Although the more fantastical elements of Goliath's story are probably later embellishments, as he was attested by later historians such as Josephus, we can rest assured that Goliath is every bit as historical as someone like Jesus.
@@SteveSmith-os5bs Some people may point to the relative lack of evidence for a historical giant in the clouds versus giant of the Philistines, but let us remember that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Ask any tenured professor of Jack and the Beanstalk Studies what their academic consensus is. So-called "giant mythicism" is one of those ideas that's very popular on the internet.
Even in the Bible David was supposed to fight as a mercenary with the enemies against Saul in the very war where Saul was killed. But the enemy king began to doubt David's loyalty and refused to let David and his forces join in the fight.
Between the time when the oceans drank Atlantis and the rise of the sons of Aryas, there was an age undreamed of. And unto this, Conan, destined to wear the jeweled crown of Aquilonia upon a troubled brow. It is I, his chronicler, who alone can tell thee of his saga. Let me tell you of the days of high adventure!
I like Cohen the Barbarian. He’d never been keen on heroes. But he realized that he needed them to be there, like forests and mountains ... he might never see them, but they filled some sort of hole in his mind. Some sort of hole in everyone’s mind.
Omg when I saw this title. I clicked so fast. My 1st argument ever was this. I was like 6yos. Another little boy and me were arguing how big he was. The adult had us look it up in the bible. We had different bibles. We were both right..... The adults were not effected by the fact the 2 Bible differed however for me it was life changing.
It is also amusing how David is seen as being brave for facing the giant with 'only' his sling shot. The sling shot was a feasome ranged weapon. The Romans employed units of them in their military and the Balearic islands were famous for them.
@@stephenwodz7593He did not. It would be more akin to cheating. According to the tale, the king put him in armor and he rejected it. Clearly, the king was putting his champion in a hand to hand contest, not target practice. If he fought hand to hand, Goliath would have defeated him easily. However, we have reason to believe the David vs Goliath story isn't accurate anyway as stated here in the video.
Another contradiction. Elhanan killed Goliath in 2 samuel 21 19 but many bible translations just put words like "the brother of Goliath" into the verse to hide the contradiction.
@@Agryphos yeah, there are 3 versions. Two in Samuel and one in Chronicles. You can't just put words of chronicles into samuel. That's changing the verse. This has nothing to with translations anymore. But again, Christians and honesty don't seem to be related
No matter how tall he was, this is by far the most unimpressive “miracle” claimed in the Bible. There’s nothing miraculous about a person killing another person with a projectile weapon. That’s just called science. David bragging about beating Goliath with a sling would be like me bragging about beating Mike Tyson with a gun.
Not to mention the literary elements that paint Goliath as a “snake” - his scales, everything being “bronze,” the word for which sounds suspiciously like “snake” - and David cutting off his head, all to set David up as the seed of the woman crushing the head of the serpent. So whatever kernel of truth may be hiding in the story, this is obviously a dressed-up literary recreation
Even in the Bible David was supposed to fight as a mercenary with the enemies against Saul in the very war where Saul was killed. But the enemy king began to doubt David's loyalty and refused to let David and his forces join in the fight.
An excellent read is Dr Joel Baden’s “The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero” You will never look at David the same way again-this isn’t your Sunday school story about David…and it’s way more scandalous and fascinating.
Something else to add to the variable size, cubits and spans, being based on the proportions of parts of the human body would vary from person to person unless there was an agreed upon standard. So, depending on who measured him, they could get different heights. For a more recent example of this, one of the contributing factors for why today Napoleon has a reputation for being short is because at the time the British inch and the French inch were not the same size; he was something like 5’3” using French inches, which was actually something like 5’7” in British inches; the British used this discrepancy as part of the propaganda against Napoleon, using the 5’3” measurement to make him sound shorter than he actually was.
When I was a child I was into the David and Goliath story from the Bible and when I asked my mom about Giants are not real how come Goliath was a giant? My mom kind of replied back that they consider someone who is the same height as Michael Jordan or Shaq would be considered a giant during that time.
