wouldn't it be saying that the stoned knocked him out or to the ground and then David killed Goliath with his own sword.
 

Well it appears that Goliath gets killed twice, no?

"So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and a stone, and struck the Philistine and killed him."

"Therefore David ran and stood over the Philistine, took his sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him, and cut off his head with it."

Sounds like maybe those Philistine gods weren't totally fake after all; how else could Goliath be resuscitated in time to be killed again when David ran over?
 

Personally, whenever I run into a problem like this, I find it useful to check out different translations, as there are points that are clearer in some translations than in others.

Doing that here, it looks like the original text isn't necessarily clear. Young's Literal Translation reveals that the Hebrew here is all in present tense - and that makes it hard to establish an order of events, as Biblical writers didn't always write chronologically. It's very possible that the first "killed him" is there to emphasize the fact that DAVID killed GOLIATH, and won the battle WITHOUT HIS OWN SWORD, and the second one is to describe how it happened. (Holman's Christian Standard Bible makes this interpretation explicit.) Or it's possible that the second "killed him" is actually there to clarify some of the order. "He killed him THEN he chopped off his head with Goliath's own sword." (This is the NIV's interpretation.)

Or, there's the God's Word Translation that suggests that the second "killed him" indicates "made sure he was dead".

Personally, I think it's clear what killed Goliath.

David did.
 

There is no contradiction here. In writing & literature, how often does an author repeat a point to reinforce it? Even the act of beheading a corpse is itself redundant, but David does it anyway for dramatic effect. (We're still talking about 3000 years later, eh?)

These words are written that we may believe His message in the Scriptures that eternal salvation comes only by grace through faith in the innocent death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
 

Heyercapital, I understand what you're saying, but that seems like a cop out to me. The New King James' translation pretty clearly says that David killed Goliath (a) with his sling and (b) with Goliath's sword. If it weren't for the passage saying he killed him with a sling, then it would be crystal clear that David was NOT beheading a corpse, but instead an unconscious guy.
 

The Blackadder Says:

Maybe Goliath was a zombie.
 

Re-read the passage, say from v47, and even say it aloud, as it would have been read.

Note in vv49-50 it is repeated "with a sling and stone" making the reader/listener reflect on the bare physical armament of God. v47 leads into it that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear....He will give you into our hands. ('Hands' also echos using a bare sling.) v50 repeats David's hands were empty -without a sword - and we visualize David taking up the sword the enemy relied upon.

Having Scripture repeat that David "slew" Goliath reinforces the lesson. The men reading this 3000 years ago weren't dunces. They knew 'dead' is 'dead.'

I hope this is helpful.
 

Heyercapital, c'mon. Read it aloud from verse 51:

"51 Therefore David ran and stood over the Philistine, took his sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him, and cut off his head with it."

I am not a dunce. "...and killed him..." is "...and killed him..."

In context, we can only assume that the above sentence is either a bad translation or extremely misleading. It's a bit like saying, "Barack Obama went to Martha's Vineyard and was elected president." Yes, that's technically true, but unless you already knew the actual sequence of events, it would mislead.
 

The first mention of the stone being thrown does not say that he killed him with it. So I took it to mean that he struck Goliath with the stone and then proceeded to kill him. I think it was just a bad choice of words or translation. It wouldn't make sense to say he killed him twice but simply adding "then proceeded" makes it make sense.
 

Peace, Bob. I wasn't calling you a dunce. We're all on the same team here.

When in doubt trust the Bible and lean not on our own understandings.

I checked in with my pastor on the matter:
The Bible version (NKJV) may be causing some of the confusion. (ESV & KJV also carry this similar translation.) The Hebrew underlying v51 has only the context and meaning of 'drawing' the sword, but not the grammatical context of "drawing and striking" which would bring us translate it as "killed."

The NIV version is more clear.
 

Heyercapital said:

Peace, Bob. I wasn't calling you a dunce. We're all on the same team here.

I know you weren't. I was just mirroring your arguments. You thought you decisively proved that it must have been the sling, because the people 3,000 years ago weren't dunces and knew what "dead" meant.

So I was just saying, I'm not a dunce and know what it means to say David took Goliath's sword and killed him.
 

BTW I am happy to concede it's a bad translation in the New King James. Obviously I hope it's a bad translation since I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God!
 

I know I am late to this discussion...but Bob invited me to chime in and I think there might be more to this account/debate than what meets the eye. I'll just share my thoughts and sit back and watch...

In order to see this account as the Israelites and Philistines would...you will have to go back to I Samuel chapter 5 and begin reading.

(This also will address the comment by Danny that suggested the Philistine gods weren't fake and did indeed have power over life and death...enough to bring Goliath back to life to be killed again.)

The Philistines stole the Ark of the Covenant (in ISam.5) in order to 'get' the power of the Israelites God on their side. They brought the Ark into the temple of their main god- Dagon. Dagon was a strange god...half-man/half-fish. Due to the Philistines respect for the power of the Israelites God they placed the Ark in the same room as Dagon.

The next morning they came into the temple and found Dagon on HIS FACE lying before the Ark. The Philistines propped him back up in his place. The next day they came in and found Dagon missing his hands and HIS HEAD. Obviously...the power of God is being referenced here and must have been quite perplexing to those Philistines.

This information can now help us in gaining perspective on the situation before us now.

As David pulled up to the battlefront...his main complaint to the other men was "This guy is defying the LIVING God!"

As David approached Goliath, Goliath began his haughty rant of being bigger and better than this boy. However, note how the Bible records how Goliath ends his rant- he cursed David by his gods. (included in that would surely be his MAIN god- Dagon)

You've read this far and here is the good part- at this point David knows what/who he is dealing with and actually responds to Goliath with the specific things that David is planning to do to Goliath. It is two-fold: David was going to 1) 'smite' him and 2) take his HEAD from him.

Imagine the affect that the severed head of the giant held high in the hands of David standing over the 'stump' of his body would have had on the rest of the company of the Philistines!

These soldiers would surely have known about what happened to their god the last time that it met the God of the Israelites. They would have known about it because some of them would have been involved in the battle when they took the Ark. Of course the news would have spread when Dagon fell on his face and lost his head in front of the Ark. (This caused some much havoc within the Philistine camp that they finally gave it back!)

Anyway...just some thoughts that give the two instances of 'slew' or 'killed' some additional meaning.
 

Magnat,

Thanks for the comment. I am embarrassed to say that the first time I read how the Israelites bungled and managed to lose the ark to the Philistines, I was horrified. And then of course I soon enough realized, "Oh wait a minute, God can handle His own ark; He doesn't need a wall of human bodies to protect it from pagans."
 

You will like the ugg boots,you will found More and more people choose cheap ugg boots.So you know that ugg series of the most famous is the ugg boots sale. I recommend you go to online store, there have a lot of Ugg Classic Short boots
Bailey Button
Ugg Classic Mini
Ugg Classic Tall boots
Ugg Classic Cardy
Ugg Nightfall
Bailey ugg Boots