Remove Ad, Sign Up
Register to Remove Ad
Register to Remove Ad
Remove Ad, Sign Up
Register to Remove Ad
Register to Remove Ad
Signup for Free!
-More Features-
-Far Less Ads-
About   Users   Help
Users & Guests Online
On Page: 1
Directory: 1 & 95
Entire Site: 10 & 865
Page Admin: Davideo7, geeogree, Page Staff: Lieutenant Vicktz, play4fun, pray75,
03-28-24 08:13 PM

Forum Links

Gideons
Some questions about snippets of this mini bible
Related Threads
Coming Soon

Thread Information

Views
1,203
Replies
13
Rating
4
Status
CLOSED
Thread
Creator
thenumberone
09-12-13 10:13 AM
Last
Post
SoL@R
11-01-13 07:41 AM
Additional Thread Details
Views: 330
Today: 0
Users: 0 unique

Thread Actions

Thread Closed
New Thread
New Poll
Order
 

Gideons

 

09-12-13 10:13 AM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 883866 | 582 Words

thenumberone
Level: 143


POSTS: 5575/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35017564
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
I was handed a bible today. Normally I avoid taking them,(there is generally someone handing them out at any major event)but I never actually realised what I was being handed and it would have been kind of rude to make them take it back.
Still I figured I might as well take a look. I was kind of disappointed it wasnt actually a bible per say as much as a collection of their favourite bits of it, so a lot of stuff they disagree with has been taken out of it.
What caught my eye is the fact it said it was by the gideons. Iv never actually heard of them before. They claimed to have given out 1 billion copies of the bible though so hey ho.
They seem to have annotated several passages too.
Interestingly its stated that Jews are on the same level as Christians
God spoke to them and they sinned, and the same is said of Christians. To that extent it puts forward that Jews and Christians are on equal footing to reach heaven.

There are also a host of colourfull little stories.
Im wondering about mathew 18: the greatest kingdom, where jesus states that any one that leads a child to sin should hang a milestone (essentially a large rock) around their neck and drown themselves in the sea. Does his moving you to suicide not make him a sinnner, since suicide is in fact a sin, and forbidden?
I took a look at Ephesians 4 which basically starts out condeming anger, spite, rage, malice etc.
I compared that to psalm 18 where it says the mountains shook from his anger, that god gives him strength in battle, that god delivered him nations, and specifically "He is the god that avenges me, who subdues nations under me".
It also states that he was saved because he kept the ways of the lord and did not sin, yet "I pursued my enemies and overtook them;I did not turn back until they were destroyed... You made my adversarys bow before my feet...they cried for help, but there was no one to save them...I poured them out like mud in the street."
Most of this is condemned by Ephesians, and of course much of the core of the bible. Anger, spite, murder (there was no need to kill his enemys, they were defeated) False idols (having his enemys lie at his feet, thats pretty close at any rate).
Looking at the end of ephesians 4 it talks of the fact wives must submit completely to their husbands. A step over in Ephesians 6 it is commanding slaves to whole heartedly serve their masters, as if they were christ himself.
Iv really just skimmed these stories and psalms, but they seem to be at complete odds with many core elements of the bible.
Looking at them, I actually half expect a note saying they were taken from the old testament to be scribbled somewhere around here.

Anyone got an alternate take on those? Perhaps I have missed something but I really dont think they ought to be in their if the ultimate goal is peace.

Anyway, yeh, at least got something to read anyway, im always running out of books.

*Im glad I copied the text, apaprently the pic was too big*
*Actually I forgot to remove the layout, il just put the image in a link, its not important anyway, just a pic of the bible in question*

Bible
I was handed a bible today. Normally I avoid taking them,(there is generally someone handing them out at any major event)but I never actually realised what I was being handed and it would have been kind of rude to make them take it back.
Still I figured I might as well take a look. I was kind of disappointed it wasnt actually a bible per say as much as a collection of their favourite bits of it, so a lot of stuff they disagree with has been taken out of it.
What caught my eye is the fact it said it was by the gideons. Iv never actually heard of them before. They claimed to have given out 1 billion copies of the bible though so hey ho.
They seem to have annotated several passages too.
Interestingly its stated that Jews are on the same level as Christians
God spoke to them and they sinned, and the same is said of Christians. To that extent it puts forward that Jews and Christians are on equal footing to reach heaven.

There are also a host of colourfull little stories.
Im wondering about mathew 18: the greatest kingdom, where jesus states that any one that leads a child to sin should hang a milestone (essentially a large rock) around their neck and drown themselves in the sea. Does his moving you to suicide not make him a sinnner, since suicide is in fact a sin, and forbidden?
I took a look at Ephesians 4 which basically starts out condeming anger, spite, rage, malice etc.
I compared that to psalm 18 where it says the mountains shook from his anger, that god gives him strength in battle, that god delivered him nations, and specifically "He is the god that avenges me, who subdues nations under me".
It also states that he was saved because he kept the ways of the lord and did not sin, yet "I pursued my enemies and overtook them;I did not turn back until they were destroyed... You made my adversarys bow before my feet...they cried for help, but there was no one to save them...I poured them out like mud in the street."
Most of this is condemned by Ephesians, and of course much of the core of the bible. Anger, spite, murder (there was no need to kill his enemys, they were defeated) False idols (having his enemys lie at his feet, thats pretty close at any rate).
Looking at the end of ephesians 4 it talks of the fact wives must submit completely to their husbands. A step over in Ephesians 6 it is commanding slaves to whole heartedly serve their masters, as if they were christ himself.
Iv really just skimmed these stories and psalms, but they seem to be at complete odds with many core elements of the bible.
Looking at them, I actually half expect a note saying they were taken from the old testament to be scribbled somewhere around here.

Anyone got an alternate take on those? Perhaps I have missed something but I really dont think they ought to be in their if the ultimate goal is peace.

Anyway, yeh, at least got something to read anyway, im always running out of books.

*Im glad I copied the text, apaprently the pic was too big*
*Actually I forgot to remove the layout, il just put the image in a link, its not important anyway, just a pic of the bible in question*

Bible
Vizzed Elite
Bleeding Heart Liberal


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days

(edited by thenumberone on 09-12-13 10:20 AM)    

09-12-13 01:37 PM
play4fun is Offline
| ID: 883922 | 361 Words

play4fun
Level: 114


POSTS: 1701/3661
POST EXP: 459253
LVL EXP: 16222177
CP: 21496.5
VIZ: 781220

Likes: 2  Dislikes: 0
Really? You have never heard of the Gideons? They are the reason why some hotels have Bibles in their drawers.

