Judges 19-21 ?

[trofimus]

Of course since you detest and despise the traditional Masoretic and Received Tests, you will always perceive problems where none exist. You even think that the corrupted Septuagint has something to contribute to our understanding of God's truth.

All you had to do was ask yourself -- do the Gospel show that the Romans pierced the hands and feet of Christ, and Thomas made this a point of contention? Then it that case "like a lion on my hands and my feet" is UTTER RUBBISH and should not even be considered.

A good demonstration of your inconsistency.

In the first part you defend the "traditional" masoretic text (having "like a lion on my hands and feet") and call Septuagint corrupt (having "pierced my hand and feet").

And in the second part you say that "like a lion" is utter rubbish...

 

[MarcR]

What with the problem of textual variants, where we have two (or more) different texts on the same place. Are both inspired? What if they are contradicting each other?

For example in Psalms - "they pierced my hands and my feet" vs "like a lion on my hands and my feet" - where is inspiration there? Just one text? Or both? How to decide?

I confess that I have done very little study in textual criticism. Generally I favor the Textus Receptus and/or the Majority Text over Wescott Hort, or Nestle; because I favor texts from places that did not practice allegorical interpretation over those from places that did.

I do not believe that contradictions in the Greek manuscripts are of such a nature that the intent of the passage will be corrupted by either reading.

 

[Nehemiah6]

A good demonstration of your inconsistency.

Why inconsistency? Here is what is in the Orthodox Jewish Bible:
For kelavim have surrounded me; the Adat Mere'im (congregation of evil men) have enclosed me; ka'aru yadai v'ragelai (they pierced my hands and my feet; T.N. see Isa 53:5; Zech 12:10 and medieval Hebrew Scripture manuscripts as well as the Targum HaShivim and the Dead Sea Scrolls Nahal Hever.

כִּ֥י סְבָב֗וּנִי כְּלָ֫בִ֥ים עֲדַ֣ת מְ֭רֵעִים הִקִּיפ֑וּנִי כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י יָדַ֥י וְרַגְלָֽי׃ (Westminster Leningrad Codex)

 

[trofimus]

I confess that I have done very little study in textual criticism. Generally I believe that the Textus Receptus and/or the Majority Text over Wescott Hort, or Nestle; because I favor texts from places that did not practice allegorical interpretation over those places that did.

I do not believe that contradictions in the Greek manuscripts are of such a nature that the intent of the passage will be corrupted by either reading.

Regarding the Old Testament, the situation is quite different, even whole books are in the Bibles of some Christian branches and not in other ones... its not just about a word here or there or few sentences like in the New Testament...

Or there are significant differences in whole chapters.

 

[trofimus]

Why inconsistency? Here is what is in the Orthodox Jewish Bible:
For kelavim have surrounded me; the Adat Mere'im (congregation of evil men) have enclosed me; ka'aru yadai v'ragelai (they pierced my hands and my feet; T.N. see Isa 53:5; Zech 12:10 and medieval Hebrew Scripture manuscripts as well as the Targum HaShivim and the Dead Sea Scrolls Nahal Hever.

כִּ֥י סְבָב֗וּנִי כְּלָ֫בִ֥ים עֲדַ֣ת מְ֭רֵעִים הִקִּיפ֑וּנִי כָּ֝אֲרִ֗י יָדַ֥י וְרַגְלָֽי׃ (Westminster Leningrad Codex)

Not sure where you got this.

You can check in interlinear: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/psa22.pdf

In Tanakh: Psalm 22 JPS Tanakh 1917

Or there: Psalms 22 / Hebrew - English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

Or there: http://jps.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Tanakh1917.pdf

--- Simply everywhere. Masoretic text has "lion". So I would welcome if you post your source.

 

[MarcR]

Regarding the Old Testament, the situation is quite different, even whole books are in the Bibles of some Christian branches and not in other ones... its not just about a word here or there or few sentences like in the New Testament...

Or there are significant differences in whole chapters.

If you are referring to apocryphal books; I consider only those books included in the Masoretic text to be cannon. If some publishers choose to include the apocrypha that does not trouble me as long as they are kept in a separate section.

Chapter 5 of 1Chronicles obviously is missing an unknown number of verses; but even that does not compromise God's intended purpose.

 

[trofimus]

If you are referring to apocryphal books; I consider only those books included in the Masoretic text to be cannon. If some publishers choose to include the apocrypha that does not trouble me as long as they are kept in a separate section.

Chapter 5 of 1Chronicles obviously is missing an unknown number of verses; but even that does not compromise God's intended purpose.

