God Puts Israel's Hand On A Hot Stove (Buddhism, myth, women)

[lovesMountains]

Some of you people have way toooooo much time on your hands

[nateswift]

Originally Posted by hd4me

Ezekiel 20:25,26 does cause consternation...

Not all Bible translations are the same (here are some translations where the various editorial committees/scholars arrived at an independent translation from eachother):

"I even let them follow rules that were not good. I let them have laws they could not live by...."

I/m no Hebrew scholar, but the source I use indicates that all the text variations use the word for "gave" so it looks like any other translation is translator bias because they know it does not make sense. The answer is that the writer got it wrong.

[thrillobyte]

This is why having the original language, I don't mean the Aramaic, but the actual order and context of the words, is so important. Off one sentence and a plethora of modern translations two views emerge:

1. God compels the Israelites by force of His will to continue in their vile practice

So I gave them other statutes NIV

Moreover, I gave them statutes ESV

And I also gave them statutes DBT

2. God allows the Israelites to continue following their own decree:

I gave them over to worthless decrees and regulations NLT

The second is less harsh. it denotes that God didn't actually give them a decree (statute) to continue the sacrificing, but let them make their own choice to continue. Whereas, the first, by far the more common translation, indicates that God actually pushed their faces into the vomit and said, "Here! You like it? Have some more!"

It's all in the wording.

[texdav]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

Ever heard of parents who try to teach their children a lesson by subjecting them to the pain they are trying the keep the children from experiencing? Like for example parents who put their child's hand on a hot burner to burn them so that they will know what a burnt hand feels like and won't touch a hot stove ever again?

Is this an example of what we'd call "good parenting"?

Apparently God did the same thing to Israel.

Ezekiel 20:25-26:



Now look at Jeremiah 32:35:



Now Jeremiah says God never commanded Israel to burn their children in sacrifice offerings to pagan gods, but Ezekiel says God DID give Israel such a command [statute] to burn their children as sacrifice offerings to teach them a lesson. Moreover, God says in Jeremiah that it never even entered His mind to do such a thing. But it must have entered His mind because He issued a statute to do just that in Ezekiel 20:25-26.

What do we have here, a flat-out contradiction of scripture, or an apologetic's dream example to twist and turn the meaning so that two contrary statements can actually be rationalized into reconciliation?

I'd say god has done a very good job of guarding Israel if you look at the nations who have attacked it. Israel is a pretty small nation but has defeated the combined army's of much larger nations.

[thrillobyte]

Originally Posted by texdav

I'd say god has done a very good job of guarding Israel if you look at the nations who have attacked it. Israel is a pretty small nation but has defeated the combined army's of much larger nations.

Yes, He has.

He's just not done a very good job of keeping her from committing adultery.

[Vizio]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

Ever heard of parents who try to teach their children a lesson by subjecting them to the pain they are trying the keep the children from experiencing? Like for example parents who put their child's hand on a hot burner to burn them so that they will know what a burnt hand feels like and won't touch a hot stove ever again?

Is this an example of what we'd call "good parenting"?

Apparently God did the same thing to Israel.

Ezekiel 20:25-26:



Now look at Jeremiah 32:35:



Now Jeremiah says God never commanded Israel to burn their children in sacrifice offerings to pagan gods, but Ezekiel says God DID give Israel such a command [statute] to burn their children as sacrifice offerings to teach them a lesson. Moreover, God says in Jeremiah that it never even entered His mind to do such a thing. But it must have entered His mind because He issued a statute to do just that in Ezekiel 20:25-26.

What do we have here, a flat-out contradiction of scripture, or an apologetic's dream example to twist and turn the meaning so that two contrary statements can actually be rationalized into reconciliation?

Yes--he allowed them to do sinful acts. He didn't command them to do so, nor did he intend for them to do it...but they did. What's the issue?

[Vizio]

Originally Posted by lovesMountains

Some of you people have way toooooo much time on your hands

Pfft! Please. He copied and pasted it from another website. You think he actually looked that up himself?

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by nateswift

I/m no Hebrew scholar, but the source I use indicates that all the text variations use the word for "gave" so it looks like any other translation is translator bias because they know it does not make sense. The answer is that the writer got it wrong.

The Hebrew word has a broad range of meanings. Most translations follow the KJV because they are either revisions, clones or wish to avoid going against the popular view.

The idea of giving is understood as allowing. We can see this in verses that speak of a similar issue. Part of the idiom of the day, as it were.

KJV Psalm 81:12 So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lust: and they walked in their own counsels.

LXE Psalm 81:12 So I let them go after the ways of their own hearts: they will go on in their own ways.

In a previous verse to the one in question, we can see the thought behind the word:

KJV Ezekiel 16:19 My meat also which I gave thee, fine flour, and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou hast even set it before them for a sweet savour: and thus it was, saith the Lord GOD.

God did not "give" them bread, he allowed them to harvest and make it there.

We see this also in the NT

KJG Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

NAB Romans 1:24 Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies.


The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) word chosen shows that they knew the diea of "allowing" was part of the words meaning:

Here is info on the word, from the United Bible Society Biblical Greek lexicon:

1561 give; grant, allow, permit; place, put; appoint; establish; give out, pay; produce, yield, cause; entrust; bring (offerings); inflict (punishment); dÃ… e`auto,n venture to go (Ac 19.31); cf. evrgasi,a (Lk 12.58)

The context determines which is best. Since God never gave such a law, allow fits best as that fits the Historical context in Scripture.

It is not possible to take one verse and explain it standing alone. The Bible as a whole helps us understand the meaning, not just lexicons. This is common in any language as words have individual possible meanings and then meanings impacted by associated words, the structure of the verse and the immediate and historical context.

It is like the word "shambles" used in the KJV for "market place". In the 1600's a market was something set up, either in or out of a city's walls, and the booths were set up in no particular order, a 'shambles' as it were. If one does not know the historical setting and meaning, the wrong thought can be taken.

[Vizio]

Originally Posted by expatCA

The Hebrew word has a broad range of meanings. Most translations follow the KJV because they are either revisions, clones or wish to avoid going against the popular view.

Or maybe because they seek to offer a translation of the original texts that is easily readable to anyone that was born later than 1600.

[lovesMountains]

Originally Posted by Vizio

Pfft! Please. He copied and pasted it from another website. You think he actually looked that up himself?

I'm sure you are right, but even taking the time to create this thread and work so hard to convince others of his ridiculous notions of God is a real waste of his time and energy!