If you look at the inside of the Bible, it will tell you what version it is. Gideons don't use a specific version, but they hand out some of the more recognizable Bible versions, like NKJV, NLT, NASB, etc. The Bible that you are holding is one of the ways combinations that Gideons use. For evangelistic purposes, they would hand out just the New Testament and Psalms, so that it is not as heavy to give out an actual Bible. They do give out Old and New Testaments combine in other places, but from what you described that they were giving them out, they probably are using that so that people won't be getting a heavy load.

From the sound of what you described next, it sounds like you are either are unfamiliar with the Bible's content or you really skimmed the verses that you mentioned. The Bible that you are holding is not going to be any different than the other Bibles, so there shouldn't be anything different about it.

For example, for Matthew 18. Jesus was not saying that those who lead a child to sin should hang a millstone around their neck and drown. He said that that situation would have been BETTER than you causing a child to sin. Jesus make a lot of these comparisons and extremities a lot to emphasize how serious certain actions are, and for someone to lead a child to sin (or anyone really) is a really bad thing to do. You can even see that in verse 8-9 where Jesus talks about how serious it is to have your body part to keep stumbling and sinning, but He is not saying that you are suppose to cut it off. He is saying that missing a body part and not sin is a better situation than losing the entire body in Hell. Figurative comparisons.

My recommendation for you is to actually read the verse clearly and study them before making a quick jump to say that it doesn't follow with Christian ideas.
Really? You have never heard of the Gideons? They are the reason why some hotels have Bibles in their drawers.

If you look at the inside of the Bible, it will tell you what version it is. Gideons don't use a specific version, but they hand out some of the more recognizable Bible versions, like NKJV, NLT, NASB, etc. The Bible that you are holding is one of the ways combinations that Gideons use. For evangelistic purposes, they would hand out just the New Testament and Psalms, so that it is not as heavy to give out an actual Bible. They do give out Old and New Testaments combine in other places, but from what you described that they were giving them out, they probably are using that so that people won't be getting a heavy load.

From the sound of what you described next, it sounds like you are either are unfamiliar with the Bible's content or you really skimmed the verses that you mentioned. The Bible that you are holding is not going to be any different than the other Bibles, so there shouldn't be anything different about it.

For example, for Matthew 18. Jesus was not saying that those who lead a child to sin should hang a millstone around their neck and drown. He said that that situation would have been BETTER than you causing a child to sin. Jesus make a lot of these comparisons and extremities a lot to emphasize how serious certain actions are, and for someone to lead a child to sin (or anyone really) is a really bad thing to do. You can even see that in verse 8-9 where Jesus talks about how serious it is to have your body part to keep stumbling and sinning, but He is not saying that you are suppose to cut it off. He is saying that missing a body part and not sin is a better situation than losing the entire body in Hell. Figurative comparisons.

My recommendation for you is to actually read the verse clearly and study them before making a quick jump to say that it doesn't follow with Christian ideas.
Vizzed Elite
I wanna live like there's no tomorrow/Love, like I'm on borrowed time/It's good to be alive


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 07-22-09
Location: Quincy, MA
Last Post: 2496 days
Last Active: 2425 days

Post Rating: 2   Liked By: Sidewinder, Singelli,

09-12-13 03:32 PM
Jordanv78 is Offline
| ID: 883981 | 80 Words

Jordanv78
Level: 190


POSTS: 6353/12281
POST EXP: 809836
LVL EXP: 95388985
CP: 78594.2
VIZ: 575200

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
thenumberone : Yeah I'm surprised as well that you have never heard of Gideons. I personally am not religious myself but their bibles are in almost every large hotel chain although I'm not sure if I have noticed them in hotels outside the US much...

Anyways, strangely enough one of my girl friends clients at work is Gideons and she just got done doing their national convention with them a few weeks ago(Which was also funny because she's not religious either)
thenumberone : Yeah I'm surprised as well that you have never heard of Gideons. I personally am not religious myself but their bibles are in almost every large hotel chain although I'm not sure if I have noticed them in hotels outside the US much...

Anyways, strangely enough one of my girl friends clients at work is Gideons and she just got done doing their national convention with them a few weeks ago(Which was also funny because she's not religious either)
Vizzed Elite
Former Admin
Special Assault Brigade for Real Emergencies


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 10-16-10
Location: Chicagoland
Last Post: 2390 days
Last Active: 2363 days

09-12-13 04:04 PM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 883999 | 186 Words

thenumberone
Level: 143


POSTS: 5577/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35017564
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
play4fun :
New international version i guess?
Ill need to look next time im in a hotel, iv seen bibles kicking about but iv never actually looked to see who by, I always assumed it was the hotels that bought em.
I did skim it, but what i quoted was exact. When It said the milestone, it literary said anyone who does it. I can see that their is some ambiguity there but looking at it the context seems to suggest doing it after. If it had said "to have had" that would surely imply that as an alternative. But it says "If anyone causes on of these little ones to sin, it would be better for him to have a large milestone hung around his neck..." Unless you are looking at another translation that seems pretty resolute.
I said in my mind it doesent seem to but i was genuinely interested in what peoples thoughts were on that, what is your line of thought on psalm 18? I am reading the entire lenghts of these things and I cant see the good in that at all?
play4fun :
New international version i guess?
Ill need to look next time im in a hotel, iv seen bibles kicking about but iv never actually looked to see who by, I always assumed it was the hotels that bought em.
I did skim it, but what i quoted was exact. When It said the milestone, it literary said anyone who does it. I can see that their is some ambiguity there but looking at it the context seems to suggest doing it after. If it had said "to have had" that would surely imply that as an alternative. But it says "If anyone causes on of these little ones to sin, it would be better for him to have a large milestone hung around his neck..." Unless you are looking at another translation that seems pretty resolute.
I said in my mind it doesent seem to but i was genuinely interested in what peoples thoughts were on that, what is your line of thought on psalm 18? I am reading the entire lenghts of these things and I cant see the good in that at all?
Vizzed Elite
Bleeding Heart Liberal


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days

09-16-13 07:22 AM
SoL@R is Offline
| ID: 885746 | 28 Words

SoL@R
Level: 45


POSTS: 145/459
POST EXP: 124100
LVL EXP: 625166
CP: 2839.2
VIZ: 180742

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
thenumberone :  Do you want to know our thoughts on the whole Psalm 18?  If you're really interested and keen on reading, I would be happy to oblige
thenumberone :  Do you want to know our thoughts on the whole Psalm 18?  If you're really interested and keen on reading, I would be happy to oblige
Trusted Member
Those who wait on the Lord will renew their strength; They shall mount up with wings like eagles.