Yes, you consider. But in Christian history, masoretic text/canon was simply irrelevant, Vulgate and Septuagint, the Bibles of all Church, had these "apocryphical" (quotes, because they were never truly "hidden", thats why this name is wrong) books.

So either all the church got it wrong for 1500 years and Jews right, or the opposite is true. How to decide?

 

[phil36]

What with the problem of textual variants, where we have two (or more) different texts on the same place. Are both inspired? What if they are contradicting each other?

For example in Psalms - "they pierced my hands and my feet" vs "like a lion on my hands and my feet" - where is inspiration there? Just one text? Or both? How to decide?

Hi Trofimus,

Textual variants are not a big problem. It is usual espoused as a big problem by those who don't believe in the inspiration and authority of scripture. This poses a real problem, because, scripture becomes only some sort of guide and can't really be trusted....

One of the Dead Sea Scrolls fragments contains Psalm 22:16. Thisfragment, published in 1997, was discovered in a cache of Scrolls at Nah. alH. ever in Israel during the early 1950s. Significantly, the 5/6 H. ev–Sev4PsFragment 11 of Psalm 22 contains the crucial word in the form of a thirdpersonplural verb, written vrak (“pierced/dug”).36 While it can often bedifficult to distinguish between a waw (v) and yod in the Dead Sea texts,the editors of the most authoritative edition of the scrolls, Discoveries inthe Judaean Desert, confirm this reading in its transliteration and in two6BYU Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44, Iss. 3 [2005], Art. 9http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol44/iss3/9Psalm 22:16 Controversy V 167notes: “Although the photograph . . . is very faded, most of the letters areclearly identifiable under magnification,” and regarding vrak the editorsconclude, “with waw (v) and yod clearly distinguishable in this hand . . .this important variant [vrak] reading is assured.”37 ----- https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi...o.uk/&httpsredir=1&article=3716&context=byusq

 

[trofimus]

Hi Trofimus,

Textual variants are not a big problem. It is usual espoused as a big problem by those who don't believe in the inspiration and authority of scripture. This poses a real problem, because, scripture becomes only some sort of guide and can't really be trusted....

The context of the convo is that MarC said something like that even later additions to Scriptures are inspired. So I asked what about textual variants. If all of them are inspired and if not, how to decide which are inspired and which are not.

 

[Ezekiel8]

3 chapters is would be a long post if i quote it, so here's a link:

Judges 19-21
​

how is what happened in these chapters testifying of Christ? we know it does, ((John 5:39)), so where is He in this?

a woman is killed by a tremendously wicked act that is strikingly similar to what we know about Sodom. her husband, a priest, cuts her body into pieces sends them to all the tribes, and every tribe of Israel knew when they saw her flesh that this act was so evil, that the whole town - full of 'sons of Belial' - must be destroyed. the tribe of Benjamin however defended them, and all 11 of the other tribes nearly wipe Benjamin out completely, after they inquire and God tells them Judah should go up against them first, only to have thousands from the tribe of Judah killed. and this is the town Saul is from!

i've given of course a very poor synopsis - refer the scripture itself. but there are so many questions, what does this all mean? what have you heard taught of this, and what have you understood from it?

Pretty interesting topic, makes me think of the end of chapter 19.

Judges 19:30

[SUP]30 [/SUP]And it was so, that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: consider of it, take advice, and speak your minds.

Well personally I think it is sort of self-explanatory within the context of the story. This is my basic synopsis.

A Levite's concubine played the whore against him, he went and took her back. Her father accepted this and they departed. After being comforted by his concubine's father whom entertains him for 5 days he departs and arrives in Gibeah. A man offers to lodge them in his home and provide the animals with accommodations as well. While the Levite lodges in the man's house, indeed, much like the Sodom and Gomorrah account, the sons of worthlessness beset the house all around. The sons of worthlessness like the sons of Sodom demand to bring the stranger out to do him wickedly. The righteous householder offers up his own virgin daughter and the man's concubine instead. The sons of Belial refuse, therefore the Levite sets the concubine forth. The sons of worthlessness have sex with and sexually abuse the woman all night long. In the morning she clutches to the door post, but her spirit is broken and not in her. The righteous Levite takes his concubine home and cuts her up into 12 pieces to send the pieces throughout all Israel as a testimony against them that a great folly has been wrought in Israel.


