Are these God's words too???

  • Thread starter Thread starter lightofeyes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lightofeyes

Guest
This quote from the bible which is supposed to be God’s words
can anybody explain why Almighty God used these words if the bible has not been corrupted?

2Ki 18:27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own** dung**, and drink their own piss with you?
Isa 36:12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

Your comments please…
 
Below are a number of quotes from the Quran, which is the supposedly final & preserved word of Allah. Can anyone please explain why Almighty Allah used these words if the Quran is truly His book?

056: 52-55. Ye verily will eat of a tree called Zaqqum And will fill your bellies therewith; And thereon ye will drink of boiling water, Drinking even as the camel drinketh.

044: 43-46. Lo! the tree of Zaqqum, The food of the sinner! Like molten brass, it seetheth in their bellies. As the seething of boiling water.

037: 64-67. Lo! it is a tree that springeth in the heart of hell. Its crop is as it were the heads of devils. And lo! they verily must eat thereof, and fill (their) bellies therewith. And afterward, lo! thereupon they have a drink of boiling water.

014: 16-17. Hell is before him, and he is made to drink a festering water, Which he sippeth but can hardly swallow.

Comments please… (Please keep in mind that it is no one else than Allah who allegedly utters these words) 😃
 
Lol, none off these words considered shamed to recite, its punishment in the hell fire for the wrong doers. hahhaha 😃
 
I wonder why nobody wants to comment into this thread, is it because they found shamed words to attribute to their bible?. are you realy shamed to recite those words? if so then you have to realize that the bible has been corrupted.

Peace…
 
It’s a quote of Rabshakeh.

Would you rather the Bible lie about what was said, or the truth be told?
 
didididi said:
It’s a quote of Rabshakeh.

Would you rather the Bible lie about what was said, or the truth be told?
Click to expand...
and there is no way to tell the truth except to use such a dirty words!!, had that from Almighty God, he can use good words.
 
lightofeyes said:
and there is no way to tell the truth except to use such a dirty words!!, had that from Almighty God, he can use good words.
Click to expand...
There are very few words God could use other than those ones to tell the truth about those particular things. After all he created those things, there can’t be and isn’t anything shameful in naming anything he created.
 
lightofeyes said:
This quote from the bible which is supposed to be God’s words
can anybody explain why Almighty God used these words if the bible has not been corrupted?

2Ki 18:27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own** dung**, and drink their own piss with you?
Isa 36:12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

Your comments please…
Click to expand...
May I ask what translation of the Bible you got the word “piss” from please?

I searched quite a few versions and only found the word “urine” which is not offensive, and neither is “dung” in my opinion.
 
lightofeyes said:
This quote from the bible which is supposed to be God’s words
can anybody explain why Almighty God used these words if the bible has not been corrupted?

2Ki 18:27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own** dung**, and drink their own piss with you?
Isa 36:12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

Your comments please…
Click to expand...
No Idea what your quotes are intended to prove. As for the II Kings quote, as long as you brought it up we might as well learn a little about what it is referring to:

Quick overview from wikipedia

An account of the Assyrian Siege of Jerusalem (2 Kings 18:13-19:37) - Hezekiah rebels against Assyria and partially subjugates the land of the Philistines (2 Kings 18:8). However, Sennacherib, the king of Assyria, captures several cities in Judah, and so Hezekiah uses the temple funds, even breaking up the gold plated doors, to pay tribute to Sennacherib. Sennacherib sends messengers to Jerusalem to say that Hezekiah’s ally Egypt is weak, that Hezekiah has offended Israel’s God, and that Jerusalem couldn’t even muster two thousand men to fight against the oncoming Assyrians (he makes his point by offering to supply the horses if Jerusalem can find the men). Sennacherib offers a the people a life of ease if they will submit, but the people of Judah respond with silence, as Hezekiah has ordered them. Sennacherib is briefly distracted by battling the Ethiopians that have launched an attack upon him, and so sends Hezekiah a letter reminding him that other nations’ gods have not saved them from him. Apparently by way of preparation for any siege, Hezekiah constructs a conduit and pool providing water to Jerusalem. (Note: This pool is not mentioned in the account of the siege in 2 Kings, but may be referenced in 2 Kings 20:20b and 2 Chronicles 32:3-5.) Hezekiah sends messengers to Isaiah who prophecies that Yahweh will protect Jerusalem for the sake of the promise made to David, and the Assyrians will not be able to besiege Jerusalem. That night an angel kills one hundred eighty-five thousand men of the Assyrian army, and the survivors return to Assyria. (There is an interesting interplay between this account and the Assyrian account which states that Hezekiah was “locked up like a caged bird”, and paid tribute to Sennacherib–though the Assyrians put a good face on things, the desired end of a siege is usually to break into a city, not to keep the inhabitants pent up within it.) Fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy of divine retribution (or simply fulfilling the internal politics of Assyria), Sennacherib is killed by two of his own sons, and a third becomes king in his place.
 
