Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 196 of 427 (542951)
01-14-2010 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by Peg
01-13-2010 11:57 PM


Re: Am I correct?
quote:
2 Sam 7:13 NWT
"He is the one that will build a house for my name, and I shall certainly establish the throne of his kingdom firmly to time indefinite"
What is being established here is not Solomon, but the 'thone' which represents the position of kingly authority.
But it is still Solomon's throne, and Solomon's kingdom. And Solomon ruled an earthly kingdom.
quote:
This is why I keep saying that only the first part of the prophecy 'he will build a house for my name' refers to Solomon.
I'm not seeing that reason. Clearly in all the translations quoted, both parts refer to the same person. The rules of English grammar demand it. When you say that they refer to different people you are saying that 2 Samuel 7:13 is wrong. It should say "He is the one that will build a house for my name, and I shall certainly establish the throne of some other guy's kingdom firmly to time indefinite". Does that actually make sense to you ?
quote:
The remainder about the 'throne' would have to be fulfilled by someone else for the reason that Solomon did not remain faithful, nor did he live forever. Only one who would live forever could rule on the throne forever.
Of course it doesn't say that Solomon - or whoever it refers to - will rule forever. As you correctly state:
What is being established here is not Solomon, but the 'thone' which represents the position of kingly authority.
Thus the prophecy does NOT require that Solomon rule forever. It requires that Solomon's (earthly) kingdom should remain forever, it may require that Solomon's line continues to rule it, but it clearly does not say that Solomon - or any individual person - will occupy the throne forever.
And - as Purpledawn has pointed out - 1 Kings 9 states that the promise was conditional on the rulers remaining faithful. If, as you say, Solomon was unfaithful then the promise no longer applies. (I will also note that Jeremiah 18:5-10 asserts that all such promises are conditional, and it is possible that the author of 2 Samuel shared that view of prophecy).
And let us take a further look at 2 Samuel:
13 "He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.
14 "I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men,
So, as well as telling us that the person referred to will build a temple (as Solomon did, and Jesus did not) it also tells us that this person will - or is likely to - "commit iniquity", and God will punish him for it. Do you think that Jesus did wrong and needed to be punished by God ? Did Solomon ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Peg, posted 01-13-2010 11:57 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by purpledawn, posted 01-14-2010 9:01 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 207 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 5:38 AM PaulK has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 197 of 427 (542981)
01-14-2010 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by Peg
01-13-2010 11:46 PM


Re: Everlasting Heir Busted
quote:
The throne represents a position of authority given by God to rule.
Exactly! The person God gives that leadership authority to must behave. If David's descendants through Solomon behaved, then there would always be a descendant of David through Solomon reigning over Israel. 1 Kings 2:1-4 - 1 Kings 9:4-8 (Message 131)
quote:
Solomon had that while he was faithful, but later lost it. So the prophecy here is not speaking about Solomon. The initial part about the builder of the temple is about Solomon, but the rest of the prophecy, the position of authority that was to be established forever, is not.
PaulK has already commented on rules of English grammar in Message 196, so I won't.
As I noted in Message 173, your sticking point seems to be the forever part. You feel it means without end. It doesn't mean without end, but implies an indefinite period of time. Iblis also addressed that issue in Message 182:
Iblis writes:
Once you actually search the scriptures and rightly divide them, in other words, it's pretty clear the word means "long-time".
Even the translation you provided for Brian in Message 194 says indefinite, which means the end is not specified.
2 Sam 7:13 NWT
"He is the one that will build a house for my name, and I shall certainly establish the throne of his kingdom firmly to time indefinite"
1 Kings 9:4-8 does tell when the end of the promise would be. The destruction of the temple was the end of the promise for David's line to rule.
The promise in 2 Samuel 7:13 was for Solomon and his descendants. That promise ended with the destruction of Solomon's temple.
I'm not sure why you're arguing this since you've already made the genealogies useless concerning the promise in 2 Samuel 7:13. Luke's is the wrong son and Matthew's goes through a cursed lineage.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Peg, posted 01-13-2010 11:46 PM Peg has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 198 of 427 (542982)
01-14-2010 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by PaulK
01-14-2010 2:44 AM


