[img]http://.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/david_goliath.jpeg.jpg[/img]

The same “infallible” bible also credits the killing of Goliath to Elhanan, one of David’s mighty men.

One of the myths of Christianity is the infallibility of the bible. Quoting Paul, some Christians insist every word in the bible is “God-breathed.” (2 Timothy
3:16). When you identify contradictions in the bible, they either refuse to acknowledge them or try to rationalise them away with highfalutin apologetics.

However, these apologetics have not made the contradictions disappear. All they do is establish that these bible-fanatics are not committed to the truth.
Christians generally believe little David killed mighty Goliath, according to the “infallible” account of 1 Samuel 17:50-51. This feat is drummed into us from
childhood. We act in plays celebrating David’s victory. We listen to sermons extolling his achievement. However, the same “infallible” bible also credits the killing of Goliath to Elhanan, one of
David’s mighty men. This contradiction leads to the inevitable conclusion that while the bible might indeed be a highly inspired book, it is nevertheless
not infallible.

Bible discrepancies

2 Samuel says: “There was another battle with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan son of Jair from Bethlehem killed Goliath from Gath.” (2 Samuel 21:19). This record of Elhanan (as opposed to David) killing Goliath can be found in the following bible translations among many others: New International Version (NIV); American Standard Version (ASV);
New American Standard Bible (NASB); New American Standard Bible, Updated Edition (NASU); The Amplified Bible (AMP); Revised Standard Version
(RSV); New Revised Standard Version (NRSV); and Today’s English Version (TEV).

Other bible translations of the same 2 Samuel 21:19 say Elhanan killed “the brother of Goliath.” These translations include the King James Version (KJV);
New King James Version (NKJV); The Living Bible (TLB); and New Living Translation (NLT). Of the latter, the New King James Version is remarkably unreliable. As a matter of policy, King
James sometimes adds its own words to bible verses, effectively doctoring their meaning.

In its own defence, it warns its readers in its introductory pages that: “words or phrases in italics indicate expressions
in the original language which require clarification by additional English words.” The need for such dubious “clarification” led the New King James Version to
alter 2 Samuel 21:19 as follows: “Again there was war at Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed THE BROTHER OF Goliath the Gittite.”

Although the translation says Elhanan slew “the brother of Goliath;” the words “the brother of” are written in italics, indicating that they do not appear
in the original Hebrew text but were added at the discretion of NKJV translators. This leads to the following conclusion: either the original Hebrew of 2 Samuel 21:9 was not infallible, or the doctored 2 Samuel 21:9 of NKJV is not infallible. Whichever is the case, it means the bible is not infallible. The bible is a book written and compiled by men; and men are not infallible.

Who killed Goliath?

However, my purpose here is not just to demonstrate the fallibility of the bible. Bible-worshipping Christians will always reject that fact no matter what.

My purpose is to determine if David killed Goliath. Faced with the dilemma of contradictions between 1 and 2 Samuel, the author of 1 Chronicles, written
centuries after 2 Samuel; says: “There was another battle with the Philistines, and Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi, the brother of Goliath from Gath.” (1
Chronicles 20:5).

The question then arises as to which version we are going to believe? Should we believe the classical position that David killed Goliath, or should we believe the equally biblical position that Elhanan
killed Goliath?

For a number of reasons, the account stating that David killed Goliath is the less believable. It is in the tradition of kings and rulers to take credit for other
people’s achievements under their kingdom. David was no exception to this. For example, when Joab captured Rabbah, he tactfully gave the credit to
David. David himself went along with this charade and pretended that he was the one who took the city. (2 Samuel 12:26-31).

It would appear that originally the killing of Goliath was part and parcel of a collection of tales extolling the exploits of David’s mighty men of war known as
“The Thirty.” Elhanan was one of them.

He distinguished himself by killing a mighty Philistine called Goliath. But in the process of magnifying the great King David, his substitution as the killer of
Goliath was not long in coming.