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-05-13
Location: Gordon's Bay, RSA
Last Post: 2562 days
Last Active: 1893 days

09-16-13 08:36 AM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 885761 | 44 Words

thenumberone
Level: 143


POSTS: 5596/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35017564
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
SoL@R : :
Indulge away, i am happy to see your take on it :-)
I am keen on reading, regardless of my thoughts on it. Likewise if you want to reference anything that bibles is still sitting their so il take a look at it.
SoL@R : :
Indulge away, i am happy to see your take on it :-)
I am keen on reading, regardless of my thoughts on it. Likewise if you want to reference anything that bibles is still sitting their so il take a look at it.
Vizzed Elite
Bleeding Heart Liberal


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days

09-16-13 02:17 PM
Sidewinder is Offline
| ID: 885842 | 280 Words

Sidewinder
Level: 65


POSTS: 307/1093
POST EXP: 110877
LVL EXP: 2251803
CP: 4575.8
VIZ: 50810

Likes: 1  Dislikes: 0
thenumberone :

Well, if you fully read that verse, it says "In your anger do not sin: Do not let the sun go down you are still angry..." Ephesians 4:26 (New Living Translation) Sure, it is okay to become angry, but for the right occasions. First you must look at what is causing you to be angry. 

"They compliment him, but they ignore me."

What do you think is causing anger to  come upon you in that situation?

Keep in check how your anger controls you. You do not want to become angry due to jealousy, malice, hatred, etc. for that is the sin that Paul talks about when you are angry.

Now, take Moses. When he came down Mt. Sinai and saw the people of Israel committing idolatry, he became angry. His anger was the proper response to what the people of Israel have been doing...Moses goes on a bit more and smashes the stone tablets. Maybe that was unnecessary, but Moses's burning anger was the proper way to respond to the situation. You do not treat the situation by simply asking the people to stop...Moses's anger emphasized the wrong in what they were doing, making a bigger impact.

Jesus talks about respect. Wives submitting to their husbands shows a respect for a higher authority. The husbands were to be the man of the house, the leader. This does not mean that the wives or children are insignificant, but rather the husband is chosen to guide the household. 
Slaves were to respect their masters and obey them. They may be persecuted, but Jesus himself was persecuted as well. Jesus wants you to be humble and respect others no matter what. 
thenumberone :

Well, if you fully read that verse, it says "In your anger do not sin: Do not let the sun go down you are still angry..." Ephesians 4:26 (New Living Translation) Sure, it is okay to become angry, but for the right occasions. First you must look at what is causing you to be angry. 

"They compliment him, but they ignore me."

What do you think is causing anger to  come upon you in that situation?

Keep in check how your anger controls you. You do not want to become angry due to jealousy, malice, hatred, etc. for that is the sin that Paul talks about when you are angry.

Now, take Moses. When he came down Mt. Sinai and saw the people of Israel committing idolatry, he became angry. His anger was the proper response to what the people of Israel have been doing...Moses goes on a bit more and smashes the stone tablets. Maybe that was unnecessary, but Moses's burning anger was the proper way to respond to the situation. You do not treat the situation by simply asking the people to stop...Moses's anger emphasized the wrong in what they were doing, making a bigger impact.

Jesus talks about respect. Wives submitting to their husbands shows a respect for a higher authority. The husbands were to be the man of the house, the leader. This does not mean that the wives or children are insignificant, but rather the husband is chosen to guide the household. 
Slaves were to respect their masters and obey them. They may be persecuted, but Jesus himself was persecuted as well. Jesus wants you to be humble and respect others no matter what. 
Trusted Member


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 08-10-13
Location: United States
Last Post: 3698 days
Last Active: 3620 days

Post Rating: 1   Liked By: merf,

09-17-13 09:36 AM
Uzar is Offline
| ID: 886243 | 187 Words

Uzar
A user of this
Level: 139


POSTS: 330/6433
POST EXP: 345123
LVL EXP: 32433254
CP: 25933.5
VIZ: 555693

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
Well, my grandfather is a Gideon. They aren't really all that different than Christians. What you really need is to learn the context of what you're reading. For example, in Psalms, where it says "I pursued my enemies and overtook them; I did not turn back until they were destroyed... You made my adversaries bow before my feet...they cried for help, but there was no one to save them...I poured them out like mud in the street." That's how warfare was back then. That is how the armies were defeated. The Geneva Convention didn't exist back then. Also, the countries he was fighting hated God. They also sacrificed children, and did other horrible acts. Moving into Ephesians where it talks about wives submitting to their husbands. Well, would you rather wives be in constant rebellion of their husbands? Paul also says "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loves the church." He also says for husbands to love their wives as they love themselves. And for the slaves, Paul was writing to everyone in households in that time. And Rome had slaves, so he needed to include them.
Well, my grandfather is a Gideon. They aren't really all that different than Christians. What you really need is to learn the context of what you're reading. For example, in Psalms, where it says "I pursued my enemies and overtook them; I did not turn back until they were destroyed... You made my adversaries bow before my feet...they cried for help, but there was no one to save them...I poured them out like mud in the street." That's how warfare was back then. That is how the armies were defeated. The Geneva Convention didn't exist back then. Also, the countries he was fighting hated God. They also sacrificed children, and did other horrible acts. Moving into Ephesians where it talks about wives submitting to their husbands. Well, would you rather wives be in constant rebellion of their husbands? Paul also says "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loves the church." He also says for husbands to love their wives as they love themselves. And for the slaves, Paul was writing to everyone in households in that time. And Rome had slaves, so he needed to include them.
Vizzed Elite
I wonder what the character limit on this thing is.


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 06-03-13
Location: Airship Bostonius
Last Post: 1878 days
Last Active: 1849 days

09-18-13 05:07 PM
Brigand is Offline
| ID: 886743 | 41 Words

Brigand
Level: 89


POSTS: 789/2233
POST EXP: 116430
LVL EXP: 6762535
CP: 2057.5
VIZ: 112856

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
I was a given the New testament in highschool by the giddeons. Like my whole class. Most of them were used as cigarettepapers since they were the right size and thin enough. My copy is maybe still at my mothers place.
I was a given the New testament in highschool by the giddeons. Like my whole class. Most of them were used as cigarettepapers since they were the right size and thin enough. My copy is maybe still at my mothers place.
Trusted Member
Not even an enemy.


