Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by His Blood Spoke My Name, Aug 19, 2006.
or by sword?
The Hebrew word for 'slew' in both verses is:
Was Goliath killed twice?
That's how you make sure a giant is dead.
Seriously, I think verse 51 explains how David slew Goliath after he smote him in verse 50. In other words, the rock didn't kill Goliath, it was losing his head that did him in.
I think I would have made sure he was dead also!
We may never know the answer. Who would have checked Goliath's pulse in between the time the stone knocked him down and david cutting off his head.
That would have been the only way to know for sure.
But it really doesn't matter, the end result was the same.
The God of the Israelites was stronger than the god of the philistines.
And Goliath died again in II Samuel 21:19
"In another battle with the Philistines at Gob, Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, who had a spear with a shaft like a weaver's rod."
I reckon it must be hard to kill a giant.
Oh, I don't know. Goliath don't look so big!
2 Samuel 21:19 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.
I think it was the brother of Goliath as the KJV records
Seriously though, the word for slew in both verses means to kill or to die. And verse 50 does say he slew him but there was no sword in David's hand.
It certainly would appear that the stone only knocked the big man out, as you would imply. The slaying did not take place until David used the sword on him.
Destroys the stories I heard as a boy. David killed the giant with a sling and a stone. Hmmmm.
Folks, doesn't the bible account state that the rock sunk into Goliath's forehead? If he was not dead at the time, he would have been completely incapacitated and "lifeless." It would have been (especially in those days) a mortal wound.
Have you ever hunted deer? I've put an arrow through the lungs/liver of a deer, and when I came up to it, it was still alive, but unable to move. I put it out of its misery by cutting its throat. Either wound inflicted was mortal to the deer.
Sinking a stone with a sling into the foreheard of any man was a mortal wound. Have you seen these slings that scripture speaks of? There were armies that had whole companies of men with these slings going into battle. This was no Wal-Mart slingshot with a rubber band. The stone would come at you like a rocket - it would have to to sink all the way into the forehead of a giant.
HBSMN, I believe you can go back to the story and appreciate it just as it has been written.
In the end, it was not the sling, the stone, or the sword that killed the giant. It was the very hand of God in the heart of a brave and willing servant.
I can appreciate the story more. Now that the Lord has revealed the truth. It was the Lord that guided that rock like a heat seeking missle to its target, the forehead of the giant.
The rock did not kill the giant. The Word of God tells us that the youth, David, sunk the stone in the giant's forehead, and slew him. But... there was no sword in his hand. He could not kill that giant without the sword. The Bible tells us that those who live by the sword shall die by the sword. Goliath lived by the sword. The sword is what killed him. David used that sword on that giant to finish him off.
No, the rock only knocked the big man unconcious. If it had been enough to kill him, David would not have had a need to go finish him off with that sword. How long would he have remained unconcious had the sword not been used? God only knows. He could have laid there in a comatose state for a long time... at least until he finally died of starvation. But the rock did not kill him.
Verse 50 says David smote him with the stone and "slew" him. This seems to be two distinct acts. Further detail is given; The word "therefore" seems to be very instructive here. He had no sword, therefore, he used Goliath's sword to cut off his head.
Remember that earlier, David had declined to use the armour and sword of the King, and faced the giant with the sling. No contradictions in scriptures here.
peace to youraying:
I think if the rock didn't kill him the sword did for sure... It also made it easier to carry the head to the king...
Was Goliath killed twice?
Well, obviously, you'd have to be the skeptic of skeptics to approach this text as though two adjacent verses formally contradicted each other. A true contradiction only exists when two supposedly contradictory premises are predicated at the same time and in the same sense. And I don't think that "slew" is necessarily being used in the same sense in these two usages.
David "slew" Goliath with the stone in the sense that when the stone made contact with Goliath's forehead, his fate was sealed. Having incapacitated him, he "slew" him by cutting his head off, thus assuring that Goliath's passage out of the land of the living was strictly one-way.
And, of course, it's also true that David had no sword in his hand when he "slew" Goliath with the sling - he decapitated him with his own weapon.
While it is pretty easy to explain the apparent contradiction in these verses, the difference between 1 Sam 17 and 2 Sam 21 is more difficult. Most biblical scholars suggest that it was due to a copyist error.
CARM : Who killed Goliath, David or Elhanan?
I don't know why, but this reminded me of a scene from Whose Line, where Colin Mochrie plays a person who is seeking revenge. He says something like this to the person who thought he killed him but is surprised to see him alive, "When you cut off someone's head, roll them up in a carpet, soak the carpet in gasoline and set it on fire, you better make sure that he's dead."
IMO, I think it's obvious that it's a copyist error.
While it is pretty easy to explain the apparent contradiction in these verses, the difference between 1 Sam 17 and 2 Sam 21 is more difficult.
Those who allege a "contradiction" in these passages should be put on the spot to tell us why the only similarity between the two stories is the name of the giant.
I wonder if the double use of the word slew, might be a figure of speech? How often in today's language do we say someone is killed, or dead, when death is inevitable? It would take some study as to how the word was used (not just its meaning) in that time though.
I would not read too much into it, though.