Deuteronomist and Jeremiah
quote:
(I will also note that Jeremiah 18:5-10 asserts that all such promises are conditional, and it is possible that the author of 2 Samuel shared that view of prophecy).
That's interesting. According to the Documentary Hypothesis, the Deuteronomist wrote Deuteronomy through 2 Kings and may have written the account of Jeremiah.
quote:
The actual identity of the Deuteronomist is less secure than the body of his editing work: scholars postulate that the author was Baruch (Neriyah's son), Jeremiah's scribe, or possibly Jeremiah, due to the similarities in style between Jeremiah, and the inclusion in Jeremiah of direct (unattributed) quotes of D, as well as the affiliation of Jeremiah to the Shiloh priests, the time period at which Jeremiah lived.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by PaulK, posted 01-14-2010 2:44 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by PaulK, posted 01-14-2010 10:18 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 199 of 427 (542988)
01-14-2010 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by Buzsaw
01-14-2010 12:51 AM


Re: forever is a long time
quote:
(3) I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn to David my servant, (4) your seed will I establish for ever, and build up your throne to all generations. Selah.
Ps. 89
(35) Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie to David. (36) His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. (37) It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.
In verse 1 the writer also says he will sing of the Lord's great love forever. Obviously that is impossible. You should have kept reading.
Psalm 89
38 But you (God) have rejected, you have spurned, you have been very angry with your anointed one (David).
39 You have renounced the covenant with your servant and defiled his crown in the dust. ...
In the prophets you quoted God promised the Israelites would return and be ruled by a descendant of David on earth. It didn't happen. Jesus was never a ruler.
Luke is the only one who says "will not end". Interesting that the writer of Luke says he will reign over the house of Jacob instead of Israel. Of course that has nothing to do with the promise in 2 Samuel 7:13. This is another promise which didn't come to fruition. Jesus was never an anointed ruling king.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Buzsaw, posted 01-14-2010 12:51 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-15-2010 2:49 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 200 of 427 (542992)
01-14-2010 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by purpledawn
01-14-2010 9:01 AM


Re: Deuteronomist and Jeremiah
Yes, that is interesting. If that is really the case, then we pretty much have to assume that the promise is conditional.
I will disagree on another point, though, 1 Kings 11 tells us when (according to the author) the promise ceases to apply, and why.
6 Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, and did not follow the LORD fully, as David his father had done.
7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable idol of Moab, on the mountain which is east of Jerusalem, and for Molech the detestable idol of the sons of Ammon.
8 Thus also he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods.
9 Now the LORD was angry with Solomon because his heart was turned away from the LORD, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice,
10 and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods; but he did not observe what the LORD had commanded.
11 So the LORD said to Solomon, "Because you have done this, and you have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you, and will give it to your servant.
12 "Nevertheless I will not do it in your days for the sake of your father David, but I will tear it out of the hand of your son.
13 "However, I will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son for the sake of My servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem which I have chosen."
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by purpledawn, posted 01-14-2010 9:01 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by purpledawn, posted 01-14-2010 11:10 AM PaulK has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 201 of 427 (543000)
01-14-2010 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by PaulK
01-14-2010 10:18 AM


Re: Deuteronomist and Jeremiah
quote:
13 "However, I will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son for the sake of My servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem which I have chosen."
That left only Judah and some of the area of Benjamin for David's descendants. Zedekiah was the last king of Judah from the line of David. God took the rest and gave it to Cyrus.
2 Chronicles 36:22-23
In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah, the Lord moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and to put it in writing: "This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: " 'The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah.
The first promise ended and the promises made of reviving the kingdom didn't happen when they returned from exile.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by PaulK, posted 01-14-2010 10:18 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Briterican
Member (Idle past 3949 days)
Posts: 340
Joined: 05-29-2008


Message 202 of 427 (543011)
01-14-2010 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Buzsaw
01-12-2010 7:35 PM