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 12-29-12
Location: Yurop.
Last Post: 2700 days
Last Active: 2686 days

09-24-13 07:15 AM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 889732 | 306 Words

thenumberone
Level: 143


POSTS: 5608/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35017564
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
Sidewinder :
so your take is that emotions like anger or jelousy are allowable, some times appropriate, so long as you contemplate the reasoning, and dont use it excessively?

See the last one I still cant see the logic of, since yopu state jesus wants to to respect people. Is having a lesser view of another respectful? Beieving women to be below men on authority, or slaves to be below you in every respect, hence their being permanently indentured, is a lack of respect on the controlling individuals part. The implication by that verse that these 2 things are tolerable is to bypass the point of respect altogether.

A user of this :
Im pretty sure gideons are christians, all be it a branch of them.
"geneva convention" Going on the idea that the bible instills morals you shouldnt need laws to tell you right from wrong. Previous versus all condemn negative emotions and actions, here every one of them is in play.
Im pretty sure the idea was they didnt follow the correct god and teachings, not they hated god. And a whole bunch of people sacrificed children, as christians, jews and muslims did and sometimes still do with animals. By their teachings they believed it was gods will, hence it isnt an inherent evil on their part. Certainly not worthy of killing all of the survivours, what happened to positive teaching.

"rather constant rebelling." If its their will. That attitude is the same used by men to say women dont need to consent to the men before they (men) do something. There are laws against that, and equality is enshrined in most of our nations(plural) laws.
People had multiple partners, unchristian traditions, these (for the most part) were not included by the bible because to concede would be to undermine the teachings of the christian faith.
Sidewinder :
so your take is that emotions like anger or jelousy are allowable, some times appropriate, so long as you contemplate the reasoning, and dont use it excessively?

See the last one I still cant see the logic of, since yopu state jesus wants to to respect people. Is having a lesser view of another respectful? Beieving women to be below men on authority, or slaves to be below you in every respect, hence their being permanently indentured, is a lack of respect on the controlling individuals part. The implication by that verse that these 2 things are tolerable is to bypass the point of respect altogether.

A user of this :
Im pretty sure gideons are christians, all be it a branch of them.
"geneva convention" Going on the idea that the bible instills morals you shouldnt need laws to tell you right from wrong. Previous versus all condemn negative emotions and actions, here every one of them is in play.
Im pretty sure the idea was they didnt follow the correct god and teachings, not they hated god. And a whole bunch of people sacrificed children, as christians, jews and muslims did and sometimes still do with animals. By their teachings they believed it was gods will, hence it isnt an inherent evil on their part. Certainly not worthy of killing all of the survivours, what happened to positive teaching.

"rather constant rebelling." If its their will. That attitude is the same used by men to say women dont need to consent to the men before they (men) do something. There are laws against that, and equality is enshrined in most of our nations(plural) laws.
People had multiple partners, unchristian traditions, these (for the most part) were not included by the bible because to concede would be to undermine the teachings of the christian faith.
Vizzed Elite
Bleeding Heart Liberal


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days

09-24-13 09:29 AM
Uzar is Offline
| ID: 889755 | 78 Words

Uzar
A user of this
Level: 139


POSTS: 371/6433
POST EXP: 345123
LVL EXP: 32433254
CP: 25933.5
VIZ: 555693

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0

thenumberone : That's what I meant by not that different. They're a branch of Christianity. And I agree that with the war stuff it was a little extreme. Also, I never said rape was acceptable...What I meant was on a smaller, less intense scale then that. I meant more like, being a jerk, or spending money that the husband was saving or something.
I mean, the bible condemns rape as well. Men and women are supposed to be equals.

thenumberone : That's what I meant by not that different. They're a branch of Christianity. And I agree that with the war stuff it was a little extreme. Also, I never said rape was acceptable...What I meant was on a smaller, less intense scale then that. I meant more like, being a jerk, or spending money that the husband was saving or something.
I mean, the bible condemns rape as well. Men and women are supposed to be equals.
Vizzed Elite
I wonder what the character limit on this thing is.


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 06-03-13
Location: Airship Bostonius
Last Post: 1878 days
Last Active: 1849 days

09-26-13 01:52 AM
SoL@R is Offline
| ID: 890679 | 1232 Words

SoL@R
Level: 45


POSTS: 150/459
POST EXP: 124100
LVL EXP: 625166
CP: 2839.2
VIZ: 180742

Likes: 1  Dislikes: 0
thenumberone :



Better late than never. Sorry about the delayed response. Just a quick note that I feel I need to touch on before give some notes on Psalm 18 - and this might seem "weird" - If you are not a true Christian, if you have not given your heart and life to Jesus Christ, you do not have God's Spirit within you. The Bible, God's Word, might not make sense to you. It is as 1 Corinthians 2:14 say, "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.". Also remember, the Bible cannot be merely "interpreted" with a single verse or verses. The word, phrase or verse needs to be seen in the total context before it can be understood. A whole study / teaching cannot be built around verses taken out of context. So it is with that in mind that I will discuss Psalm 18 (courtesy of Bible study guides and commentaries from bible teachers / ministers Chuck Smith, David Guzik, Charles Spurgeon and Jamieson, Fausett & Brown):



A thing to keep in mind is that the book of Psalms is in fact a book of Hebrew poetry or songs. Not poetry like we know it, with rhyming verses and such. It contains degrees of comparisons and an emotional description of things that the song writer was familiar with. Without going into the whole history of things, in this case, David, who was chosen / anointed by God to be the next king of Israel, was running from the current king Saul who was seeking to destroy David. David truly loved and trusted God completely and he gives a sublimely poetical description of God's deliverance, which he characterizes as an illustration of God's justice to the innocent and His righteous government. His own prowess and success are celebrated as the results of divine aid, and, confident of its continuance, he closes in terms of triumphant praise. That's basically what the whole Psalm is about.
You haven't asked for a specific extract so I'll add comments here and there. Since you mentioned New International Version, I'll be quoting from that.



So, look at verse 5-6:

"The cords of the grave coiled around me;

the snares of death confronted me.

