RE: What does God deserve?
July 9, 2011 at 9:27 am
(This post was last modified: July 9, 2011 at 9:32 am by The Grand Nudger.)
The iron chariots reference has always been my favorite. Superman had kryptonite, God..iron, or maybe it was the chariot, or maybe god is allergic to wheels. One of the more amusing things about that passage, is that many.....many "scholars" have attempted to translate it completely out of the OT.
New International Version
Judges 1:19
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 iron chariots.
Young's Literal Translation
Judges 1:19
and Jehovah is with Judah, and he occupieth the hill-country, but not to dispossess the inhabitants of the valley, for they
have chariots of iron.
One can see how a single word, added, removed, or altered in it's tense can have a huge impact on the overall statement. In this case, the NIV is engaging in an obvious whitewash, since the verse is speaking in the singular, not the plural, and is referencing god, not Judah, or his troops. This is only one example of bible "scholars" deliberately removing or altering controversial verses to defend the narrative from criticism. Even in the case of the NIV translation, we are left wondering why the chariots would have been a problem, if the lord was with Judah and his men. There are many verses that make clear, in no uncertain terms, that when the lord is with an army it cannot fail, and when the lord is not, it surely must.
Perhaps GC has a different opinion on this.
New International Version
Judges 1:19
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 iron chariots.
Young's Literal Translation
Judges 1:19
and Jehovah is with Judah, and he occupieth the hill-country, but not to dispossess the inhabitants of the valley, for they
have chariots of iron.
One can see how a single word, added, removed, or altered in it's tense can have a huge impact on the overall statement. In this case, the NIV is engaging in an obvious whitewash, since the verse is speaking in the singular, not the plural, and is referencing god, not Judah, or his troops. This is only one example of bible "scholars" deliberately removing or altering controversial verses to defend the narrative from criticism. Even in the case of the NIV translation, we are left wondering why the chariots would have been a problem, if the lord was with Judah and his men. There are many verses that make clear, in no uncertain terms, that when the lord is with an army it cannot fail, and when the lord is not, it surely must.
Perhaps GC has a different opinion on this.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
