- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
09 Feb 22
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIt’s not that God couldn’t do it, it’s that He wouldn’t do it because of Israel’s disobedience.
@PB1022
Okay, you struggled with the whole slaves in Egypt thing, so let's try a simple contradiction in scripture. We are told in Matthew 19:26 that, "… with God all things are possible” (which one would expect from an omnipotent deity) and yet in Judges 1:19 we read:
"And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not ...[text shortened]... of iron."
How can this be? If all things are possible for God, why was thwarted by iron chariots?
He says so in the next chapter:
“And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land; ye shall throw down their altars: but ye have not obeyed my voice: why have ye done this?
Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you; but they shall be as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare unto you.”
(Judges 2:1-3)
Also, the “he” in Judges 1:19 refers to Judah, not God.
Look at other translations. As one example, here’s the NIV.
“The LORD was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had chariots fitted with iron.”
(Judges 1:19)
<<2. The "he" in Judges 1:19 is Judah, not God. It was Judah who wasn't able to drive out the inhabitants, not God. Modern translations make that clear. Anyone who has read the Bible knows that tribes and people groups were sometimes spoken of as if they were one person. Even being called "he," "him," or "his" (etc.). That's because the progenitor or leader of a group both represents the group, along with the group being associated with the progenitor or leader.>>
https://bibledifficultiesanswered.blogspot.com/2014/09/can-god-stop-iron-chariots.html?m=1
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
09 Feb 22
@pb1022 saidEven for God to move?!
Iron’s pretty heavy, Ghosty. Have you ever tried to move a chariot of iron?
It ain’t easy!
Blimey. As Hulk would say, "Weak God."
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
09 Feb 22
@pb1022 said"And the Lord was with Judah."
It’s not that God couldn’t do it, it’s that He wouldn’t do it because of Israel’s disobedience.
He says so in the next chapter:
“And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
And ye shall make no ...[text shortened]... der.>>
https://bibledifficultiesanswered.blogspot.com/2014/09/can-god-stop-iron-chariots.html?m=1
- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
09 Feb 22
@ghost-of-a-duke saidApparently my attempt at humor flew over your head at the height of a 747.
Even for God to move?!
Blimey. As Hulk would say, "Weak God."
- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
09 Feb 22
@ghost-of-a-duke saidRight. And Judah had many successful battles that day. Look at the previous verses:
"And the Lord was with Judah."
“And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah.
Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof.
And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.”
(Judges 1:17-19)
God explained in the next chapter why He didn’t enable them to drive out the inhabitants of the valley.
10 Feb 22
@kellyjay said
Bump for Dive
@kellyjay said
They either reflect it as it was first written or not. I don’t get to twist a meaning into a personal preference as some like to do, due to the harshness of the meaning
Thanks. Yes I did see this one.
The question is; HOW do you know they (the translations you prefer) “either reflect it as it was written or not”?
10 Feb 22
@divegeester saidThe study, looking at all the material I can get my hands on from those that do commentary, other translations, teachers, I'm not interested in a preferred translation; I want to the one that reflects the original. Preferred inserts me into the text instead of getting something out of it.@kellyjay said
They either reflect it as it was first written or not. I don’t get to twist a meaning into a personal preference as some like to do, due to the harshness of the meaning
Thanks. Yes I did see this one.
The question is; HOW do you know they (the translations you prefer) “either reflect it as it was written or not”?
10 Feb 22
3 edits
@kellyjay saidOk let me see if I can word this in such a way that you can’t sidestep my point, it’s my bad, not you….
The study, looking at all the material I can get my hands on from those that do commentary, other translations, teachers, I'm not interested in a preferred translation; I want to the one that reflects the original. Preferred inserts me into the text instead of getting something out of it.
You have claimed that some translations of the Bible are better than others, right. Now what I m trying to get at is which criteria you use to make that differentiation.
You’ve replied “study” I.e. you are telling me you have studied all these translations and peripheral commentaries, teachers on them etc. a mission to find the one which reflects the original. Which “one” is that, which translation reflects the “original”…Hebrew the best?
Leaving aside my incredulousness at this assertion of your academic abilities for the moment… I still don’t know what specific criteria, what biblical assessment framework you have used to come to an opinion that some translations are better than others. Which is what you claimed a few pages ago.
Here is my approach, in contrast your claim about how you form your opinion on translations… I like the translations which support my already developed view of doctrine and my personal opinion of what the scriptures mean.
So would you care to expand on your translation assessment criteria please?
- Joined
- 25 Nov 21
- Moves
- 1990
10 Feb 22
@divegeester saidI think you’re assuming the various translations of the Holy Bible are radically different when they’re not.
Ok let me see if I can word this in such a way that you can’t sidestep my point, it’s my bad, not you….
You have claimed that some translations of the Bible are better than others, right. Now what I m trying to get at is which criteria you use to make that differentiation.
You’ve replied “study” I.e. you are telling me you have studied all these translations and pe ...[text shortened]... he scriptures mean.
So would you care to expand on your translation assessment criteria please?
My suggestion to you (and everyone) is check the translation in Isaiah 7:14 - if the English translation says “young virgin or virgin,” the translation is accurate and a good translation.
If it says, “young woman” it’s not accurate and it’s not a good translation.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
10 Feb 22
@pb1022 saidNo. God was with Judah at the battle in question and the reason given for their failure was: BECAUSE they had chariots of iron.
Right. And Judah had many successful battles that day. Look at the previous verses:
“And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they slew the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah.
Also Judah took Gaza with the coast thereof, and Askelon with the coast thereof, and Ekron with the coast thereof.
And the ...[text shortened]... explained in the next chapter why He didn’t enable them to drive out the inhabitants of the valley.
This is a contradiction to the biblical assertion that nothing is impossible for God.
10 Feb 22
@pb1022 saidNo, im not assuming that at all.
I think you’re assuming the various translations of the Holy Bible are radically different when they’re not.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
10 Feb 22
@PB1022
Next contradiction:
"We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him." 1 John 5:18
"For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."
Ecclesiastes 7:20
How can both be true?