In my distress I called to the Lord;

I cried to my God for help.

From his temple he heard my voice;

my cry came before him, into his ears."




All of the troops of Saul, he came out with several thousand men pursuing David. David looked over there and saw all these guys and he knew they were after him and they had encircled David. He was trapped. "The cords of the grave coiled around me."



Verses 7-15:

"The earth trembled and quaked,

and the foundations of the mountains shook;

they trembled because he was angry.

Smoke rose from his nostrils;

consuming fire came from his mouth,

burning coals blazed out of it.

He parted the heavens and came down;

dark clouds were under his feet.

He mounted the cherubim and flew;

he soared on the wings of the wind.

He made darkness his covering, his canopy around him—

the dark rain clouds of the sky.

Out of the brightness of his presence clouds advanced,

with hailstones and bolts of lightning.

The Lord thundered from heaven;

the voice of the Most High resounded. He shot his arrows and scattered the enemy,

with great bolts of lightning he routed them.

The valleys of the sea were exposed

and the foundations of the earth laid bare

at your rebuke,Lord,

at the blast of breath from your nostrils."




David describes the dramatic deliverance God brought to him. It was marked by earthquakes, the indignation of God (He was angry), smoke and fire, and the personal intervention of God. "Smoke rose from His nostrils" - Charles Spurgeon commented that it is "A violent oriental method of expressing fierce wrath. Since the breath form the nostrils is heated by strong emotion, the figure (David) portrays the Almighty Deliverer as pouring forth smoke in the heat of his wrath and the impetuousness of his zeal."

"He mounted the cherubim (a heavenly being) and flew" - David here emphasized the speed of God's deliverance.



Jumping to verses 20-24:

"The Lord has dealt with me according to my righteousness;

according to the cleanness of my hands he has rewarded me.

For I have kept the ways of the Lord;

I am not guilty of turning from my God.

All his laws are before me;

I have not turned away from his decrees.

I have been blameless before him

and have kept myself from sin.

The Lord has rewarded me according to my righteousness,

according to the cleanness of my hands in his sight."




During his long season of affliction under Saul, David was challenged to respond in unrighteous ways. He had many opportunities to strike against Saul as a matter of self-defense. Yet David consistently conducted himself in righteousness, and knew that God rewarded him because of it. Verse 23 was not a claim of sinless perfection on David's part. In fact, the year or so before the death of King Saul was spent in some significant measure of spiritual and moral compromise. Yet through it all David kept a core of integrity towards God, was correctable despite his failings, and most importantly did not fail in the greatest test: to gain the throne through killing or undermining Saul. David was obedient and faithful towards God. That is all that God asks of us, to be faithful in the little things that He entrusts us with.



Then the verses you quoted. Verses 37-42:

"I pursued my enemies and overtook them;

I did not turn back till they were destroyed.

I crushed them so that they could not rise;

they fell beneath my feet.

You armed me with strength for battle;

you humbled my adversaries before me.

You made my enemies turn their backs in flight,

and I destroyed my foes.

They cried for help, but there was no one to save them—

to the Lord, but he did not answer.

I beat them as fine as windblown dust;

I trampled them[f] like mud in the streets."




Here David had in mind those other than Saul, whom he did not describe (in any specific sense) as his enemy. David knew that as King of Israel he would have to face enemies from surrounding nations, and here he celebrated the past victories God gave him against his enemies. David fought as a true warrior, and sought to utterly defeat the enemies of Israel on the field of battle. He properly believed that God gave him the victory over these enemies. Trapp commented, "Of David we may say, as one did of Julius Caesar, you may perceive him to have been an excellent solider by his very language; for he wrote with the same spirit he fought."



There's obviously a lot more to say about this Psalm since I have not covered it all, but I'll stop here otherwise it'll turn into a novel

So, hopefully this has shed a bit more light for you on these passages. Always see it in context. Study the scriptures. Understand where it's coming from or ask your questions here!
thenumberone :



Better late than never. Sorry about the delayed response. Just a quick note that I feel I need to touch on before give some notes on Psalm 18 - and this might seem "weird" - If you are not a true Christian, if you have not given your heart and life to Jesus Christ, you do not have God's Spirit within you. The Bible, God's Word, might not make sense to you. It is as 1 Corinthians 2:14 say, "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.". Also remember, the Bible cannot be merely "interpreted" with a single verse or verses. The word, phrase or verse needs to be seen in the total context before it can be understood. A whole study / teaching cannot be built around verses taken out of context. So it is with that in mind that I will discuss Psalm 18 (courtesy of Bible study guides and commentaries from bible teachers / ministers Chuck Smith, David Guzik, Charles Spurgeon and Jamieson, Fausett & Brown):



A thing to keep in mind is that the book of Psalms is in fact a book of Hebrew poetry or songs. Not poetry like we know it, with rhyming verses and such. It contains degrees of comparisons and an emotional description of things that the song writer was familiar with. Without going into the whole history of things, in this case, David, who was chosen / anointed by God to be the next king of Israel, was running from the current king Saul who was seeking to destroy David. David truly loved and trusted God completely and he gives a sublimely poetical description of God's deliverance, which he characterizes as an illustration of God's justice to the innocent and His righteous government. His own prowess and success are celebrated as the results of divine aid, and, confident of its continuance, he closes in terms of triumphant praise. That's basically what the whole Psalm is about.
You haven't asked for a specific extract so I'll add comments here and there. Since you mentioned New International Version, I'll be quoting from that.



So, look at verse 5-6:

"The cords of the grave coiled around me;

the snares of death confronted me.

In my distress I called to the Lord;

I cried to my God for help.

From his temple he heard my voice;

my cry came before him, into his ears."




All of the troops of Saul, he came out with several thousand men pursuing David. David looked over there and saw all these guys and he knew they were after him and they had encircled David. He was trapped. "The cords of the grave coiled around me."



Verses 7-15:

"The earth trembled and quaked,

and the foundations of the mountains shook;

they trembled because he was angry.

Smoke rose from his nostrils;

consuming fire came from his mouth,

burning coals blazed out of it.

He parted the heavens and came down;

dark clouds were under his feet.

He mounted the cherubim and flew;

he soared on the wings of the wind.

He made darkness his covering, his canopy around him—

the dark rain clouds of the sky.

Out of the brightness of his presence clouds advanced,

with hailstones and bolts of lightning.

The Lord thundered from heaven;

the voice of the Most High resounded. He shot his arrows and scattered the enemy,

with great bolts of lightning he routed them.