Re: Quote mining?
Hi Buzsaw
Buzsaw writes:
Hi Briterican. I've been debating Brian a number of years more than you and likely been into the Bible long before either of you were born. If you think Brian's understanding of the Bible relative to this debate (abe: makes sense,) perhaps you could do a better job of supporting his position than he has done. You could begin with explaining how a forever throne could be limited to a contemporary era.
Fair enough. I'm afraid I'm not in a position to argue any position on this as I simply don't have enough information, and I'm finding it hard enough to follow what's being said here as it is. I'm sure Brian doesn't need my help though.
Buzsaw writes:
I pray for the day some EvC member will publically profess conversion to Jesus Christ as lord and saviour on this board or that some EvC Christian apostate will return to the fold. Perhaps you will be the first
Never say never eh - that is in reference to somebody doing this. I'm sorry, however, that I must politely decline the offer to be that somebody
As for the details on prophecy, I wasn't intending to put forward strawmen, I just don't think that everything fits as nicely and neatly together like you do. Additionally, and probably more importantly, I frankly don't accept "prophecy" as a real or even potentially possible thing. Prediction is one thing, because predictions can be, and often are, wrong. Prophecy is something else, and it lies outside the realm of rational thinking.
Buzsaw writes:
I have a high school diploma, 3 semesters at Bob Jones University and some USAF jet mechanic training. The rest comes from reading, googling, listening, researching, observing and above all, praying for wisdom, insite, knowledge and understanding of all things important. That's it. You might say I'm a 74 year old home schooler working to achieve the ultimate degree.
And it is comments like this that make me regret my disrespectful tone. I hope you'll appreciate that since it is debate, it can get heated, but you displayed the wisdom of your years (in terms of courtesy) in your polite replies to my inciteful ones.
---- now I should get out of here as I am completely off topic and I'm not adding anything to the discussion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Buzsaw, posted 01-12-2010 7:35 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by Buzsaw, posted 01-15-2010 12:10 AM Briterican has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 203 of 427 (543056)
01-15-2010 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Briterican
01-14-2010 3:15 PM


Re: Quote mining?
Briterican writes:
And it is comments like this that make me regret my disrespectful tone. I hope you'll appreciate that since it is debate, it can get heated, but you displayed the wisdom of your years (in terms of courtesy) in your polite replies to my inciteful ones.
Hey, Briterican, we all get aroused in lively debate on occasion. I appreciate your exemplary attitude, enjoy debating the issues with you and like reading your input in the threads.
Briterican writes:
---- now I should get out of here as I am completely off topic and I'm not adding anything to the discussion
You're doing fine. If something comes to mind, do aire it. Iron sharpens iron, as the saying goes.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Briterican, posted 01-14-2010 3:15 PM Briterican has seen this message but not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 204 of 427 (543060)
01-15-2010 2:49 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by purpledawn
01-14-2010 9:53 AM


Re: forever is a long time
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn to David my servant, (4) your seed will I establish for ever, and build up your throne to all generations. Selah.
Ps. 89
(35) Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie to David. (36) His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. (37) It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Purpledawn writes;
In verse 1 the writer also says he will sing of the Lord's great love forever. Obviously that is impossible. You should have kept reading.
Its so ironic that you should instruct someone to KEEP READING
Your tunnel vision doesnt allow you to see that there is always more involved where God is involved. Even in these passages below it should be easily understood that a principle can carry forward, whether the person is still around or not.
Psalm 112
1Praise the Lord.
Blessed is the man who fears the Lord,
who finds great delight in his commands.
2His children will be mighty in the land;
the generation of the upright will be blessed.
3Wealth and riches are in his house,
and his righteousness endures forever.
4Even in darkness light dawns for the upright,
for the gracious and compassionate and righteous man.c
5Good will come to him who is generous and lends freely,
who conducts his affairs with justice.
6Surely he will never be shaken;
a righteous man will be remembered forever.
7He will have no fear of bad news;
his heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord.
8His heart is secure, he will have no fear;
in the end he will look in triumph on his foes.
9He has scattered abroad his gifts to the poor,
his righteousness endures forever;
his hornd will be lifted high in honor.
when for example could we say that Moses' or Christs righteouness ceased or does it still continue to this day and forever.
where God is involved, these passages CAN and DO have greater meaning, than simply that which was promised to David in particular. it simply takes the totality of those passages to see the ultimate message and purpose for which God intended.
why for example should we assume that Gods statement to Abraham, "through thy seed shall all the nations of the earth shall be blessed",
Should be something God actually said to Abraham, then assume that an inspired Apostles explanation of this same statement, in the nature of christ, should be less than accurate as inspired?
In this instance one could see how Gods purposes were literally meant to last FOREVER, even if a single person was or was not around. Even if we assume that only the writer that spoke of Abrahams promise by God, was inspired, does not the promise to Abraham go on forever.
that is if we ascribe as much reverance to the Apostles as you seem to give the writers of the old testament. that is also, if we ascribe God in the process of the New Testament, as you seem to imply in the Old testament. or am I incorrect in my assumptions concerning your views of the Old testament
if you literally accept God, as in the text, involved in t he process
and take the totality of scripture concerning an issue, there is no reason to believe that forever cannot have a deeper meaning as in the example I have provided in Abraham
EAM
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by purpledawn, posted 01-14-2010 9:53 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 205 of 427 (543063)
01-15-2010 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by purpledawn
01-13-2010 8:37 PM


