts, when the Septuigant was written they did not have the word syngenes or synopsis in Koine Greek yet so they used the best term they could find in ?Greek to translate from teh Hebrew. sorry yo love denying the facts.
Yes and who were these Adelphoi? It couldn't mean fellow Jews or fellow believers because after the crowds told Jesus HIs family was outside, this is what jesus said:
Matthew 12:47-50
King James Version
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
Couldn't be fellow Jews for the whole crowd was Jews.
Couldn't be a few believers, cuz many in the crowd were already followers of Jesus
If they meant cousins, they would have used the commonly accepted word- syngenes, or synopsis.
Whenj I lose I do accept my defeat like a man, but you should take your own advice. Context dear child, context!
Not all, but some, who had fled the romanist teaching and still held to many of their dark doctrines. Besides why would you even want to quote peole who were declared "anathema" by your roman ist church and pope?
I expect it would not make sense to you . You have been thouroughly indoctrinated in the Romanist reintperpretation and allegorical musings of the Scriptures. but the Greek grammar puts a spike in the heart of your false teaching.
I provided the evidence, you provided vague implications and crafty interpetations.
But Mary is called the New Eve, She is also called the Ark of the New covenant, and she is also called the eastern gate because from her vagina came Jesus.
So that makes Her the last Adams wife, though she isn't.
Tha tmakes her the spiritual temple for her vagina is the eastern gate which is part of the temple.
That makes her the third ark.
She also is called Queen of Heaven though she is not married to the King of Kings nor is she married to God the Father the King over all!
All these are promulgated by inference vague comparisons that are tenuous at best! You would think that god in all His omniscience, who made perfectly plain the character and nature of Jesus, would have done the same for Mary seeing she holds such an enormous lofty place in romanist teaching! But no! Instead we have to paste and cut all her supposed magnificence through vague ness, implication and shake inferences.
Now you are showing your stupidity like you did with your example of Michal. did you toss out your ability to think when you asdopted Romanism?
We are called to pray for others so I do! but no where is it even hinted at we should go to people whose bodies are in the ground and their souls and spirits in heaven and pray to them to intercede for us!
Sorry moldy bread. But Jesus was preached long before the Catholic (big C) church was even a thought. and if romanism never existed the gospel still would have gone out. You think too much like a man and not a believer.
Remember your romanist church condemned those who dared read the bible without a priest interpreting it for them and made anathema anyone reading the bible in their common language!
Why Christians Were Denied Access To Their Bible For 1,000 Years
Wouldn't you assume that the newly established Church would want its devotees to immerse themselves in the sanctioned New Testament, especially since the Church went to great lengths to eliminate competing Gospels?www.huffpost.com
Your romanist church tried to suppress the good news for individuals so they could keep their money making schemes going full tilt!
Sacramentals, indulgences, penances etc.
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 22,505
- 3,785
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Then WHY do you keep whining and vomiting out blatant LIES, like the following from post #3514:
“But as the times of Jesus did not rely on AI, adelphos was ALWAYS familial brethren genetically. “
NOT according to what YOU said above
No – pit was a unanimous belief among the Rebels.
Protestantism is “disposable”. MANY of the beliefs of the original Rebels were discarded or added onto over the last 500 years. That’s why there are tens of thousand of different sects – ALL teaching different doctrines and ALL claiming that they were led to this confusion by the Holy Spirit.
Your Protestant Fathers wouldn’t recognize ANY of you . . .
Last edited:
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 22,505
- 3,785
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
continued . . .
I’ve already given you multiple verses from the Septuagint that use “Adelphos” in places for “Cousins” and “Uncle “
Show me another story where something is introduced, then abandoned ion the next sentence.
As I instructed you before – Rev. 11:19 introduces the subject of Rev. 12:1.
Matt. 2L29
"For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven".
However, as a member of His Church – Mary is married to the King of Kings, as we are the Bride of Christ.