The valleys of the sea were exposed

and the foundations of the earth laid bare

at your rebuke,Lord,

at the blast of breath from your nostrils."




David describes the dramatic deliverance God brought to him. It was marked by earthquakes, the indignation of God (He was angry), smoke and fire, and the personal intervention of God. "Smoke rose from His nostrils" - Charles Spurgeon commented that it is "A violent oriental method of expressing fierce wrath. Since the breath form the nostrils is heated by strong emotion, the figure (David) portrays the Almighty Deliverer as pouring forth smoke in the heat of his wrath and the impetuousness of his zeal."

"He mounted the cherubim (a heavenly being) and flew" - David here emphasized the speed of God's deliverance.



Jumping to verses 20-24:

"The Lord has dealt with me according to my righteousness;

according to the cleanness of my hands he has rewarded me.

For I have kept the ways of the Lord;

I am not guilty of turning from my God.

All his laws are before me;

I have not turned away from his decrees.

I have been blameless before him

and have kept myself from sin.

The Lord has rewarded me according to my righteousness,

according to the cleanness of my hands in his sight."




During his long season of affliction under Saul, David was challenged to respond in unrighteous ways. He had many opportunities to strike against Saul as a matter of self-defense. Yet David consistently conducted himself in righteousness, and knew that God rewarded him because of it. Verse 23 was not a claim of sinless perfection on David's part. In fact, the year or so before the death of King Saul was spent in some significant measure of spiritual and moral compromise. Yet through it all David kept a core of integrity towards God, was correctable despite his failings, and most importantly did not fail in the greatest test: to gain the throne through killing or undermining Saul. David was obedient and faithful towards God. That is all that God asks of us, to be faithful in the little things that He entrusts us with.



Then the verses you quoted. Verses 37-42:

"I pursued my enemies and overtook them;

I did not turn back till they were destroyed.

I crushed them so that they could not rise;

they fell beneath my feet.

You armed me with strength for battle;

you humbled my adversaries before me.

You made my enemies turn their backs in flight,

and I destroyed my foes.

They cried for help, but there was no one to save them—

to the Lord, but he did not answer.

I beat them as fine as windblown dust;

I trampled them[f] like mud in the streets."




Here David had in mind those other than Saul, whom he did not describe (in any specific sense) as his enemy. David knew that as King of Israel he would have to face enemies from surrounding nations, and here he celebrated the past victories God gave him against his enemies. David fought as a true warrior, and sought to utterly defeat the enemies of Israel on the field of battle. He properly believed that God gave him the victory over these enemies. Trapp commented, "Of David we may say, as one did of Julius Caesar, you may perceive him to have been an excellent solider by his very language; for he wrote with the same spirit he fought."



There's obviously a lot more to say about this Psalm since I have not covered it all, but I'll stop here otherwise it'll turn into a novel

So, hopefully this has shed a bit more light for you on these passages. Always see it in context. Study the scriptures. Understand where it's coming from or ask your questions here!
Trusted Member
Those who wait on the Lord will renew their strength; They shall mount up with wings like eagles.


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-05-13
Location: Gordon's Bay, RSA
Last Post: 2562 days
Last Active: 1893 days

(edited by SoL@R on 09-26-13 01:54 AM)     Post Rating: 1   Liked By: Singelli,

10-17-13 08:45 AM
thenumberone is Offline
| ID: 907702 | 837 Words

thenumberone
Level: 143


POSTS: 5658/6365
POST EXP: 365694
LVL EXP: 35017564
CP: 4946.4
VIZ: 329756

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
SoL@R :

I can hardly object given how long its taken me to respond. I apologise, iv been exceptionally busy and didnt think it was fair to reply to a post you put so much effort into with a few pointless lines.

Also i apologise if i miss something, its possible since i keep getting distracted by someone asking me scripting questions, so my attention is somewhat divided. This is probably my best opportunity to reply for the next few weeks though.

Corinthians 2:14
Yeh iv heard that quite a few times, though i dont agree with it.

5-6:
yup i understood the context of that.

7-15
I understood that too, however its where i begin to see contradictions.
As shown by various parts of the bible, predominantly new testament, acts of anger, spite, envy etc are condemned as wrong and humans are urged to forgoe such things.
However god himself seems guilty of at least anger here, shown by the very strong imagery of those few verses. By your own admission god was angry.
From that stems the question is he then not as fallible as man, especially given man is created in his image (unless thats only outward appearance).
Is anger inherently wrong, or is he himself not applicable, making anger wrong in humans only?

20-24
"Verse 23 was not a claim of sinless perfection on David's part"
"I have been blameless before him
and have kept myself from sin. "
Surely if he had been somewhat guilty of sin, then he wouldn't be entirely blameless, albeit enough so that he was treated as the grieving party?
"Like if I am fighting in a war and fight in an area where i know there to be a large number of civilians. I act in a reckless manner and end up killing one. It was unintentional and i never started the war so i am not punished, however i have to accept some of the blame for what happened.

37-42
And here, is where my ultimate objection comes.
Their is a difference between killing a man with a gun and killing a man at your feet. I would see a difference, i can only imagine you would too, and here i think he doesent.
Before he said he was blameless. I disputed that but I recognise much of what was done was necessary, he was on the defensive. Now he has all the power, and instead of choosing a new path, he now becomes the aggressor, he chases his enemys, i can only imagine them praying from salvation from their enemys blood lust. Here i have to ask if two wrongs can ever make a right.
He had a choice and yet he gave in utterly to anger, wroth, spite, vengeance...

"you humbled my adversaries before me"
Humbled from the dictionary:

having or showing a modest or low estimate of one’s importance
of low social, administrative, or political rank:
(of a thing) of modest pretensions or dimensions:

From this they had been shown they were the weaker and that god was not on their side.

"You made my enemies turn their backs in flight"

Again theres the old saying backstabber. While it generally applies to those that trust you the metaphor is still there, to kill someone who is in no position to harm you is considered wrong. I can only assume that this was less to cement his own safety as to appease his pride.

"They cried for help, but there was no one to save them...
I beat them as fine as windblown dust;
I trampled them[f] like mud in the streets."

