Comments
A cursory view of any commentaries you have will reveal some interesting items you may wish to spend more time studying. One, the UBS Handbook, states, “This verse [verse 50], which is a kind of summary statement, is missing in the Septuagint. MFT and NAB place the entire verse within square brackets, indicating that the translators regard the verse to be a later addition to the Hebrew text.
Omanson, R. L., & Ellington, J. (2001). A handbook on the first book of Samuel. UBS Handbook Series (380). New York: United Bible Societies.
Logos Series X Pastor’s Library | Logos 3 Leader’s Library | 4 Portfolio | 5 Platinum | 6 Feature Crossgrade | 7 Essential | 8 M & W Platinum and Academic Professional | 9 Academic Professional and Messianic Jewish Diamond
A cursory view of any commentaries you have will reveal some interesting items you may wish to spend more time studying. One, the UBS Handbook, states, “This verse [verse 50], which is a kind of summary statement, is missing in the Septuagint. MFT and NAB place the entire verse within square brackets, indicating that the translators regard the verse to be a later addition to the Hebrew text.
Omanson, R. L., & Ellington, J. (2001). A handbook on the first book of Samuel. UBS Handbook Series (380). New York: United Bible Societies.
Nonsense. They just don't know what to do with it.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
1Sam 17:49-50 states David killed the giant with the single stone. How then are we to understand vs 51 that says he slew him by cutting off his head.
How are we to understand this - especially vs 51.
What translation are you reading that says he slew him by cutting off his head? It might be helpful to look at that verse in different translations. Here are a few that might shed some light on how we can understand v. 51:
CEB: Then David ran and stood over the Philistine. He grabbed the Philistine’s sword, drew it from its sheath, and finished him off. Then David cut off the Philistine’s head with the sword. When the Philistines saw that their hero was dead, they fled.
GW: David ran and stood over the Philistine. He took Goliath’s sword, pulled it out of its sheath, and made certain the Philistine was dead by cutting off his head. When the Philistines saw their hero had been killed, they fled.
The Message: Then David ran up to the Philistine and stood over him, pulled the giant’s sword from its sheath, and finished the job by cutting off his head. When the Philistines saw that their great champion was dead, they scattered, running for their lives.
I'm reading from the KJV - which states, " ...took his sword and drew it out of the sheath thereof, and slew (killed) him and cut off his head" ... but again, if you notice vs 50, it is said, "So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote (kill) hi: but there was no sword in the hand of David" ... which seems to say that the giant was actually killed without a sword.
So could that suggest that vs 51 is simply saying in the words "slew him and cut off his head" that he simply was beheaded, the word *slew* meaning just that. Your furthered thoughts are going to be appreciated I'm sure. Thanks!
Here's a perfect application for the Exegetical Guide. Run it on 1 Sam 17:51.
Many different lexicons provide insight into that word which KJV translates slew. Not sure which of these you have in your Library:
HALOT gives the definition "make a full end of" particularly for that verse:
So, apparently the word "slew" in verse 50 left Goliath in the Monty Pythonesque "I'm not dead yet" state.
I may have a different approach to interpreting scripture to you, but I'll try to help.
Can I suggest that neither the author of 1 Samuel nor David knew at exactly which moment Goliath died? No post-mortem examination was performed, and their understanding of function and dysfunction of the brain was very limited.
Even today I, as a doctor, would find it very difficult to say exactly when someone with the type of brain injury likely to have been caused by David's stone died. Determining time of death after decapitation with a sword is a little easier.
This is my guess (and it is no more than that): Gigantism is caused by a growth-hormone-secreting tumour in the pituitary gland, situated just underneath the brain. If it is a large tumour (which it isn't always), it can press on another structure underneath the brain, the optic chiasm. This is where some of the nerve fibres coming from the eyes cross over the midline to be processed in the opposite side of the brain. The result of damage to the optic chiasm is bitemporal hemianopia: inability to see the outer parts (to the left and right) of the field of vision, with preservation of central vision.
This visual field field defect would make Goliath vulnerable to stones coming at him from the side. Assuming that David was right handed, his best approach would have been to aim his stone at Goliath's left temple (which is included in the meaning of the Hebrew word usually translated forehead). Not only is this the thinnest part of the skull, but just inside is the middle meningeal artery and its branches, making serious bleeding inside the skull (an extradural haematoma) quite likely. Such a sequence of events might fell Goliath and even render him unconscious immediately, but it might (or might not) take a few minutes for the pressure inside his head to affect the brainstem, responsible for breathing and circulation. We would only really regard him as dead once his heart stopped (along with signs that his brain wasn't functioning).