Other vague references they mock are: Moses/ Jesus, Paschal Lamb/ Jesus, David/Jesus, Jesus/Melchizedek and others . . .
Rev. 5:8 explicitly shows the Elders in Heaven taking our prayers to God.
This is the very definition of “Intercession”, Einstein.
WHEN did the Catholic Church originate?
The NT was written by Catholics, compiled by the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church declared the Canon of Scripture under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Time for a History Lesson . . .
The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified – ALL 73 (not 66) Books.
- 11 years after that, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
- 4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.
The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.
Time for another History Lesson . . .
The Council of Toulouse dealt with the Albigensian heresy, a sect that believed that marriage is evil because the flesh is evil. They produced twisted vernacular versions of the Bible to “prove” their bizarre doctrines. Consequently, the bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible so as to quell this and further heresies.
This action had NOTHING to do with people reading the Bible, because almost NOBODY owned a Bible in the 12th and 13th centuries. It’s blindingly apparent that you don’t know your history, so allow me to educate you . . .
You see – the printing press wasn’t invented until the 15th century. Before that – ALL books were HAND-COPIED. They took years to print and were very expensive to produce, as a result.
Probably best if you took some time off and studied your History before you go on making asinine comments and accusations.
I’m embarrassed for you . . .
They could have been cousins, relatives, kinsmen, etc. Relatives of ANY kind are also “Adelphoi”
And I never even implied that they were anything but relatives.
WRONG.
I’ve already given you multiple verses from the Septuagint that use “Adelphos” in places for “Cousins” and “Uncle “
You never will because you never HAVE . . .
I was making the point that the men YOU all followed ALL believed in Mary’s Perpetual Virginity.
No - it ‘doesn’t make sense, period.
Show me another story where something is introduced, then abandoned ion the next sentence.
As I instructed you before – Rev. 11:19 introduces the subject of Rev. 12:1.
Perhaps if you actually read your Bible, you would know that Jesus explicitly states:
Matt. 2L29
"For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven".
However, as a member of His Church – Mary is married to the King of Kings, as we are the Bride of Christ.
What NON-believers refer to as “vague comparisons” are known as prophetic fulfillments by us Christians.
Other vague references they mock are: Moses/ Jesus, Paschal Lamb/ Jesus, David/Jesus, Jesus/Melchizedek and others . . .
Why?? Can you show me where the Bible says that they were kicked-OUT of the Body of Christ??
Rev. 5:8 explicitly shows the Elders in Heaven taking our prayers to God.
This is the very definition of “Intercession”, Einstein.
So, enlighten us, Einstein.
WHEN did the Catholic Church originate?
Let’s see . . .
The NT was written by Catholics, compiled by the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church declared the Canon of Scripture under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Time for a History Lesson . . .
The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified – ALL 73 (not 66) Books.
- 11 years after that, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
- 4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.
The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.
This is one of my FAVORITE Protestant LIES.Remember your romanist church condemned those who dared read the bible without a priest interpreting it for them and made anathema anyone reading the bible in their common language!
Why Christians Were Denied Access To Their Bible For 1,000 Years
Wouldn't you assume that the newly established Church would want its devotees to immerse themselves in the sanctioned New Testament, especially since the Church went to great lengths to eliminate competing Gospels?
Your romanist church tried to suppress the good news for individuals so they could keep their money making schemes going full tilt!
Sacramentals, indulgences, penances etc.
Time for another History Lesson . . .
The Council of Toulouse dealt with the Albigensian heresy, a sect that believed that marriage is evil because the flesh is evil. They produced twisted vernacular versions of the Bible to “prove” their bizarre doctrines. Consequently, the bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible so as to quell this and further heresies.
This action had NOTHING to do with people reading the Bible, because almost NOBODY owned a Bible in the 12th and 13th centuries. It’s blindingly apparent that you don’t know your history, so allow me to educate you . . .