Here i am certain that if a psychiatrist analysed someone like that they would suggest he was a very aggressive and dangerous man.
His actions, and the way he conveys them to us, bear the hallmarks of a man that takes real pleasure in the suffering of others.
It was not enough for him to win, he wanted to humiliate them as much as possible.
Grind them to dust, destroy as much as physically [possible.
Pour them out
*looks again.
Actually you have a different line to me here. You have trampled them, i have poured them.
I can look at both.
Pouring them out like mud, if we take physically, would refer to the blood being spilled. That there blood is no better than mud shows his feeling of superiority, and his view that they lack any worth at all as humans. Referring to someones blood as mud is also a historically derogatory term, commonly to do with race and ethnicity.
Equally however, to trample them like mud is to step on them, showing no regard for them in life or death. Again calling in to question any worth.
Kind of like if you defeat an army and then proceed to mutilate their corpses.
That in itself wasnt uncommon since the Egyptians were known to cut an ear from every body to form a count of the dead, however they werent christian.

SoL@R :

I can hardly object given how long its taken me to respond. I apologise, iv been exceptionally busy and didnt think it was fair to reply to a post you put so much effort into with a few pointless lines.

Also i apologise if i miss something, its possible since i keep getting distracted by someone asking me scripting questions, so my attention is somewhat divided. This is probably my best opportunity to reply for the next few weeks though.

Corinthians 2:14
Yeh iv heard that quite a few times, though i dont agree with it.

5-6:
yup i understood the context of that.

7-15
I understood that too, however its where i begin to see contradictions.
As shown by various parts of the bible, predominantly new testament, acts of anger, spite, envy etc are condemned as wrong and humans are urged to forgoe such things.
However god himself seems guilty of at least anger here, shown by the very strong imagery of those few verses. By your own admission god was angry.
From that stems the question is he then not as fallible as man, especially given man is created in his image (unless thats only outward appearance).
Is anger inherently wrong, or is he himself not applicable, making anger wrong in humans only?

20-24
"Verse 23 was not a claim of sinless perfection on David's part"
"I have been blameless before him
and have kept myself from sin. "
Surely if he had been somewhat guilty of sin, then he wouldn't be entirely blameless, albeit enough so that he was treated as the grieving party?
"Like if I am fighting in a war and fight in an area where i know there to be a large number of civilians. I act in a reckless manner and end up killing one. It was unintentional and i never started the war so i am not punished, however i have to accept some of the blame for what happened.

37-42
And here, is where my ultimate objection comes.
Their is a difference between killing a man with a gun and killing a man at your feet. I would see a difference, i can only imagine you would too, and here i think he doesent.
Before he said he was blameless. I disputed that but I recognise much of what was done was necessary, he was on the defensive. Now he has all the power, and instead of choosing a new path, he now becomes the aggressor, he chases his enemys, i can only imagine them praying from salvation from their enemys blood lust. Here i have to ask if two wrongs can ever make a right.
He had a choice and yet he gave in utterly to anger, wroth, spite, vengeance...

"you humbled my adversaries before me"
Humbled from the dictionary:

having or showing a modest or low estimate of one’s importance
of low social, administrative, or political rank:
(of a thing) of modest pretensions or dimensions:

From this they had been shown they were the weaker and that god was not on their side.

"You made my enemies turn their backs in flight"

Again theres the old saying backstabber. While it generally applies to those that trust you the metaphor is still there, to kill someone who is in no position to harm you is considered wrong. I can only assume that this was less to cement his own safety as to appease his pride.

"They cried for help, but there was no one to save them...
I beat them as fine as windblown dust;
I trampled them[f] like mud in the streets."

Here i am certain that if a psychiatrist analysed someone like that they would suggest he was a very aggressive and dangerous man.
His actions, and the way he conveys them to us, bear the hallmarks of a man that takes real pleasure in the suffering of others.
It was not enough for him to win, he wanted to humiliate them as much as possible.
Grind them to dust, destroy as much as physically [possible.
Pour them out
*looks again.
Actually you have a different line to me here. You have trampled them, i have poured them.
I can look at both.
Pouring them out like mud, if we take physically, would refer to the blood being spilled. That there blood is no better than mud shows his feeling of superiority, and his view that they lack any worth at all as humans. Referring to someones blood as mud is also a historically derogatory term, commonly to do with race and ethnicity.
Equally however, to trample them like mud is to step on them, showing no regard for them in life or death. Again calling in to question any worth.
Kind of like if you defeat an army and then proceed to mutilate their corpses.
That in itself wasnt uncommon since the Egyptians were known to cut an ear from every body to form a count of the dead, however they werent christian.

Vizzed Elite
Bleeding Heart Liberal


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-22-11
Last Post: 3382 days
Last Active: 3382 days

11-01-13 07:41 AM
SoL@R is Offline
| ID: 920630 | 827 Words

SoL@R
Level: 45


POSTS: 189/459
POST EXP: 124100
LVL EXP: 625166
CP: 2839.2
VIZ: 180742

Likes: 0  Dislikes: 0
thenumberone :

Now it's my turn to apologise for this necro post.  Life happened and time was consumed  I also apologise if I do miss some of your questions.

However god himself seems guilty of at least anger here, shown by the very strong imagery of those few verses. By your own admission god was angry.  From that stems the question is he then not as fallible as man, especially given man is created in his image (unless thats only outward appearance).  Is anger inherently wrong, or is he himself not applicable, making anger wrong in humans only?

God does get angry, yes, BUT this is where we as finite beings, with limited understanding, will never fully understand an infinite, everlasting God with absolute knowledge and wisdom.  God's anger is not the foolish, uncontrolled, "I want to hit everything" anger you and I are familiar with.  God's anger is always directed at SIN.  Yet his angry is a perfect, righteous, controlled anger. The Bible says that God is a being perfect in his character. Sin offends his perfect character. When nations or individuals reject his love and goodness, God then becomes angry toward them. When there is genuine repentance God forgives the sinning party. God would much rather grant mercy and forgiveness than express his anger.

Surely if he had been somewhat guilty of sin, then he wouldn't be entirely blameless, albeit enough so that he was treated as the grieving party?

You are right.  David was indeed not perfect or blameless or as we would understand it today, "without sin" (the Batsheba episode comes to mind).  The word "blameless" here (or many parts of the Bible) actually refers to being upright, living in a close relationship with God.  Maybe a word like wholesome or sound or candid would be appropriate when applying this word to people.  David did of course sin in his life, but he did not endure in sin.  He ran away from his sin, hated it and repented wholeheartedly and ALWAYS turned back to God.  God has amazing grace that is why David, like the rest of us had to find grace in His sight.