Say that you never read the Bible without explicitly stating that. He led a mercenary force after Saul turned against him (David), frequently fighting for one Philistine city-state or another.
This is probably going to sound like a silly question but when I hear scholars say that a person was most probably not a historical figure, I often wonder why that is. What is it that makes scholars believe Goliath was not an actual person? I mean, of course, we have nothing in antiquity that mentions him other than biblical accounts and Josephus. Is it because there is no other record?
This is a great question. When I was younger and growing up in an evangelical church, I always cringed or scoffed at statements like, "Scholars agree so-and-so was almost certainly not historical." Now I understand it a little better. I am just a layman in terms of biblical scholarship, but my understanding is: academic scholars look for different clues or lines of evidence to understand what type of story is being told. Is it a historical account? Is it a historical account that was later editorialized to make a particular point? Is it a "larger than life" story that was part of an oral tradition or mythos around a particular leader or character? Etc. Within the Bible and also in other ancient literature we have examples of all of those things (the siege of Troy is a famous example). When scholars see a pattern of evidence, it supports the conclusion that a given story or figure was probably not real, but part of a story that was important at the time. (Dan mentions this in the video re: authors purposefully building David's legend) Someone like Dan can answer this better than me, I hope he does!
Goliath was so tall he did a push-up and burned his back on the sun. He was so tall he had to Niagara Falls to take a shower. He was so tall he used the Eiffel Tower as a back scratcher!
Would like to see you dealing with the question of how Saul first met David. In 1 Samuel 17 is the famous story of David and Goliath, with Saul asking "55 As Saul watched David going out to meet the Philistine, he said to Abner, commander of the army, “Abner, whose son is that young man Abner replied, “As surely as you live, Your Majesty, I don’t know.” 56 The king said, “Find out whose son this young man is.” 57 As soon as David returned from killing the Philistine, Abner took him and brought him before Saul, with David still holding the Philistine’s head. 58 “Whose son are you, young man?” Saul asked him. David said, “I am the son of your servant Jesse of Bethlehem.” " So at this point Saul doesn't know who David is . But in the previous chapter - 1 Samuel 16- we have this story "14 Now the Spirit of the Lord had departed from Saul, and an evil[a] spirit from the Lord tormented him. 15 Saul’s attendants said to him, “See, an evil spirit from God is tormenting you. 16 Let our lord command his servants here to search for someone who can play the lyre. He will play when the evil spirit from God comes on you, and you will feel better.” 17 So Saul said to his attendants, “Find someone who plays well and bring him to me.” 18 One of the servants answered, “I have seen a son of Jesse of Bethlehem who knows how to play the lyre. He is a brave man and a warrior. He speaks well and is a fine-looking man. And the Lord is with him.” 19 Then Saul sent messengers to Jesse and said, “Send me your son David, who is with the sheep.” 20 So Jesse took a donkey loaded with bread, a skin of wine and a young goat and sent them with his son David to Saul. 21 David came to Saul and entered his service. Saul liked him very much, and David became one of his armor-bearers. 22 Then Saul sent word to Jesse, saying, “Allow David to remain in my service, for I am pleased with him.” 23 Whenever the spirit from God came on Saul, David would take up his lyre and play. Then relief would come to Saul; he would feel better, and the evil spirit would leave him." i know the Bible just gathers up different versions, but how do apologists reconcile these two?
David is the Type of Richard the Lionheart, a commander with musical skill. Ignoring that Richard’s great-grandfather was one of the first troubadours, you can listen to some of his songs on RU-vid.
When I first read the story, I figured Saul had a lot of servants and attendants and didn't really know or care about David, beyond that he played nice sounds. Later on, when David shows up for the Goliath Incident, Saul doesn't recognize the kid who played the lyre, since it's a totally different context. After they told him he was Jesse's son, he might have been like, "Hey, wasn't that the kid who played the lyre for me?" Alternately, if he was tormented by an evil spirit, it might have affected his ability to recall names, like someone with Alzheimer's who has good days and bad days. These days, I've been listening to The Bible for Normal People podcast, which has a lot of faithful guests who view the Bible more realistically. They probably agree with Dan on a lot and just chalk the contradictions up to contradictory oral narratives that were collected and preserved for posterity, not intended to be a perfect historical record.