lightofeyes said:
This quote from the bible which is supposed to be God’s words
can anybody explain why Almighty God used these words if the bible has not been corrupted?

2Ki 18:27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own** dung**, and drink their own piss with you?
Isa 36:12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

Your comments please…
Click to expand...
The problem is your lack of understanding of the quote you posted not the contents of the quote. Have you read the book of 2 Kings?

Rabshakeh is the commander of the Assyrian forces and his master is not God, it is the Assyrian King who has sent him to the city gate. He is sent to Jerusalem to taunt the inhabitants regarding what they will be reduced to if they fight and lose rather than surrender immediately.

I don’t understand your point in posting this.
 
Muslims have to keep convincing themselves that the Bible is “corrupted” since they can’t prove the validity of the Quran! :rolleyes:
 
lightofeyes said:
This quote from the bible which is supposed to be God’s words
can anybody explain why Almighty God used these words if the bible has not been corrupted? Your comments please…
Click to expand...
Salaam brother, it’s a shame that you do not understand this yourself. 😦
 
kellie said:
May I ask what translation of the Bible you got the word “piss” from please?

I searched quite a few versions and only found the word “urine” which is not offensive, and neither is “dung” in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I went to www.biblegateway.com which allows a search of multiple (though I believe almost all Protestant–no Apocyrpha) translations.

The words are as follows in the passage from 2 Kings:

KJV–piss and dung
NIV–filth and urine
New American Standard–dung and urine
The Message–turds and pee
Amplified Bible–dung and urine
New Living Translation–dung and urine
English Standard Version --dung and urine
Contemporary English Versionn–body waste and urine
New KJV–condenses it into “waste”
21st Century KJV–dung and urine
Young’s literal translation–dung and water
Darby Translation–dung and urine
Holman Christian Standard–excrement and urine
New International Reader’s Version–waste and urine
Douay Rheims 1899 with Apocrypha–dung and urine
The online Tanakh translates it as dung and water (the translateion is from 1917)jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Kingsa18.html

So my conclusion would be that the choice of the particular word used in any given translation for the concept has more to do with the social mores of the time in which it was written. Certain terms may be considered impolite or offensive in one generation that were not considered so in other generations.

Why not use the words that convey the intent of the passage, which is to describe the horrible conditions during war? In that case, the use of a harsher phrase may better give the intended meaning.
 
Apperently the words piss and dung weren’t bad words during the time of translation. Dung still is not a bad word lol.

and if they are… what are you doing writing them yourself? :eek:
 
Valke2 said:
No Idea what your quotes are intended to prove. As for the II Kings quote, as long as you brought it up we might as well learn a little about what it is referring to:

Quick overview from wikipedia

An account of the Assyrian Siege of Jerusalem (2 Kings 18:13-19:37) - Hezekiah rebels against Assyria and partially subjugates the land of the Philistines (2 Kings 18:8). However, Sennacherib, the king of Assyria, captures several cities in Judah, and so Hezekiah uses the temple funds, even breaking up the gold plated doors, to pay tribute to Sennacherib. Sennacherib sends messengers to Jerusalem to say that Hezekiah’s ally Egypt is weak, that Hezekiah has offended Israel’s God, and that Jerusalem couldn’t even muster two thousand men to fight against the oncoming Assyrians (he makes his point by offering to supply the horses if Jerusalem can find the men). Sennacherib offers a the people a life of ease if they will submit, but the people of Judah respond with silence, as Hezekiah has ordered them. Sennacherib is briefly distracted by battling the Ethiopians that have launched an attack upon him, and so sends Hezekiah a letter reminding him that other nations’ gods have not saved them from him. Apparently by way of preparation for any siege, Hezekiah constructs a conduit and pool providing water to Jerusalem. (Note: This pool is not mentioned in the account of the siege in 2 Kings, but may be referenced in 2 Kings 20:20b and 2 Chronicles 32:3-5.) Hezekiah sends messengers to Isaiah who prophecies that Yahweh will protect Jerusalem for the sake of the promise made to David, and the Assyrians will not be able to besiege Jerusalem. That night an angel kills one hundred eighty-five thousand men of the Assyrian army, and the survivors return to Assyria. (There is an interesting interplay between this account and the Assyrian account which states that Hezekiah was “locked up like a caged bird”, and paid tribute to Sennacherib–though the Assyrians put a good face on things, the desired end of a siege is usually to break into a city, not to keep the inhabitants pent up within it.) Fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy of divine retribution (or simply fulfilling the internal politics of Assyria), Sennacherib is killed by two of his own sons, and a third becomes king in his place.
Click to expand...
This is right on, read this lightofeyes, and get your context straight!
 
As a Catholic Christian I believe that every word in Sacred Scripture uttered by the Spirit is the inerrant word of God.

It is easy to see that every word in Sacred Scripture is not uttered by the Sprit.

As an example: Psalm 14:1a “Fools say in their hearts, ‘There is no God.’…”

The phrase, “There is no God” is therefore contained in Scripture. If every word in Scripture is God breathed and inerrant, then this phrase would be included. Since it is impossible for the all truthful Spirit to speak deception or lie, the phrase “There is no God;” though found in Scripture, is not an utterance of the Holy Spirit. It is the utterance of the fool.

Scripture contains ideas other than God’s in its pages. If we took some of the passages from Job out of their context we would have a dim view of the Light of God.

There are no problems with the passages you have cited other than maybe you don’t like the English words used to translate the ideas contained in Scripture.
 
KarenNC said:
I went to www.biblegateway.com which allows a search of multiple (though I believe almost all Protestant–no Apocyrpha) translations.

The words are as follows in the passage from 2 Kings:

KJV–piss and dung
NIV–filth and urine
New American Standard–dung and urine
The Message–turds and pee
Amplified Bible–dung and urine
New Living Translation–dung and urine
English Standard Version --dung and urine
Contemporary English Versionn–body waste and urine
New KJV–condenses it into “waste”
21st Century KJV–dung and urine
Young’s literal translation–dung and water
Darby Translation–dung and urine
Holman Christian Standard–excrement and urine
New International Reader’s Version–waste and urine
Douay Rheims 1899 with Apocrypha–dung and urine
The online Tanakh translates it as dung and water (the translateion is from 1917)jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Kingsa18.html

So my conclusion would be that the choice of the particular word used in any given translation for the concept has more to do with the social mores of the time in which it was written. Certain terms may be considered impolite or offensive in one generation that were not considered so in other generations.

Why not use the words that convey the intent of the passage, which is to describe the horrible conditions during war? In that case, the use of a harsher phrase may better give the intended meaning.
Click to expand...
Hi KarenNC

Good job.

You failed to mention in your exhaustive list what is actually written in the Hebrew. I looked into my Hebrew-English interlinear and it is translated in Isaiah 36:12 …and to drink the WATER of their feet with you? And 2Kings18:27 is a repeat of Isaiah
JeanneH
 
1ke said:
The problem is your lack of understanding of the quote you posted not the contents of the quote. Have you read the book of 2 Kings?

Rabshakeh is the commander of the Assyrian forces and his master is not God, it is the Assyrian King who has sent him to the city gate. He is sent to Jerusalem to taunt the inhabitants regarding what they will be reduced to if they fight and lose rather than surrender immediately.

I don’t understand your point in posting this.
Click to expand...
Perfectly said! :clapping:
 
lightofeyes said:
This quote from the bible which is supposed to be God’s words
can anybody explain why Almighty God used these words if the bible has not been corrupted?

2Ki 18:27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own** dung**, and drink their own piss with you?
Isa 36:12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

Your comments please…
Click to expand...
Why would God not use these words?

Edwin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top