Whores, Harlots and Prostitutes of the Bible: Part One, RAHAB of Jericho, Canaan
Loading...
1,553
Loading...
Uploader Comments (SolomonSeries)
see all
All Comments (9)
-
YOU DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE!
STOP BEING SO CONFIDENT IN YOURSELF!!!!
-
Your main reasoning is irrationally based. Assuming the Bible clearly means, "prostitute" as in someone exchanging money for sex, the Bible doesn't have to describe the details in order to prove her profession. I want to say that I also debated and thought deeply about this perplexing story in the OT as well as in the NT. However, your argument doesn't satisfy; rather, it makes the continuity of the Bible less structurally sound by the arguments you make. I side with her being a prostitute.
Loading...
Hi there. I appreciate your thinking and have watched a few of your videos. I also have issue with indoctrination for the purpose of institutional perpetuity. However none of the cited texts support what you infer. Strongs #H2181, zanah is the origin or root of the the word which translates variously as either prostitute or whore/whoring, fornication, adultery. Besides that Psalm 87 makes no mention of Rahab, 89 and Isaiah 51 rer. a sea monster. And Joshua notes no children.
joel0228 1 year ago
Sir, a material miscalculation that many people make is that Strong's is a complete work. Strong's clearly attempts to theologically and doctrinally translate the Biblical document. It does not allow for a broader translation of each word which would either expand or restrict the meaning. Besides the Hebrew text to which you refer is obviously not in the original language. Written Hebrew was not introduced until 1000 years after the timeline of this story.
SolomonSeries 1 year ago
@SolomonSeries
I am impressed by such a quick reply (and discerning mind-I'd not made such criticism of the concordance; thank you) Do the Psalmic and Isaiah references to a sea monster corroborate on the argument? You clearly infer Rahab's children, even grown children. Where exactly to I find that reference?
joel0228 1 year ago
Many of the old translations of the Bible retain a mystic, greek mythology spin. The KJV clearly uses the word "Unicorn" which was adapted and inserted in the Text. The old Spanish texts refer to Toro which is a bull. Unicorns and sea monsters in the Bible often signal to us there is a problem with that part of the translation.
SolomonSeries 1 year ago
Send me an e-mail with the specific chapter and verse and I may be able to help you with your Bible questions.
SolomonSeries 1 year ago
@SolomonSeries
Ps. 89:10 in it's context does not appear to reference Rahab as a particular person, but perhaps a figurative reference to either Egypt or some other group. Ps. 87 not reference to Rahab as a woman but as interchangeable with Egypt in any translation I have checked. Is 51:9 again is in reference to Egypt not a specific woman in the line of David. I enjoy your argument but when I see places that do not appear to strengthen it I inquire as to the purpose of the citation.
joel0228 1 year ago
Your line of reasoning and connections are disjointed. A psalm that refers to both David and Rahab is not contemporary to their lives, because the two could not have lived at the same time, therefore one reference or the other could easily be fanciful song and subject to mis-translation, or more accurately mis-application of the Word. Psalmists put a lot of faith in the music of the Text (Psalms), but just as you see in church today, the songs rarely reflect the content of the Bible itself.
SolomonSeries 1 year ago