Re: Earthly Throne
Nope, not directly or indirectly. The author of Samuel is unknown. According to the text God authorized David to be king and rule over the Israelites.
I thought God was the ultimate author?
I've asked you several times to explain what you mean by spiritual. You have yet to explain.
You dont seem to be very skilled in discussion, due to t he fact that i offered PRINCIPLE and the SACRIFICAL act required by God as a principle for forgiveness of sin or attonment
"Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin"
It doesn't matter what God intended. He let the people have kings. We aren't talking about God's intentions, we are talking about what the text actually says.
well this displays alot about your entire position that was not clear up to this point, all in you one statement above. Do you mean to tell me that you cannot deduce from the scriptures that is was not Gods original intention for HIM TO BE THIER ONLY KING?
Im afraid that this statement also implies that you have no intention of being objective
Dueteronomy and Leviticus were written after the time of David and Solomon. The authors are talking about earthly kingdoms.
not if the author was God
And yet you don't take the text at face value. You have to add a backstory so it will fit current dogma.
By back story do you mean God not actually in the process. by backstory do you mean to imply the writers of the New testament were not inspired as they claimed, like thoseof the old
Then show us the where it clearly states that David's kingdom mentioned in 2 Samuel 7:13 is spiritual or ethereal. We keep asking and you keep not showing.
Since you listed 6 different verses, I have no idea which verse you're talking about; the verses you've shared don't make 2 Samuel 7:13 mean spiritual kingdom or that God speaks of anything but a physical nation or kingdom on the planet.
its in the entirity od scripture PD, to include the New testament. here is one from the Old
1 Samuel 8
When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as judges for Israel. 2The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3But his sons did not walk in his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice.
4So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5They said to him, You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to leada us, such as all the other nations have.
6But when they said, Give us a king to lead us, this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7And the Lord told him: Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.
10Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11He said, This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattleb and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the Lord will not answer you in that day.
19But the people refused to listen to Samuel. No! they said. We want a king over us. 20Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.
21When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. 22The Lord answered, Listen to them and give them a king.
now tell me if we should take the entirity of scripture concerning gods intentions? tell me whether this is a spiritual principle
EAM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by purpledawn, posted 01-13-2010 8:37 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by purpledawn, posted 01-15-2010 7:20 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3896 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 206 of 427 (543065)
01-15-2010 5:16 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by purpledawn
01-13-2010 8:37 PM