Saul and David

The account of David killing Goliath is so full of contradictions that it is clear it is the fabricated version. One of the problems with the account has to
do with the inability of bible-writers to determine precisely when David first met Saul.

We are told that when Saul transgressed against the Lord, God sent an evil spirit to trouble him. (1 Samuel 16:14).
Someone then recommended to Saul that he should hire David to play the harp, offering the dubious thesis that soothing music is a demon-repellent. But then the man recommending David said something strange: he extolled David, a young teenager who was not even old enough to be in the army, as a man of war: “I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who is skillful in playing, a mighty man of valor, a man of war.” (1 Samuel 16:18).

This description is a giveaway. It is obviously written after the fact. There is no basis for describing David, a youth keeping sheep, as “a mighty man of valour” and “a man of war.” By all accounts, David was not even a man yet.

On this recommendation, Saul sent word to Jesse, David’s father, that his son should be seconded to him. However, David entered Saul’s service not as a
harp-playing musician, but as his armour-bearer, even though we are told later that Saul’s armour was too heavy for David. (1 Samuel 17:38-39).

Nevertheless, whenever Saul came under attack by the evil spirit, David would play a harp and the evil spirit would depart. Saul quickly took a liking to David, and he sent to his father a second time that David’s secondment to him should become permanent. (1 Samuel 16:22).

However, when we get to the incident where David is alleged to have killed Goliath, we discover to our surprise that this same David, who was supposed to
be Saul’s armour-bearer/musician, had never met Saul before. In that contradictory account, David was
just a young boy tending sheep. His father sent him to deliver lunch to his two brothers at the war-front.

On arriving there, he found Goliath terrorizing everybody and offered to fight against him.

He was then brought to Saul who, on meeting him for the very first time, said to him: “You are not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him; for you
are a youth, and he a man of war from his youth.” (1 Samuel 17:33). However, in the earlier version, David was specifically introduced to Saul as “a man of war.”

Contrary to the earlier account where Saul sent emissaries to David’s father twice, he now did not know who David’s father was. He asked Abner, his military commander: “Whose son is this young
man?” (1 Samuel 17:55). (Continued).

Source:- http://.com/vanguard-reporter-says-david-did-not-kill-goliath/

Whatever the case maybe,fear God!

how dat one take call off strike??

he's actually got things mixed up...needs to study d bible with more attention to detail...the bible editions may varyin their use of language (that's why they're called 'versions'), but definitely none disputes d fact that david killed goliath...
Now d bible makes mention of GOLIATH in ANOTHER battle wit d philistines... It is very logical that several people would bear d same name, and don't forget dat the name GOLIATH could even have been a family name, a surname kind of...

Copy and paste reporters

Justosaus: he's actually got things mixed up...needs to study d bible with more attention to detail...the bible editions may varyin their use of language (that's why they're called 'versions'), but definitely none disputes d fact that david killed goliath...
Now d bible makes mention of GOLIATH in ANOTHER battle wit d philistines... It is very logical that several people would bear d same name, and don't forget dat the name GOLIATH could even have been a family name, a surname kind of...

LOL. Another Christian spin. Let me help u out bro.
So u are trying to tell us there were about 37 Goliaths who all happened to be from Gath in Philistine at a time when people were know mainly by their first names? Guy try another lie.
Also I am yet to see any of u Christian spinners counter the OP's assertion on the inconsistency in David's story especially as pernitent to when exactly he met Saul.
Why did the KJV feel the need to add to the original meaning of that portion of the bible about Elhanah killing Goliath? That is shady, wont u agree? Hence the question arises as to what other shady means men has be adding to the books that make up the bible since they were first penned down.
These are some of the many inconsistencies in the bible. We have argued them here many times and slippery Christians have always attempted to wriggle themselves out of it.