You see – the printing press wasn’t invented until the 15th century. Before that – ALL books were HAND-COPIED. They took years to print and were very expensive to produce, as a result.
Probably best if you took some time off and studied your History before you go on making asinine comments and accusations.
I’m embarrassed for you . . .
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Well as I showed you the complete definition from Koine Greek scholars, I will just assume you are lying again about me or do not carefully read all my posts and simply cherry pick.. Iam not going to rewrite definitions multiple times to keep you from misquoting my responses.
See my answer just above.
Well as neither you nor I nor the romanist church has all teh writings of the reormers, you are just bloviating.
The reason being that doctrine underwent change is simple.
Most of the reformers were refugees from Romanism and had held to many of the false teachings of Romanism. As time went on and they wewre able to focus more on Scripture and less on Scripture guided by the Roman indoctrination, of course doctrine became clearer and clearer.
I could care less if Luther or SAwingli or Calvin or the Wesley boys would recognize me. I amnot hear to lease them nor any pope.
Not at all in teh New Testament! by the time the NT was written they had a widely used terms for near kinsmen- syngenes or synpsis.
In the OT as those words were not available in koine the 70 used the best word available to them and that was adelphos (oi)
That is history as wrtitten and occured not rewritten to satisfy the false teachings Romanism has about Mary!
So you and I are just as much a bride as Mary which makes us just as much Queen of heaven! Queens are married to their kings!
Well as the ones you quoted and the book "Behold your MOther" (a Catholic scholar), none of trhe passages are prophecies but actual realities and types. And it is only Romanists that hold to these false analogies. The rest of christians do not.
You must be reading between th elines again. But even in Catholic bibles- in between the lines is empty space!
There is nothing in that passage that says they present the prayers to God. they do not repeat prayers. Incense is used as an odour before god. I remember the frankincense used on the sensures. Only you could pretend this means they take the prayers and repray them on behalf of others. That is definition.
If you are referring to teh small c catholic (universal) church, tht began at Pentecost. If you are referring to teh BigC Catholic Church, that particular sect was conceived under Constantine and though scholars disagree on the sate, the big C Catholic sect was born afterwards.
Lying again ! The Apocryphal and Deuterocanonical books were not formally canonized until April 8 1546 at teh council of Trent! Before that they werre apocryphal (hidden) and considered pseudopigraph (other wrwitings) but not formally canonized.
The NT was written by Christians, not big C catholics, it wasc omiled by the little c catholic church and declared canon by the little c catholic church. Small c catholic is all believers. Big C Catholic describe the 22 sects called Catholic that recognize the pope as the visible head of the church.
No right! As I educated you, the the 70 when they wrote teh Koine OT, syngenes and synpsis were not available in teh language. So they chose the best available Greek wword to describe kinfolk. but the language evolved as all languages and they seperated out biological family from near kinfolk with differing words! You rdeceptive ploy still has no merit in the NT!
you should be more embarrassed for your self.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=5719...yOGM5ZDQwZGQ0MWJjODE3YzAyODNiZWFmY2VkMg&ntb=1
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=8e3d...yOGM5ZDQwZGQ0MWJjODE3YzAyODNiZWFmY2VkMg&ntb=1
Did the Catholic Church Forbid Reading the Bible in Common Languages
The Catholic Church did not actively forbid the reading of the Bible in common languages. Instead, it sought to maintain control over religious teachings and practices by restricting access to the Bible in Latin, the language of the clergy and the educated elite. This was done to ensure that interpretations and explanations of the scripture were overseen by trained theologians and clergy members who could provide the "correct" understanding of the text. The Church's prohibition of Bible translations into local languages was influenced by the fear of heresy and misinterpretation, as well as the political and social power dynamics of the time.
It was all a power play under th guise of protecting people. The Bishops and clergy were much like the pharisees of Jesus day. Forbidding the lay folk from personal study. Just like the romanists, they believed only the "elite" had the power to interpret.