What's up with Samuel
As usual, we are getting more than our fair share of gibberish in this thread. One of the ideas that is getting vigorously stressed every few pages is thusly: that God never intended us to have kings, thinks kingship is a bad idea, and in fact doesn't like any kings at all; and therefore, Jesus must have been a king.
The idea that he didn't intend the Israelites to have kings is kind of ludicrous.
Deuteronomy 17:15-18 writes:
Thou shalt in any wise set [him] king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: [one] from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which [is] not thy brother.
But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.
Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of [that which is] before the priests the Levites
Sounds like a plan! The reason that they needed a king was because being ruled directly by God is strikingly similar to anarchy.
Judges 17:6 writes:
In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.
Just interpreting ancient fables for themselves and counting on God to play his part didn't work.
Judges 19:22-30 writes:
[Now] as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, [and] beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.
And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, [nay], I pray you, do not [so] wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly.
Behold, [here is] my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing.
But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.
Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord [was], till it was light.
And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down [at] the door of the house, and her hands [were] upon the threshold.
And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her [up] upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place.
And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, [together] with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.
And it was so, that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: consider of it, take advice, and speak [your minds].
Trusting to the priests to help sort everything out for them didn't work either.
First Samuel 2:12-14,17,22 writes:
Now the sons of Eli [were] sons of Belial; they knew not the LORD.
And the priests' custom with the people [was, that], when any man offered sacrifice, the priest's servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a fleshhook of three teeth in his hand;
And he struck [it] into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that the fleshhook brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither.
Wherefore the sin of the young men was very great before the LORD: for men abhorred the offering of the LORD.
Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled [at] the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
They wanted someone to look out for their own interests, and help keep them from being looted by the priests and raped by sons of bitches. You would too, if it were you. One of the things that they learned was that it isn't the best idea to just pick someone who is attractive and popular.
First Samuel 9:2 writes:
And he had a son, whose name [was] Saul, a choice young man, and a goodly: and [there was] not among the children of Israel a goodlier person than he: from his shoulders and upward [he was] higher than any of the people.
What would be a good idea, would be to pick someone who already has experience and has shown they can be trusted to do the job.
Second Samuel 5:1-3 writes:
Then came all the tribes of Israel to David unto Hebron, and spake, saying, Behold, we [are] thy bone and thy flesh.
Also in time past, when Saul was king over us, thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel: and the LORD said to thee, Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be a captain over Israel.
So all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and king David made a league with them in Hebron before the LORD: and they anointed David king over Israel.
Don't get slack though, don't trust to lineages. You may think you got lucky in the next generation
First Kings 4:29-32 writes:
And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that [is] on the sea shore.
And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt.
For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol: and his fame was in all nations round about.
And he spake three thousand proverbs: and his songs were a thousand and five.
but what looks like business in the front may well be party in the back
First Kings 11:1-3 writes:
But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, [and] Hittites;
Of the nations [concerning] which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: [for] surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.
And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.
and things aren't going to get any better after that.
First Kings 12:12-14 writes:
So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam the third day, as the king had appointed, saying, Come to me again the third day.
And the king answered the people roughly, and forsook the old men's counsel that they gave him;
And spake to them after the counsel of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke: my father [also] chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.
So pick your own leaders, from your own brothers, based on their experience and ability to do the job, and hold them to it, just the way the law says. And if any posers come around talking about genealogies and divine right, don't believe them, because they are talking shit.
Matthew 22:41-46 writes:
While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,
Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, [The Son] of David.
He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any [man] from that day forth ask him any more [questions].

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by purpledawn, posted 01-13-2010 8:37 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 207 of 427 (543066)
01-15-2010 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by PaulK
01-14-2010 2:44 AM