NOTE: We are not trying to make u stop believing ur bibles. We cant. Religion is an insidiously dangerous virus that has no known cure. We are only trying to remind that that smug satisfaction u get by telling urself u are reading the mind of God --and thus, the keys to the gates of heaven-- is a big lie.
Also note that most of the post-Davidian Israelites were strongly pro-David. Hence we expect history to be twisted in David's favour. That is understandable considering most of the writers were in captivity and homesick and thus began to dream of the great kingdom of David.
Unless of course u believe the bible fell from the sky.

.

Some one can bear the name goliath because uptill today we still hear of pharoh in egyt besides i dont think the story of david and goliath is only in the bible what aboutquaran . Why are u trying to turn the word of God upside down?

Brother of Goliath most likely carried similar genes to Goliath's. Goliath may well not be name of a person but a description of the person (giant). Goliath or no Goliath is not enough to determine fallibility of the Bible. If you can point to me God's promise or judgment in the Bible that failed, then the Bible becomes fallible to me.

Chazzyboy: Some one can bear the name goliath because uptill today we still hear of pharoh in egyt besides i dont think the story of david and goliath is only in the bible what aboutquaran . Why are u trying to turn the word of God upside down?

Are u high on fermented eba? Where do u hear d name Pharoah in Egypt today? Some of u just come and talk rubbish online.
And the Quran which written 600+ years after d bible by shamelessly plaigiarising parts of the bible, and distorting them, is supposed to be argument for the truth of the story in d bible? Guy rest abeg

.!

Some journalists need to undergo brain test, Including the clown that wrote this article. Logically those of us that understand Philippine know that Goliath means giant, The man may have killed another giant sorry Goliath. Since the bible clearly stated it in 2nd Sam 21:19 another battle. Don't start giving some people hope now@ Mr journalist... Oga moderator i know you are planning to put this shit on front page, If i were u this shit should be in trash bin...

The Goliath of Gath in 1Samuel 17, was killed by David well before he became king, around the 20th year of King Saul's 40year reign, and David was still a teenager then. Then the Goliath the Gittite in 2Samuel 21 was killed by Elhanan after the rebellion and death of Absalom, about 20 to 30 years into David's reign as king. David was an old man then.

So between the Goliath of 1Samuel 17 and the Goliath of 2Samuel 21, we are talking of about 40 to 50 years. So they definitely couldnt be the same person.

Gath is a tribe of giants in Philistine, of the descendant of the Anakims. Now for another giant to be born in a tribe of giants and called Goliath within a space of 40years is no shocker. If that seems far fetched to you, it is either a case of genuine naivity or deliberate stupidity.

Its like not believing that two Ayoku can come from Kogi state in Nigeria within a space of 40 years. Thats deliberate stupidity.

The op is a confused human being

I_am_strata: The op is a confused human being

Downside of information technology. Just anyone can have their say, no matter how uninformed. Even ignorance is now a point of view.

sambas: Some journalists need to undergo brain test, Including the clown that wrote this article. Logically those of us that understand Philippine know that Goliath means giant, The man may have killed another giant sorry Goliath. Since the bible clearly stated it in 2nd Sam 21:19 another battle. Don't start giving some people hope now@ Mr journalist... Oga moderator i know you are planning to put this shit on front page, If i were u this shit should be in trash bin...

phillipines?what are u on about?if u say goliath means giant,why does the bible specifically say in 1 sam 17:4 that the name of the philistine champion was goliath of gath?why didn't it say "a goliath of gath",since according to u goliath can be used in place of giant?Certainly goliath as used in the bible was a specific name of a person or persons (a proper noun not a common noun).

Beretta92: phillipines?what are u on about?if u say goliath means giant,why does the bible specifically say in 1 sam 17:4 that the name of the philistine champion was goliath of gath?why didn't it say "a goliath of gath",since according to u goliath can be used in place of giant?Certainly goliath as used in the bible was a specific name of a person or persons (a proper noun not a common noun).

You're right, Goliath is a name not a title.

ayoku777:

Downside of information technology. Just anyone can have their say, no matter how uninformed. Even ignorance is now a point of view.

it is somewhat contagious. Thank God for scriptural 'vaccine'