The Big C catholic church like the Watchtower believe that teh clergy is the only ones who can truly understand teh Word of God (through Ecclesiastical Authority) and the flocks had to blindly obey.
According to teh Romanists I am damned forever due to the anathemas pronounced at teh Council of Trent! I am glad jesus is far more merciful than romanism
The "Romanist" slur is uncharitable (and tragically misguided). It's a shame you insist on it.
That aside, perhaps I missed it, but what is your response to John's use of "adelphe" in John 19:25 to refer to another Mary as Mary's "sister" - which, unless you believe Mary's parents were precursors to George Foreman (giving all their kids the same name), was not a biological sister of Mary the mother of Jesus?
Filtering out the ad nominem and other mudslinging--
First, Tobit 7:2-4 in the LXX uses "cousin" and "brother" as synonyms in reference to the same person, mere sentences apart. Whence this idea that they didn't have a word for "cousin"? (And note that these words were used synonymously there; hardly the clear-cut semantic distinction you seem to insist that these terms had in Koine usage)
Second, where did you get the idea that Constantine created the so-called Capital "C" Catholic Church? To stick with just the one doctrinal point at hand, the idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary (outside of Scripture itself of course) is a clearly identifiable Christian belief in writings we still have from the first half of the second century. Did Constantine go back in time about two centuries to corrupt the immediate post-apostolic period? Attributing Catholicism to Constantine is ahistorical polemic (contrived by Boettner and the like), unmoored from the historical record.
Third, your point about the canon is misleading at best, related to a point you had no answer to when I brought this subject up earlier in this thread. Yes, there was no dogmatically established canon until Trent. But it took until that long only because, in a nutshell, for the entire period from the informal settlement of the canon in the 380s until the Protestant Reformation, there was no meaningful challenge to the canonicity of the Greek old testament books (what Protestants later excised from their bibles). Look at the decree from the Council of Rome (382)--I believe the first identifiable instance of a body of the church itself identifying the full canon as canon--and see for yourself. There, in black and white, in the list of the "divine Scriptures" (i.e. the canon list), are those very books.
This ignores the point - which "Scripture," and who decided that for you, since the Bible does not contain an inspired table of contents? You have to resort to some extrinsic authority to decide what is "Scripture" and what is not. Hence the point - Sola Scriptura is a logical contradiction.
Far be it from me to lecture on tone, and it seems like you and Ronald Nolette have a long history, but brother to brother, just asking - lets try to let the truth, goodness, and beauty of the "faith once delivered" and preserved by our "one holy catholic and apostolic church" do all the work here, and not take the mudslinging bait!
This seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle about the immaculate conception, and sorry if I missed it, but what is the response to kecharitomene? Greek Fathers (native Koine speakers) read these words and recognized their significance. Did you get a response here that deals with this text and that historical understanding head on?
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Well if one follows Roman Catholic teaching they are a Romanist. If you feel it a slur, maybe you should get a little thicker sin.
and the John 19 passage:
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
There are four people mentioned here. Mary, Mary's sister Salome, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdeline. I am always amazed that way way too many people who name the name of Jesus, toss out the simple rules of grammar to try to defend an undefensible hypothesis.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
And as I told Bread of Life over and over again, when the OT books were translated from Hebrew to Greek or written in Greek, the terms for near relatives (syngenes and synpsis) were not in Koine Greek, they came later. So the 70 used the best word available at the time which was adelphos or adelphi! For the NT it was vastly different for even Elizabeth was referred to as Mary's cousin in Luke 1:26 and in Luke 1:58 cousins is used and it is syngenes!
Sorry but those are the simple facts and they cannot be altered!
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 22,505
- 3,785
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
I usually do approach posters in a less-rigid way - untill the start with the lies and anti-Cahtolic slurs.
It's uaually at this pont that they need to be taken out to the proverbial woodshed and straighted out . . .
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 22,505
- 3,785
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
No, I don't think I ever got a respnse to "Kecharitomene".
