Noclegi Augustów Nad Jeziorem Neckover

Mnożą Się Kłamstwa Program Kulinarny Kinie

Dopadamy kapitana ten zdradzi kogo blunt wypada tak sojuszników jasna and therefore not relinquish what you believe you hold by a divine right. we know that Jehovah, our God, has given us the land of the Israelites; and therefore we not give it up. Bush Wilt thou not possess that which Chemosh thy god giveth thee? Without really attributing any divinity to the Ammonitish idol, Jephthah here argues with them on their own admitted principles. ‘It is a maxim with you, as among all nations, that the lands which they conceive to be given by their gods, they have absolute right to, and should not relinquish to any claimant whatever. You suppose that the land which you possess was given by your god Chemosh, and therefore you not relinquish what you believe you hold by a divine right. like manner we are fully assured that Jehovah our God, who is Lord of heaven and earth, has given the Israelites the land of the Amorites; and therefore we not give it up.' The of Jephthah's remonstrance was evidently sound and impregnable. Them we possess. Heb. אותו נירש otho nirâsh, him we inherit; i. e. his or their land; as above, v. 23. IVP Background Commentary Chemosh is best known as the national god of the Moabites, and the ninth-century Moabite stone he is said to bring victory battle, as Yahweh is depicted as doing for The Ammonite national deity is generally Milcom Although Chemosh was adopted as the national deity of the Moabites, the occurrence of the variant form, Kamish, a deity list from Ebla, where he had a suggests he was on the register of Semitic gods third-millennium Syria, before the Moabites. One Assyrian deity list associates Chemosh with Nergal, the god of the netherworld. There is not yet any firm identification of what natural phenomenon Chemosh was related to, nor is there any uncontested depiction of him on archaeological finds. Although it seems that Jephthah acknowledges the existence of the god Chemosh, this does not mean or imply that he was polytheistic or that he viewed the Lord as being only a local deity. Jephthah have been assuming the Ammonite 's perspective for the sake of argument. NET Note Heb Is it not that what Chemosh your god causes you to possess, you possess, and all whom the LORD our God dispossesses before us we possess? Jephthah speaks of Chemosh as if he is on a par with the LORD God of This does not necessarily mean that Jephthah is polytheistic or that he recognizes the LORD as only a local deity. He simply be assuming the Ammonite 's perspective for the sake of argument. Other texts, as well as the extrabiblical Mesha inscription, associate Chemosh with Moab, while Milcom is identified as the god of the Ammonites. Why then does Jephthah refer to Chemosh as the Ammonite god? Ammon had likely conquered Moab and the Ammonite probably regarded himself as heir of all territory formerly held by Moab. Originally Moab had owned the disputed territory meaning that Chemosh was regarded as the god of the region Jephthah argues that Chemosh had ago relinquished claim to the area while the LORD had ago established jurisdiction over it Both sides should abide by the decisions of the gods which had stood firm for three hundred years. A R Fausset Barber comments that Fausset's work is of immeasurable value. Remains one of the finest treatments extant. A must for the expositor. Wilt not thou possess that which Chemosh thy god giveth thee to possess? whomsoever the LORD our God shall drive out from before us, them we possess Judges 11 'And now are you any better than Balak the of Zippor, of Moab? Did he ever strive with or did he ever fight against them? Bush thou any better than Balak? That is, probably not morally better, but hast thou any better title? Yet Balak, who was then of Moab, from whom the greatest part of these lands had been taken by the Amorites, who had most interest the matter, and was best able to enforce his claim, if he had thought fit-Balak did not once object to our settlement then, nor offer to molest us the enjoyment of our possessions. If he then acquiesced this disposition of the lands, if the title of had not been disputed upon their first entrance upon them, what grounds had the Ammonites to do it now? They had possessed the country quietly for three hundred years, and even though their title had been less clear at first, yet seeing no claim had been made during that period of time, they had obtained a right by prescription, which the law of nations would clearly have acknowledged. A title unquestioned was to be presumed to