Thread: Are iron chariots mightier than God?

Ahhh, that infamous verse. Technically it is part of one of the many contradictions in the Bible. There's another verse later in Judges which talks about God being able to defeat iron chariots, but in this particular verse, he can't.

God can:
Judges 4:13-16 And Sisera gathered together all his chariots, even nine hundred chariots of iron, and all the people that were with him, from Harosheth of the Gentiles unto the river of Kishon. And Deborah said unto Barak, Up; for this is the day in which the LORD hath delivered Sisera into thine hand: is not the LORD gone out before thee? So Barak went down from mount Tabor, and ten thousand men after him. And the LORD discomfited Sisera, and all his chariots, and all his host, with the edge of the sword before Barak; so that Sisera lighted down off his chariot, and fled away on his feet. But Barak pursued after the chariots, and after the host, unto Harosheth of the Gentiles: and all the host of Sisera fell upon the edge of the sword; and there was not a man left.

God can't:
Judges 1:19 And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

Come on! Make up your mind people! Silly goat-herders...

Its referring to Judah, not God.

http://www.tektonics.org/TK-JUD.html#ironchariots.html

I am intrigued that you guys try to debate God on the biblical level when you do not even believe he exists.

Actually, if the Lord was with Judah, surely the divine influence should have allowed Judah to conquer the valley? And yet, despite the divine backing and influence, he failed.

Also, why we do it? Because it's fun to pick up at the inconsistencies of scriptures...

Originally Posted by psychology student

Its referring to Judah, not God.

http://www.tektonics.org/TK-JUD.html#ironchariots.html

I am intrigued that you guys try to debate God on the biblical level when you do not even believe he exists.

Actually its referring to God. Maybe thats not what the writer meant, but its what the language says. The word he is referring to God. That's certain. Maybe whoever wrote it fucked up their language for a second, but it is referring to God in itself.



..And how do you know what the person who wrote it meant?

Yeah, what your reading is one translation, of many.

Originally Posted by psychology student

Yeah, what your reading is one translation, of many.

Bluefinger's was a different one which also said the same thing.


You seem to be jumping around alot. Why do you have to bend what it said with excuses like "bad translation!". It's quite clear that it's just bad writing. It doesn't disprove christianity or anything. But just admit it's bad writing and grammar, at the least.

Look at the original Hebrew, there are many translations. You are judging a translation.

Originally Posted by psychology student

Look at the original Hebrew, there are many translations. You are judging a translation.

I trust the many different highly qualified and practiced translators and proof readers who all agreed fine.


I know you probably don't because what they said goes against your belief.

No, many translations agree with me. Nonetheless, the sentence is ambiguous in all translations as it cites two actors, and then does not clearly distinguish which it refers to in the latter part of the verse.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Again, I don't know why you are debating the semantics of the bible regarding God, when you don't believe he exists.

I say it's God.

Argument:

It really depends on whether it says "and he [possibly Judah] drove out..." or "and [can only be Yahweh] drove out". If there's no personal pronoun that could refer to Judah, then "and drove out" is a continuation of the first sentence which has Yahweh as the active principle. Which would mean Yahweh drove them out.

You would have to compare translations and see which way it is translated in most cases. Considering that some translations do not have the pronoun it could be argued that it is more likely that the second part is in reference to Yahweh. This is because, as a translator, you can't just leave out the pronoun if it affects meaning [in this case, losing the ambiguity of the second part - or even worse, making it clear that it's Yahweh when in fact Hebrew says it's Judah]. You can, however, ADD a pronoun to highlight something or change the sentence structure a little.

Read the context around the verse, from any translation, and you will see why it is not referring to God:

Judges Chapter 1
1 And it came to pass after the death of Joshua, that the children of Israel asked the LORD, saying: 'Who shall go up for us first against the Canaanites, to fight against them?' 2 And LORD said: 'Judah shall go up; behold, I have delivered the land into his hand.' 3 And Judah said unto Simeon his brother: 'Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot.' So Simeon went with him. 4 And Judah went up; and the LORD delivered the Canaanites and the Perizzites into their hand; and they smote of them in Bezek ten thousand men. 5 And they found Adoni-bezek in Bezek; and they fought against him, and they smote the Canaanites and the Perizzites. 6 But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued after him, and caught him, and cut off his thumbs and his great toes. 7 And Adoni-bezek said: 'Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered food under my table; as I have done, so God hath requited me.' And they brought him to Jerusalem, and he died there. {P}