@@KaiHenningseneven then, the "unless I say it's ok" remains. For LDS, Nephi straight up murdered an unconscious Laban but God said it was cool, so...
@@ryanw8987 There's always rules for what is and what is not murder, so "God said it was cool", in this context, could be translated "God said it was not murder". Be that as it may, however, when I use "some say", that doesn't imply a hill I want to die on, it just means "I heard people make that argument", and the point of the argument is "not all killing is bad" (#notallkilling?). And since the rule comes from the same guy who gets to decide on what the exceptions are ... 🤷
Look, I'm about the furthest thing from a Bible apologist there is, but this really isn't a "gotcha". There's a pretty distinct difference between "Don't kill your neighbors and countrymen" and "It's okay to kill enemy soldiers in wartime". Every law has exceptions, even today--it's illegal to kill, except when the authorities say it's okay (self-defense being the big one).
One of the things I tend to repeat in my discussions of the (presumed) historicity of biblical tales is that details like distance, size, wealth or strength are emphasized or de-emphasized depending on the audience. Literacy being a rare thing until the last few hundred years, these stories were transmitted primarily through recitation to illiterate audiences who probably never in their lives traveled more than a dozen miles from where they were born. Their knowledge and understanding of events and people outside of what they directly experienced was extremely limited and so they would have had fairly unique criteria for finding any particular detail impressive. For instance, in a part of the world where people were typically under four cubits tall, like the lower Levant, a person described as being more than four cubits tall might seem impressive, but in a part of the world where people were often over four cubits, like Germania, a person who is four cubits and a span would seem just a little above average. So, different audiences required different descriptions to understand the point being made, that Goliath was very tall. Add to this the storyteller's tendency to further elaborate for entertainment purposes and soon you get a Goliath that is nearly 10 feet tall, which would make him as useful in an actual battle as a dining room table.
@@weirdlanguageguy There's a lot of people who say that the Bible can't be corrupted and so they dismiss differences between manuscript traditions such as Goliath's height where for the vast majority of the Bible's history the incorrect number was almost exclusively the one promulgated.
Goliath is described in great detail in the bible. He is a 10th century Philistine wearing the Armour of a 7th/8th century Greek Hoplite. Credit: Prof Israel Finkelstein
Is that a way of saying that the Goliath of the bible could not have existed as described? (I'm assuming here that the point is to call out the anachronism.)
The same day you made this post i wrote a post about kripkean dogmatism with regard to giants and the anunnaki and the tomb of giants found in wisconsin and goliath and the idea that the smithsonian is covering up the existence of giant human remains. I miss you ending your videos by saying, “think critically, and google competently.”
The length of the cubit would vary depending on the individual. But sure, if there is a record of anyone written down, then they definitely existed. So Harry Potter, Bugs Bunny, and Goliath, why not? Enjoy. The authoritative scroll for Bugs Bunny was obviously Disneyworld, but the Gospel of Ron DeSantis is not univocal with this. The Gospel of J.K. Rowling clearly demonstrates the existence of Harry Potter in all her books, which are univocal about Potter, thus proving his existence. Rumour has it that she a bit bigoted towards LGBT folks, but I suppose that is not relevant to the reality of Harry Potter, although it is distasteful, IMHO. And Goliath? I am not qualified to say either way. They say that the first casualty in war is always the truth. So it is not unusual for one side to hype up their guy, and disparage the other, and vice versa. But as I said before, the size of the hand and forearm of the chap [or chap-ess] that sized Goliath up might be important in terms of accuracy.
To be more precise about JoKeRowling, she's transphobic, racist, and anti-Semitic. She hit "Nazi apologist" levels when she found out they wrecked an institute dedicated to trans medical research and she lost any clarity of thought in her reaction. All of those are relevant to the Gospel of Harry Potter due to their appearance in the texts.