The tribes come up to inquire of this outrage and the righteous Levite reveals the matter explaining that they have wrought great folly in Israel. The men of Israel resolve to chastise Benjamin to put away the folly he has wrought in Israel and sendx up the army to smite them. Twice they go up against Benjamin and twice they fail. On the third attempt the Lord delivered Benjamin into the hands of Israel and they destroyed him down to but a handful of men whom took refuge in the rock of Rimmon.

So then there is a dilemma for Israel as a breach has been made upon Israel and as one of the races of Israel is threatened with extinction. Furthermore the children of Israel had sworn an oath promising a curse upon any that would give to Benjamin their daughters. After inquiry is made they find Jabeshgilead did not come up to the oath of Mizpeh. So they did go and slaughter all men and all women that have slept with a man in Jabeshgilead and to take for the Benjamites virgin wives of Jabeshgilead. However the virgin women of Jabeshgilead were too few to suffice the sons of Benjamin that remained. So Israel did allow the survivors of Benjamin to go and take for themselves daughters of Shiloh all such as danced before them. With their new wives the children of Benjamin return to their apportioned inheritance and rebuild their cities.

 

[MarcR]

Yes, you consider. But in Christian history, masoretic text/canon was simply irrelevant, Vulgate and Septuagint, the Bibles of all Church, had these "apocryphical" (quotes, because they were never truly "hidden", thats why this name is wrong) books.

So either all the church got it wrong for 1500 years and Jews right, or the opposite is true. How to decide?

The Council of Nicea 1n 325 determined that the Apocrypha would not be included in cannon but even into the twentieth century many publishers have seen fit to include it.

While the Mesoretic text was not available before the 7th century A.D. The earlier texts have been very reliable as well.

 

[trofimus]

The Council of Nicea 1n 325 determined that the Apocrypha would not be included in cannon but even into the twentieth century many publishers have seen fit to include it.

While the Mesoretic text was not available before the 7th century A.D. The earlier texts have been very reliable as well.

1. So do you believe that any later additions to Scriptures are inspired too or not? If you do, why do you have problems with "later" additions of apocrypha?

2. I do not think that the Nicean council was for Jewish canon of Scriptures. Do you have some link?

3. There is a significant difference between so called "deuterocanonical books" (like the book of Sirach), always present in Scriptures and the real apocrypha (hidden writings, lately discovered) like the gospel of Thomas.

 

[phil36]

The context of the convo is that MarC said something like that even later additions to Scriptures are inspired. So I asked what about textual variants. If all of them are inspired and if not, how to decide which are inspired and which are not.

very quickly inspiration refers to original autographs. However, we also know that God has protected the transmission of His word down through the ages. In fact my post above proves that fact.

Scholars know what the variants are and none of them change the meaning of the whole council of God. Textual variants is not the big issue that non believers and liberals try and say they are!

Most are either spellings of a word, word order, etc etc. and most of these can be traced backwards. Scholars know all the variants.

Interestingly, computers are now being engaged in this area, and they are proving how reliable the transmission scripture of has actually been.

So all believers can rest in the fact that the words you have come from the inspired word of God, is the inspired word of God and therefore authoritative in all matters relating to faith.

Canonization is a related but different subject.

 

[posthuman]

You are really trying to stretch this.

The picture of Christ which is being painted here is that without Christ, human beings become degenerate (even if they are a part of Israel).

That is the Gospel message contained in these chapters. "There was no KING JESUS in Israel" hence all the debauchery and all the atrocities and all the enmities. Thus when there is no King Jesus on the throne of a sinner's heart, he goes into the spiral described in Romans 1.

The book of Judges isn't as worthless as you are making it out to be. Just look for Him.

 

[posthuman]

Look at it this way:

Does it say "there was no GOD in Israel in those days" or does it say no king?

Seeing that God Himself was sitting above the mercy seat in the tabernacle and answering and directing the people when they inquired of Him i really don't think you have a leg to stand on to say that God was absent. Are you agnostic? i never took you to be, before. But there was no king in Israel in the days of Joshua nor is there one now, so is God absent? Or do we merely need to seek Him?
I'll continue to search the scriptures, because they testify of Him, and the King says do this. You can do whatever seems right in your own eyes.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The book of Judges isn't as worthless as you are making it out to be. Just look for Him.

Why would you conclude that I am making out the book of Judges as "worthless"? I did not even suggest or imply that, since it is Scripture. But your focus is on finding Christ, and if He is absent, then that comes within the purview of finding Christ.

For all intents and purposes YHWH was absent from Israel during this time. Therefore we read: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

The whole point of turning to Judges during the Gospel age is to show those without Christ the consequences of being without Him. Thus sin and evil were rampant in Israel at that time, and there was no moral or spiritual leadership since they had become idolatrous.