So Goliath may still have been alive when he fell, but he would have died fairly swiftly after his head was removed.
I suggest that you interpret verse 50 less literally. Its point is not when the death occurred but that little David was able to go out against the big, well-armed Goliath with just his sling and no sword and, none the less, defeat and kill him, by the grace of God.
I suggest that you interpret verse 50 less literally. Its point is not when the death occurred but that little David was able to go out against the big, well-armed Goliath with just his sling and no sword and, none the less, defeat and kill him, by the grace of God.
[Y] PTL!
Jonathan - thanks for the fascinating perspective. [:)]
macOS, iOS & iPadOS |Logs| Install
Choose Truth Over Tribe | Become a Joyful Outsider!
I suggest that you interpret verse 50 less literally. Its point is not when the death occurred but that little David was able to go out against the big, well-armed Goliath with just his sling and no sword and, none the less, defeat and kill him, by the grace of God.
Peace, Jonathan! *smile* Thank you so very much indeed! Truly appreciated!
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
The way I understand 1Sam 17:49-51 KJV as read, David hit Goliath with the stone. Goliath fell to the ground (may have been knocked out, not yet dead). David took Goliath own sword and cut off his head (which ensured death).
DMB - the only one that was left out in the cold was Goliath - modern day & loose paraphrase, "knocked out cold"!!!!!
It still is interesting how vs 50 reads, that he was killed without a sword in his hand and yet we are told he was killed in the following verse. I think I could be happy though, with what Rosie and Jonathan have pointed out - that he was literally finished off in vs 51.
I've appreciated the help on this! Thank you again!!!
IMO, 1 Samuel 17:50-51 is stating that David cut off Goliath's head with a sword, after he had first hit him with a stone - but he was already good as dead ...
Yours In Christ
DMB - the only one that was left out in the cold was Goliath - modern day & loose paraphrase, "knocked out cold"!!!!!
It still is interesting how vs 50 reads, that he was killed without a sword in his hand and yet we are told he was killed in the following verse. I think I could be happy though, with what Rosie and Jonathan have pointed out - that he was literally finished off in vs 51.
I've appreciated the help on this! Thank you again!!!
There is actually nothing in the passage which states unequivocally that the stone was what killed Goliath (I won't go into the question of whether it was even David who is supposed to have killed Goliath). It says that David struck Goliath with a stone which penetrated his forehead. It then says that "he killed him, but David had no sword in his hand." It then continues saying that he drew Goliath's sword and killed him, cutting off his head. It must be remembered that in Hebrew things are not expressed precisely as we might express them in English.
george
gfsomsel
יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
fgh, David Paul, JRS, George Somsel, DMB, Rosie Perera and Super Tramp--I love you guys as brothers and sisters in Christ.
I meant no offense. And looking back, I was incorrect in my assessment (was stuck on a train of thought). I thought I was respectful, but I apologize for any stumbling blocks I may have placed before you.
I'm thankful for this Logos community, and I look forward to insightful conversation here, a chance for iron to sharpen iron.
-Bill
I meant no offense
None taken. It sparked a good conversation between my wife and I. I also sang the children's song "Only a Boy Named David" to my 4 year old at bedtime. I hope someday he can read from the Logos resources in The Studies on David collection (11 Vols.)
I appreciate 5 Solas' post too. [8-|]
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
I also sang the children's song "Only a Boy Named David" to my 4 year old at bedtime.
My sympathies to your son. [:D] Just kidding, of course, since I have no idea what your voice is like.
george
gfsomsel
יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
Bootjack - for your interest, David also cut off his head not to make sure he was dead, but because he said to Goliath that he would strike him (stone) and take off his head (sword) in v.46. David trusted God so much that when it was over, he fulfilled the promise he made (something alot of people fail to do today because they trust in themselves instead of God), and took the head of Goliath and made the enemy retreat.
he knocked him out severely ,maybe killed him with the stone...but when david cut off his head he was definitely dead... and when the philistines saw him do that,they knew
I wonder if anyone can kill this thread?
Really. This has gone far off of the purpose of these forums. The forums are to discuss using Logos software, not theology, hermeneutics, prophecy, or even the content of Logos resources.
Take the discussion off-line, to email, or find another forum please.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
This has gone far off of the purpose of these forums. The forums are to discuss using Logos software, not theology, hermeneutics, prophecy, or even the content of Logos resources.