8 And the children of Judah fought against Jerusalem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire. 9 And afterward the children of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites that dwelt in the hill-country, and in the South, and in the Lowland. 10 And Judah went against the Canaanites that dwelt in Hebron--now the name of Hebron beforetime was Kiriath-arba--and they smote Sheshai, and Ahiman, and Talmai. 11 And from thence he went against the inhabitants of Debir--now the name of Debir beforetime was Kiriath-sepher. 12 And Caleb said: 'He that smiteth Kiriath-sepher, and taketh it, to him will I give Achsah my daughter to wife.' 13 And Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother, took it; and he gave him Achsah his daughter to wife. 14 And it came to pass, when she came unto him, that she moved him to ask of her father a field; and she alighted from off her ass; and Caleb said unto her: 'What wouldest thou?' 15 And she said unto him: 'Give me a blessing; for that thou hast set me in the Southland, give me therefore springs of water.' And Caleb gave her the Upper Springs and the Nether Springs. {P}

16 And the children of the Kenite, Moses' father-in-law, went up out of the city of palm-trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which is in the south of Arad; and they went and dwelt with the people. 17 And Judah went with Simeon his brother, and they smote the Canaanites that inhabited Zephath, and utterly destroyed it. And the name of the city was called Hormah. 18 Also Judah took Gaza with the border thereof, and Ashkelon with the border thereof, and Ekron with the border thereof. 19 And the LORD was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the hill-country; for he could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. 20 And they gave Hebron unto Caleb, as Moses had spoken; and he drove out thence the three sons of Anak. 21 And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwelt with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem, unto this day. {P}22 And the house of Joseph, they also went up against Beth-el; and the LORD was with them. 23 And the house of Joseph sent to spy out Beth-el--now the name of the city beforetime was Luz. 24 And the watchers saw a man come forth out of the city, and they said unto him: 'Show us, we pray thee, the entrance into the city, and we will deal kindly with thee.' 25 And he showed them the entrance into the city, and they smote the city with the edge of the sword; but they let the man go and all his family. 26 And the man went into the land of the Hittites, and built a city, and called the name thereof Luz, which is the name thereof unto this day. {P}

Originally Posted by psychology student

No, many translations agree with me. Nonetheless, the sentence is ambiguous in all translations as it cites two actors, and then does not clearly distinguish which it refers to in the latter part of the verse.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Again, I don't know why you are debating the semantics of the bible regarding God, when you don't believe he exists.

In an attempt to show people who believe this stuff word for word that it doesn't make sense.


Ironically I spend about a quarter of my education at the moment studying the bible. D:

Originally Posted by Omicron

In an attempt to show people who believe this stuff word for word that it doesn't make sense.

Well keep trying then.

Originally Posted by psychology student

Well keep trying then.

Mmm.

Do you want the classic Bible contradiction list?

Why would I?

Originally Posted by psychology student

Why would I?

I thought you might find it interesting.


Obviously not. My mistake.

Originally Posted by psychology student

keep trying

.

Psych, the verse still references the fact that Judah had the blessing and support of God, and despite the divine influence, Judah failed.

A poor attempt at apologetics...

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Psych, the verse still references the fact that Judah had the blessing and support of God, and despite the divine influence, Judah failed.

A poor attempt at apologetics...

That is irrelevant; another matter entirely. The point is that the initial point in the OP is incorrect.

Originally Posted by psychology student

That is irrelevant; another matter entirely. The point is that the initial point in the OP is incorrect.

The detail may be incorrect, but the point stands. There are limits to what God can and can't do, whether it is direct action or indirect influence.

Originally Posted by bluefinger

The detail may be incorrect, but the point stands. There are limits to what God can and can't do, whether it is direct action or indirect influence.

So God should do everything for us?

Originally Posted by psychology student

So God should do everything for us?

If he was as intervening and omnipotent as the Bible wants us to believe (the parts that certain groups of people love to quote, ie fundies), and the fact that simply praying for something and having faith will make it happen, as Jesus wants you to believe... then really, why the limitations in the first place?

I read it as God's inability as well. Of course I recognize that all the translations may be incorrect, but I thought they were supposed to be divinely inspired as well.