 

[posthuman]

i was rude, and i apologize

Why would you conclude that I am making out the book of Judges as "worthless"? I did not even suggest or imply that, since it is Scripture. But your focus is on finding Christ, and if He is absent, then that comes within the purview of finding Christ.

if God is absent in anything, that thing is worthless, and Christ is God.

For all intents and purposes YHWH was absent from Israel during this time. Therefore we read: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

we read that at the end of Judges 21. we do not read that at Judges 19:1

and we read YHWH speaking in Judges 20:

Judah shall go first.
Go up against him.
Go up, for tomorrow I will deliver them into your hand.
​

perhaps we should start with listening to what He says, if we are under the impression that He is "absent"

The whole point of turning to Judges during the Gospel age is to show those without Christ the consequences of being without Him.

did Christ not do something for the sake of those who did not know the Lord? look for that.
who is redeemed in this story? how are they redeemed, and who redeems them?

Thus sin and evil were rampant in Israel at that time, and there was no moral or spiritual leadership since they had become idolatrous.

Phineas, the son of Aaron, ministered before the ark in the tabernacle at this time ((ch. 20 v.7)). there is no mention of idolatry in Judges 19-20 ((though there is in the chapters immediately preceding these - which tell us of a different Levite priest, perhaps an even more difficult passage, that was recorded here by the breath of the Holy Spirit just before 19-21 for His perfect and holy purpose)).

 

[posthuman]

we read YHWH speaking in Judges 20:

Judah shall go first.
Go up against him.
Go up, for tomorrow I will deliver them into your hand.
​

perhaps we should start with listening to what He says, if we are under the impression that He is "absent"

this actually is probably a very good place to start digging

why does God say this? why does He send Judah up twice, to lay down their lives? before delivering the sons of Belial into the hands of "the assembly of the people of God" ((ch. 20 v.2))?

Judah, who offered to give himself for Benjamin in Egypt, who pledged his safety. Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, who laid down His life for the sins of the world. Benjamites who now slaughter valiant men of Judah. Saul, called Paul, a Benjamite, 'the least of the tribes' - who slaughtered the people of God, then was redeemed. Saul of Gibeah, the first human king God gave to Israel.

any of this connected? or are we just supposed to stop at "sin is bad" ?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Of course since you detest and despise the traditional Masoretic and Received Tests, you will always perceive problems where none exist. You even think that the corrupted Septuagint has something to contribute to our understanding of God's truth.

All you had to do was ask yourself -- do the Gospel show that the Romans pierced the hands and feet of Christ, and Thomas made this a point of contention? Then it that case "like a lion on my hands and my feet" is UTTER RUBBISH and should not even be considered.

I don't see a problem with the different wording. If you say: like a lion on my hands and feet, it means the feet and hands were mauled/punctured by the lions teeth. They were pierced.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

another parallel:

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
in 1 Samuel 11 Nahash, an Ammonite ruler, threatened to mutilate the people of Jabesh in bringing them under subjection. they send messengers all over Israel asking for help, and some of the messengers come to Gibeah

Now behold, Saul was coming from the field behind the oxen, and he said, “What is the matter with the people that they weep?” So they related to him the words of the men of Jabesh.
Then the Spirit of God came upon Saul mightily when he heard these words, and he became very angry.He took a yoke of oxen and cut them in pieces, and sent them throughout the territory of Israel by the hand of messengers, saying, “Whoever does not come out after Saul and after Samuel, so shall it be done to his oxen.” Then the dread of the Lord fell on the people, and they came out as one man.
(1 Samuel 11:5-7)
​

Saul, filled with the Holy Spirit, in indignation cuts an ox into pieces and sends the pieces out to every tribe.
surely this immediately reminded all the people of what had happened in Gibeah, where Saul had now done to oxen what the priest had done to the corpse of his wife??
and the fear of the LORD came over all the people, and again they all assembled.

after routing the Ammonites who threatened Jabesh-Gilead, the people wanted to exterminate everyone who opposed Saul as king - but Saul refuses to allow it, saying

Not a man shall be put to death this day,
for today the Lord has accomplished deliverance in Israel.
(1 Samuel 11:13)​

I thought maybe a piece of the concubine sent to 12 places (each of the 12 tribes) was saying that they each had a part in what had happened and was happening in that area. Maybe by ignoring it or letting it keep going on?

Then this other passage could fit along those same lines. Sort of...

Great thread! It is the prerogative of a king to hide a matter and the joy of men to seek it out. (The verse goes something like that.)