It was not enough for him to win, he wanted to humiliate them as much as possible. Grind them to dust, destroy as much as physically possible.

I've only quoted a piece of what you have said about verse 37-42 and I think this basically sums up what you're objecting against.  Kicking a dog while it's down, yes?  Again, keep in mind that the Psalms are songs / poems and in those days, the Hebrew poems were more of a comparison of different things and feelings than rhyming of words.  In actual conflict, with God's aid, the defeat of David's enemies is certain. A present and continued success is expressed.  With God's aid there will be utter victory.  "Crushed them" and "I beat them as fine as windblown dust; I trampled them like mud in the streets."  is David's expression of God's ultimate dominion and almighty power over all things.  He would be able to do these things with his enemies with God on his side.  He is not glorifying himself, but he is magnifying the greatness of God and His power in this instance.  I might be misunderstanding you, but the phrase, "You made my enemies turn their backs in flight" is not referring to "backstabbing".  It literally means that God made David's enemies turn around and flee, running in the other direction.  It is important to understand that God does not delight in bringing judgement and punishment to any individual and/or nation.  As I have mentioned earlier, God, in His perfect being, cannot stand sin and He will punish it sooner or later.  The nations that were standing against Israel in those days were heathen nations, rejecting the one, true, living God and worshiping false gods.  This is the other very important thing to understand - this will of course have no meaning or significance for the self professing atheist or person that does not know God - and that is that the God of the Bible is the only true God.  He is sovereign.  There is none other like Him (I always expect opposition on this ).  He is the Creator of all and He is the same God now as He was / is for David.  The reason why you and I are still standing is because of His grace and of His Son Jesus Christ.  It's because God loves the people of this world that He is withholding His judgement.  We are living in a time of grace, but that judgement is coming soon.  Make no mistake.  There is still time (for every one and anyone) to get right with God.
Anyway, I got a bit off track there but you get my point.  Let me know if you still have questions or whack correct me if I didn't get what you meant.
thenumberone :

Now it's my turn to apologise for this necro post.  Life happened and time was consumed  I also apologise if I do miss some of your questions.

However god himself seems guilty of at least anger here, shown by the very strong imagery of those few verses. By your own admission god was angry.  From that stems the question is he then not as fallible as man, especially given man is created in his image (unless thats only outward appearance).  Is anger inherently wrong, or is he himself not applicable, making anger wrong in humans only?

God does get angry, yes, BUT this is where we as finite beings, with limited understanding, will never fully understand an infinite, everlasting God with absolute knowledge and wisdom.  God's anger is not the foolish, uncontrolled, "I want to hit everything" anger you and I are familiar with.  God's anger is always directed at SIN.  Yet his angry is a perfect, righteous, controlled anger. The Bible says that God is a being perfect in his character. Sin offends his perfect character. When nations or individuals reject his love and goodness, God then becomes angry toward them. When there is genuine repentance God forgives the sinning party. God would much rather grant mercy and forgiveness than express his anger.

Surely if he had been somewhat guilty of sin, then he wouldn't be entirely blameless, albeit enough so that he was treated as the grieving party?

You are right.  David was indeed not perfect or blameless or as we would understand it today, "without sin" (the Batsheba episode comes to mind).  The word "blameless" here (or many parts of the Bible) actually refers to being upright, living in a close relationship with God.  Maybe a word like wholesome or sound or candid would be appropriate when applying this word to people.  David did of course sin in his life, but he did not endure in sin.  He ran away from his sin, hated it and repented wholeheartedly and ALWAYS turned back to God.  God has amazing grace that is why David, like the rest of us had to find grace in His sight.

It was not enough for him to win, he wanted to humiliate them as much as possible. Grind them to dust, destroy as much as physically possible.

I've only quoted a piece of what you have said about verse 37-42 and I think this basically sums up what you're objecting against.  Kicking a dog while it's down, yes?  Again, keep in mind that the Psalms are songs / poems and in those days, the Hebrew poems were more of a comparison of different things and feelings than rhyming of words.  In actual conflict, with God's aid, the defeat of David's enemies is certain. A present and continued success is expressed.  With God's aid there will be utter victory.  "Crushed them" and "I beat them as fine as windblown dust; I trampled them like mud in the streets."  is David's expression of God's ultimate dominion and almighty power over all things.  He would be able to do these things with his enemies with God on his side.  He is not glorifying himself, but he is magnifying the greatness of God and His power in this instance.  I might be misunderstanding you, but the phrase, "You made my enemies turn their backs in flight" is not referring to "backstabbing".  It literally means that God made David's enemies turn around and flee, running in the other direction.  It is important to understand that God does not delight in bringing judgement and punishment to any individual and/or nation.  As I have mentioned earlier, God, in His perfect being, cannot stand sin and He will punish it sooner or later.  The nations that were standing against Israel in those days were heathen nations, rejecting the one, true, living God and worshiping false gods.  This is the other very important thing to understand - this will of course have no meaning or significance for the self professing atheist or person that does not know God - and that is that the God of the Bible is the only true God.  He is sovereign.  There is none other like Him (I always expect opposition on this ).  He is the Creator of all and He is the same God now as He was / is for David.  The reason why you and I are still standing is because of His grace and of His Son Jesus Christ.  It's because God loves the people of this world that He is withholding His judgement.  We are living in a time of grace, but that judgement is coming soon.  Make no mistake.  There is still time (for every one and anyone) to get right with God.
Anyway, I got a bit off track there but you get my point.  Let me know if you still have questions or whack correct me if I didn't get what you meant.
Trusted Member
Those who wait on the Lord will renew their strength; They shall mount up with wings like eagles.


Affected by 'Laziness Syndrome'

Registered: 03-05-13
Location: Gordon's Bay, RSA
Last Post: 2562 days
Last Active: 1893 days

Links

Page Comments


This page has no comments

Adblocker detected!

Vizzed.com is very expensive to keep alive! The Ads pay for the servers.

Vizzed has 3 TB worth of games and 1 TB worth of music.  This site is free to use but the ads barely pay for the monthly server fees.  If too many more people use ad block, the site cannot survive.

We prioritize the community over the site profits.  This is why we avoid using annoying (but high paying) ads like most other sites which include popups, obnoxious sounds and animations, malware, and other forms of intrusiveness.  We'll do our part to never resort to these types of ads, please do your part by helping support this site by adding Vizzed.com to your ad blocking whitelist.

×