That is usually a conversation-ender with anti-Cathoolics.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Not at all.
God used men to write, but the words are His. He used men to choose the books, but the choice was still His!
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Timothy 3:15
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Psalm 119:105
Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
From maans perspective it seems hard, but when one learns to walk with god, it is easy to see!
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
If you are talking about teh apocrypha and deuterocanonical books, they were an insert between teh testaments for a long time and known as the pseudopigrapha or other writings
Here are some miscellaneous notes from the OT class i took in college
1 Chron 20.5 (correct reading)
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.
Lets put the two words together to see the error in our Bibles.
2 Samuel 21.19 (incorrect translation)
19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
text
Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite killed Goliath... (notice what this says, "Elhanan killed Goliath...") This is where the contradiction is, we all know that David killed Goliath.
No Hebrew manuscript of this verse has the correct original words, manuscripts for 1 Chron say Elhanan killed Goliath... (All Hebrew manuscripts contradict each other in 2 Sam 21.19 vs 1 Chron 20.5). This is a clear contradiction, but notice no Hebrew Scribe tried to correct the contradiction. That is because no scribe who ever alter the word of God.
The KJV just adds some words to the Bible and voila the contradiction disappears.
Look at the Hebrew texts that have two different words: אֲחִי versus אֶת־
These words are ALMOST the same, look close and see the chart below.
Fortunately, we have 1 Chronicles 20:5, which contains the correct Hebrew wording and informs us, through implication, that 2 Samuel 21:19 is missing the words the brother of. We can be confident that David killed Goliath. Elhanan later killed Goliath’s brother.
To conclude: the 2 Samuel passage is an entirely traceable error on the part of the copyist in the original wording, which has been preserved in 1 Chronicles 20:5. David killed Goliath.
The ͗ēṯ of 2 Samuel 21:19 is paralleled by ͗ăḥî ‘brother of’ in Chronicles. Visually, both words look very similar in Hebrew (את vs. אחי), even though they have very different meanings.
if you see any errors in my notes, please let me know
1 Chron 20.5 (correct reading)
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.
Lets put the two words together to see the error in our Bibles.
2 Samuel 21.19 (incorrect translation)
19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
text
Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite killed Goliath... (notice what this says, "Elhanan killed Goliath...") This is where the contradiction is, we all know that David killed Goliath.
No Hebrew manuscript of this verse has the correct original words, manuscripts for 1 Chron say Elhanan killed Goliath... (All Hebrew manuscripts contradict each other in 2 Sam 21.19 vs 1 Chron 20.5). This is a clear contradiction, but notice no Hebrew Scribe tried to correct the contradiction. That is because no scribe who ever alter the word of God.
The KJV just adds some words to the Bible and voila the contradiction disappears.
Look at the Hebrew texts that have two different words: אֲחִי versus אֶת־
These words are ALMOST the same, look close and see the chart below.
Fortunately, we have 1 Chronicles 20:5, which contains the correct Hebrew wording and informs us, through implication, that 2 Samuel 21:19 is missing the words the brother of. We can be confident that David killed Goliath. Elhanan later killed Goliath’s brother.
To conclude: the 2 Samuel passage is an entirely traceable error on the part of the copyist in the original wording, which has been preserved in 1 Chronicles 20:5. David killed Goliath.
The ͗ēṯ of 2 Samuel 21:19 is paralleled by ͗ăḥî ‘brother of’ in Chronicles. Visually, both words look very similar in Hebrew (את vs. אחי), even though they have very different meanings.
if you see any errors in my notes, please let me know
That's sounds pretty but it doesn't really say anything does it? I've noticed over the years when I cite clear biblical text to people they often times feel compelled not tell me the text means something different than what is clearly written. Whenever that happens I wonder why it needs to. If I read, "The pencil is red" but someone tells me that it really means pink, what am I getting there? Truth or someone's opinion?
Similar threads
