Donations for the month of August

We have received a total of "$0" in donations towards our goal of $175.

Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE

Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 4,255
Joined: April 2001
Forum Statistics
Most Online523
Jan 14th, 2020
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,247
Tom 4,255
chestnutmare 3,226
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,841
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 20
Pilgrim 15
jta 4
Recent Posts
News from Canada
by Anthony C. - Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:59 PM
The Lord God omnipotent reigneth
by chestnutmare - Thu Aug 11, 2022 6:58 AM
Foundation of Reckoning –Miles Stanford
by NetChaplain - Wed Aug 10, 2022 11:11 AM
Armstrong First to step on the Moon
by Tom - Sun Aug 07, 2022 7:48 PM
Christian Nationalism
by Anthony C. - Sun Aug 07, 2022 1:59 PM
Thread Like Summary
Total Likes: 2
Original Post (Thread Starter)
#57655 04/11/2022 12:39 PM
by DiscipleEddie
The debate over homosexuality in the Bible has been battled over in vain for years, so I'm not getting into that; I'm focused on a translation question based on a single Hebrew word, qashar, which is Strong's #H7194. In 1 Sam. 18:1/KJV the word is translated "was knit with" and the verse reads: "And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul." Many cross references give Gen. 44:30/KJV because qashar is again used in reference to the love of a father to his son: "Now therefore when I come to thy servant my father, and the lad be not with us; seeing that his life is bound up in the lad's life". It is here translated "bound up in", and since it is love of father for his son, most commentaries read that it cannot be a word of sexual nature. It is indeed the same word in both passages, qashar.

Yet, in 1970 the New English Bible translated qashar as "had given his heart to David", a phrase with strong sexual overtones and in the updated 1989 Revised English Bible, this translation was kept identical as in the NEB. Only recently did I encounter a reason given for the romantic sounding translation and it is found in a Hebrew-English Interlinear OT. I'm referring to the Zondervan Hebrew-English Interlinear OT, which can be reviewed on Amazon by searching for ISBN 978-0-310-40200-8. The rendering of qashar in this interlinear for 1 Sam. 18:1 is "then-spirit-of Jonathan she-became-one with-spirit-of David". The female pronoun "she" is included in the literal rendering of the word there, but the female pronoun "she" is not found in Gen. 44:30. The Hebrew qashar is found 44 times in the OT and I've found only 3 times the female pronoun "she" is part of the literal rendering of the word, this one about Jonathan and two others that are clearly referring to women: Gn38:28 "midwife"; Josh2:21 "Rahab". The male pronoun "he" is more than 10 times used to modify qashar in the OT and the contexts in those show it is clearly referring to men.

In the Introduction to the Zondervan Interlinear it states: " English words will be supplied that are not direct translations of a Hebrew word and its inflected form", therefore the "she" gives an inflected form of qashar and is not an addition of a word to the Hebrew text. This is not unique to the Zondervan Interlinear for an interlinear online reads in similar fashion by modifying with "she":

"and soul-of Jonathan she-was-tied in-soul-of David"

By referring to the soul/spirit of Jonathan as "she", which appears legitimate; how can it be avoided that the love of Jonathan included some sexuality? When seen along with other statements of Jonathan's love, it seems unavoidable that sexuality was meant. Studies indicate that many men are not always, 100% of the time purely heterosexual in their nature, so why would this be unusual in Jonathan's case? Has it been misleading to use Gen. 44:30 as a cross reference or instance of "comparing Scripture with Scripture", since the literal rendering of the word is different? I can think of no argument to counter this. Anyone have a substantive explanation for why sexuality (homosexuality) is not included in 1 Sam. 18:1?
Liked Replies
#57662 Apr 12th a 02:50 PM
by Pilgrim
1. Yes, kah-shar in 1Sam 18:1 is in the perfect tense and feminine... so what? Are these people and you? saying that because the word is feminine in that text, then it de facto signifies a homosexual 'binding' between Jonathan and David? scratchchin

2. Consulting some of the most respected and reliable sources re: Hebrew and O.T. as to this word as it appears in 1Sam 18:1; BDB (Brown, Driver, Briggs) A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament and Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance and Keil-Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament vol. 2, NONE even hint of anything untoward in the relationship between Jonathan and David.

BDB-Genesius: "the life of Jonathan was bound up with the life of David"
Keil-Delitzsch: (summary) with ongoing strained relationship between Saul and David who committed himself to remain under the authority of Saul despite the strong animosity of Saul toward David. And thus, Jonathan committed himself to follow David for the remaining days (for life), i.e., Jonathan made a covenant of friendship with David. And, as a pledge of his loyalty to the covenant made, he (Jonathan) gave David his clothes and his armor.

Thus, I maintain that the problem has to do with using the right text, using proper Grammatical-Historical hermeneutic and one's presupposition that respects the LGBTxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx agenda. One or more applies to all who try to suggest that there was a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan.

If the above is not sufficient to answer your query, then I apologize for not supplying what you are desiring. grin
1 member likes this
#57684 Apr 17th a 07:24 PM
by Pilgrim
BYE [Linked Image]
1 member likes this
Who's Online Now
1 members (chestnutmare), 76 guests, and 11 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TheSojourner, Larry, Nana Dadzie Jr., Cliniql, John E
972 Registered Users
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,360,340 Gospel truth