Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2014 September 5

= September 5 =

Book of Samuel
Look at 2 Samuel 13:34. Some of the versions add a second sentence in translating that verse, that is definitely not in the Hebrew: Heb-Eng. Where then? trespassers william (talk) 00:33, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The only glaring difference I see is in the ISV. See International Standard Version, perhaps. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:12, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The extra sentence appears to be from the Septuagint. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 09:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes. Bible Gateway has various translations including footnotes, and the footnote to this passage in the NIV reads "Septuagint; Hebrew does not have this sentence." --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks to all. It turns out the LXX is a complicated body of manuscripts and editions. Do you know which bible versions have the best chance of breaking it down to that resolution? After a day of searching I still can't find one that simply uses different fonts or brackets to indicate as many sources as possible. trespassers william (talk) 00:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Why is Al Nusra fighting ISIS
Seriously, I've been looking into this for some time and I can't find anything about why they are fighting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radioactivemutant (talk • contribs) 05:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I thought it was because al-Qaeda thought ISIS was too extremist! These sorts of movements always have factions splitting off and fighting amongst each other. Normally they kill more of their own related movements than anyone else but ISIS is so bloodthirsty I guess that won't be the case here. Dmcq (talk) 08:23, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Read the Wikipedia article. See Al-Nusra Front.  -- Jayron  32  09:36, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * There's always scope for personal disputes in such groupings; in addition, look up the "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912" joke... -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I believe al-Qaeda, and by extension Al Nusra, understands long-term strategy in a way that ISIS doesn't. That is, ISIS commits genocide against civilians and holds ground in a desert area.  That combo is about as stupid as you can get.  The genocide part provides the impetus for the US, NATO, etc., to fight against them (and beheading Americans and posting it online is the kicker), while trying to hold ground in a desert area against enemies with total air superiority is absolutely hopeless, since there's no place to hide.  It's just a matter of time before the attacks on them are gauged up to the point where they are wiped off the map.  This seems to be about as poorly thought out as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.  Al-Qaeda is smart enough to realize this, and wants little to do with such a pathetic strategy, preferring to hide out until they can rebuild their strength. StuRat (talk) 17:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * In many ways, Al-Qaeda was "stupid" to almost the same degree back in the Zarqawi days (though not as eagerly anxious to go out of their way to persecute native Iraqi non-Muslims)... AnonMoos (talk) 18:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

What did Balfour spend his fortune on?
According to our article, Arthur Balfour had spent his inherited fortune by the time he dies. What did he spend it on? DuncanHill (talk) 12:18, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * According to Arthur James Balfour, 1848-1930: Historiography and Annotated Bibliography by Eugene L. Rasor (1998); "The value of the various holdings inherited by Balfour decreased over the next decades, apparently due to careless management, speculation, poor investments, for example on the New York stock exchange, and gambling" (p. 16). Alansplodge (talk) 13:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. He's always seemed such a colourless personality, I'd guessed it was neither "wine, women, and song", nor "rum, bum, and concertina". DuncanHill (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)