Not quite correct. While I agree most of the posts in this thread, mine included, are out of the guidelines of the forum I must point out posts about Logos products is one of the specifically allowed subjects.
"Please keep your discussions focused on Logos Bible Software: our software, products, websites, company, tools, etc."
It is pretty much useless to post concerning a Logos product and avoid talking of the content of that product. My post of the soon shipping Samuel Rutherford Collection referenced Lex Rex which may be of interest to the posters since the original thread topic obviously is not. That particular post was more in compliance with the forum guidelines than any other post in this whole thread, MVPs notwithstanding.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
I don't know ... I was still hoping for an answer to the original question by the OP (e.g. possibly something in the hebrew itself, how killing/death was perceived, whether the 2nd 'cut' had meaning etc.) From what I can see (and I notice Janie split out the JSOT collection today but the prices ...) the removal of the head had significance both to the Philistine culture and Isreaelites (search carrione / birds / beasts in the OT).
If we cut this off, how will we ever really know?
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
I don't know ... I was still hoping for an answer to the original question by the OP (e.g. possibly something in the hebrew itself, how killing/death was perceived, whether the 2nd 'cut' had meaning etc.) From what I can see (and I notice Janie split out the JSOT collection today but the prices ...) the removal of the head had significance both to the Philistine culture and Isreaelites (search carrione / birds / beasts in the OT).
If we cut this off, how will we ever really know?
I looked through my commentaries quickly, and I could not find a suitable answer in Tyndale OT commentary, WBC, NICOT, or NAC.
Disclaimer: I hate using messaging, texting, and email for real communication. If anything that I type to you seems like anything other than humble and respectful, then I have not done a good job typing my thoughts.
This has gone far off of the purpose of these forums. The forums are to discuss using Logos software, not theology, hermeneutics, prophecy, or even the content of Logos resources.Not quite correct. While I agree most of the posts in this thread, mine included, are out of the guidelines of the forum I must point out posts about Logos products is one of the specifically allowed subjects.
What I meant was that these forums are not an appropriate place to debate, disagree with, or point out the fallacious arguments or statements of authors in the Logos library. Doing so, is just another way of engaging in theological or biblical debate, which violates guideline #2: "Please do not discuss or debate biblical,
theological, or other controversial topics."
On the other hand, dealing with materials authored by Logos is probably appropriate, when done in the form of a suggestion for inclusion of alternate understandings of a point of theology or Biblical interpretation. (As has been done with the FSB, e.g.)
I know I'm expressing my opinion about how to interpret the guidelines, and I would bow to a Logos employee's clarification of the application of guidelines 1 & 2, as they pertain to discussing the content of Logos resources.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
or point out the fallacious arguments or statements of authors in the Logos library.
I'm taking it you have never read Lex Rex or you are in an extreme minority who believe in the divine right of kings. I doubt many would take issue with Rutherford except strict pacifists (there are a few among Logos users) But most theological stances would be considered fallacious by some users. Although I agree that Michael Servetus was an heretic, I found it fallacious that Calvin could pronounce the death penalty on him.
"Fallacious" is in the eye of the beholder. My goal was to pique interest in the Samuel Rutherford Collection. It is relative and difficult to ignore. I am sorry conflict of views disturbs you this much but there are dozens of active threads that are far outside of Logos guidelines that you have not contended with. Just because the Rejoice Christian Software thread does not contain conflict of views does not make it acceptable when my Logos-related posts is somehow unacceptable.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition
Without looking into the linguisstics, does it really matter. Twice it tells us what does matter....David killed Goliath" . The final act of cutting off his head left no one in doubt. What I gather from his is, "if I am in line with God's will, no matter how great the obstacle, I will come up a winner. I remember 55 years ago, while in bible college, how we stayed up many nights discussing things that really did not matter.
Milton C. Jones
I remember 55 years ago, while in bible college, how we stayed up many nights discussing things that really did not matter.
Yes, sometimes we avoided the really important concerns such as how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, but you're much older than I since I'll only be 39 on my next birthday. [;)] [:D]
george
gfsomsel
יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
Keep Smiling [:)]
But the question still is - was Goliath slain in vs 49- 50 or actually taken out in vs 51. It appears he was killed by the stone no doubt but then the word *slew* is used again in vs 51 as to imply he was killed by removing his head. Which is it and does it the word slew in vs 51 simply mean in this case, he cut off his head. Both words *slew* in vs 50 & 51 are the same in the original.
Given that we still have trouble defining point of death with accuracy ....
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
Is that it? No one's got anything better?
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.