Just checking. In the subsequent verses cited didn’t Elhanan kill Lahmi the brother of Goliath? Don’t think it says elhanan killed Goliath. I may be wrong
@@somedutchguy7582 Possibly but as the cubit is a measurement from that time, their size, relative to modern humans would be irrelevant, and neglibile at best.
How do we decide that David probably was historical while Goliath probably wasn’t? Is it because we have an outside reference to the Davidic dynasty, or is there something more going on? I’m not an apologist, I’m just genuinely curious lol
There is no historical evidence for the life of David either. Nor for his son Solomon. They are not mentioned in any of the surrounding nations records.
Now hang on a dang minute here. There is a perfectly scientific (sounding) reason that all of this isn’t a contradiction “at all”. We have 3 completely different heights for Goliath and two different guys attributed with getting him stoned one afternoon. It all makes sense if you understand two very important points. First, Goliath’s 3 different heights are obviously an issue of observation. Stick with me on this one. What is everything made of? Right, atoms. And what are atoms made of? That’s right, smaller bits that I can’t remember the names of for two of them, but the third one is electrons. Now, what is something strange about electrons? Their position and motion can’t be observed simultaneously. And what do giants have more of than regular people? Electrons! So it is only logical that every time that God’s stenographers (who obviously took notes on everything that happened to make sure there aren’t any contradictions in the Bible) looked at Goliath, his electrons were either in motion or in a fixed location. So how could they take an accurate measurement of his height when the superposition of his electrons were constantly shifting? All three heights are right depending on the moment of observation! See!! That sounds like science!!! Now, as for how two different guys are credited with killing Goliath, that one’s super easy. David killed Goliath. Elhanan was the name David gave the slingshot.
1 Chronicles 20:5 NRSV: Again there was war with the Philistines, and Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi THE BROTHER of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam. *emphasys mine :)
Mercenaries were common until the Dreyfus Affair, when Hungarian officer working for the French Army sold secret papers to the German Empire. Von Steuben and Kościuzko were both mercenaries in the American Revolutionary War, as was El Cid in Spain.
who gives a sh1t, Goliath was humongous! Also, your suggestion that the curators of the texts somehow managed to push the David narrative doesn't hold water for the simple reason that YOU WEREN'T PRIVY TO WHAT THE TEXT HANDLERS HAD IN MIND, mr. expert!
@@fordprefect5304 Not sure why you find this funny. If the Bible portrays Goliath as a Myth, that is not funny, but very very sad. And if he is only a myth, what of other Biblical characters? Are they only a myth as there are no other sources to validate they lived? Am sure Dan would say so...
@@atwaterkent911 LOL I hate to be the bearer of bad news but no story in the bible is true. Or maybe you can find evidence to prove me wrong. Not a shred of evidence has ever been found to support any bible story. Even when the bible names kings of Judah and Israel that were real the stories about them are not supported by any evidence.
@@fordprefect5304 3000 years from now, it will be said that you and I did not exist either...even with all our computers, phones and storage devices. Will Trump be turned into a God at that time? But didn't folks 3000 years ago think the same when they carved their boring lives into stone? And we think we are so great while living... We are nothing at all. Is anything real, or is this just a Matrix?
Is that a common tradition for Israelite or Judean kings of the era? Or is David an exception, perhaps because he was a mercenary who killed his way on to the throne?
It could also be that David was a shape-shifting leprechaun. Unless you have evidence or some kind of precedent for your claim, it is no more valid than mine.
That raises all kinds of other issues: David, a youth and the son of Jesse kills Goliath while Saul is king, while David/Elhanon, the son of Jaare-oregim (or Jair) kills him while David is king some 40+ years later in a completely different location...
OK Dan, let's hear it. Why do scholars think it seems this dude called Elhanan killed Goliath in 2 Samuel 21:19 & 1 Chronicles 20:5? "And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew THE BROTHER of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam." (2 samuel 21:19) "And there was war again with the Philistines; and Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi THE BROTHER of Goliath the Gittite, whose spear staff was like a weaver's beam." (1 Chronicles 20:5)
@@johnmcgimpsey1825 Thanks for info, I'll check them out. At least this time Dan has stuck with "seems" and not morphed "seems" into "data" as he often does.