Re: Am I correct?
PaulK writes:
But it is still Solomon's throne, and Solomon's kingdom. And Solomon ruled an earthly kingdom.
but that has nothing to do with the prophecy.
Here is a corresponding prophecy to Samuels which has a few more details added.
1 Chronicles 17:11‘And it must occur that when your (David) days have come to the full [for you] to go [to be] with your forefathers, I shall certainly raise up your seed after you that will come to be one of your sons (Solomon), and I shall indeed firmly establish his kingship.
Solomons 'kingship' was established, yes.
12He is the one that will build me a house, and I shall certainly establish his throne firmly to time indefinite.
Solomon did build the 'house' but notice that it is the 'throne' that is established to time indefinite? As a theocratic nation, the throne of Isreal represented Gods authority & rulership. So really, its God's sovereignty that was being established. Not solomon at all.
13I myself shall become his father, and he himself will become my son; and my loving-kindness I shall not remove from him the way I removed it from the one that happened to be prior to you (Saul).
Did solomon remain in Gods favor? No. Solomon turned to false worship toward the end of his reign, so its imposible that this could be refering to Solomon and his rulership. Do you read anywhere in the OT that Solomon was called the 'son of God'? No.
14And I will cause him to stand in my house and in my kingship to time indefinite, and his throne will itself become one lasting to time indefinite.
This part is even more pointed because where is Gods house? Isiah 66 tells us its in heaven.
‘The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Where, then, is the house that you people can build for me, and where, then, is the place as a resting-place for me?’
So the one who is to stand in Gods house has to be a spirit person.
Also, you can read the account in 1Ki 11:9-13 about how Solomons reign ended and how God 'became incensed at Solomon because his heart had inclinded away' and because he turned to false worship God told him that he would rip part of the kingdom away from him. This is how the kingdom of Isreal became divided into a two tribe kingdom.
With a bit of background information it becomes quite clear that Solomon was not the one being spoken of in the prophecy. There is plenty of evidence for this.
PaulK writes:
And - as Purpledawn has pointed out - 1 Kings 9 states that the promise was conditional on the rulers remaining faithful. If, as you say, Solomon was unfaithful then the promise no longer applies.
and that is exactly why the kingdom became divided and the temple destroyed.
But you are claiming that the prophecy becomes void based on your assumption that the prophecy is about solomon.
I've shown quite adequately that the prophecy is not about Solomon and therefore your's and PD's reasoning is flawed.
PaulK writes:
So, as well as telling us that the person referred to will build a temple (as Solomon did, and Jesus did not) it also tells us that this person will - or is likely to - "commit iniquity", and God will punish him for it. Do you think that Jesus did wrong and needed to be punished by God ? Did Solomon ?
you already mentioned that the "in all the translations quoted, both parts refer to the same person. The rules of English grammar demand it." Well the Hebrew language did not follow the rules of english grammer and im sure you can appreciate why.
Besides that, hebrew is not written in sentences with fullstops and new paragraphs. It was written as one long continuous piece of writing. So when the english translators started putting full stops and new sentences in, it doesnt mean that these must be taken literally. It is very likely the case that they've put a full stop where there should not be.
The grammar could have looked like this....
13 He is the one that will build a house for my name, and I shall certainly establish the throne of his kingdom firmly to time indefiniteI myself shall become his father, and he himself will become my son.
14 When he does wrong, I will also reprove him with the rod of men and with the strokes of the sons of Adam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by PaulK, posted 01-14-2010 2:44 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by PaulK, posted 01-15-2010 7:54 AM Peg has replied
 Message 217 by Jaderis, posted 01-16-2010 6:48 AM Peg has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 208 of 427 (543070)
01-15-2010 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Dawn Bertot
01-15-2010 3:43 AM


Spiritual Kingdom
Message 204 didn't do anything to counter the argument presented by Iblis and myself, that owlam doesn't not mean without end; so I won't be responding to that message. No sense in repeating myself.
Iblis has also posted concerning the idea that God didn't intend for there to be kings, so I won't be responding to that issue either since it really has nothing to do with what the text says in 2 Samuel 7:13.
quote:
PurpleDawn writes:
I've asked you several times to explain what you mean by spiritual. You have yet to explain.
You dont seem to be very skilled in discussion, due to t he fact that i offered PRINCIPLE and the SACRIFICAL act required by God as a principle for forgiveness of sin or attonment
"Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin"
It would be nice if you just gave a meaning. Since you didn't, I have to guess.
The closest meaning I can find for spiritual used as an adjective to what you have described is:
2 a : of or relating to sacred matters b : ecclesiastical rather than lay or temporal
3 : concerned with religious values
2 Samuel 7:13 does not speak of sacrifices, forgiveness of sin, or blood. It is simply taking about David's Dynasty. Very straightforward.
That Dynasty ended with the destruction of the first temple.
That verse still doesn't lead to Jesus.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-15-2010 3:43 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-15-2010 10:03 AM purpledawn has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 209 of 427 (543075)
01-15-2010 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by Peg
01-15-2010 5:38 AM


Re: Am I correct?
quote:
but that has nothing to do with the prophecy.
The fact that the prophecy is talking about Solomon's kingdom, which was an earthly kingdom has nothing to do with the prophecy ? How can that be ?
quote:
Solomon did build the 'house' but notice that it is the 'throne' that is established to time indefinite? As a theocratic nation, the throne of Isreal represented Gods authority & rulership. So really, its God's sovereignty that was being established. Not solomon at all.
It''s Solomon's throne so therefore it must be Solomon's sovereignty that is somehow being preserved. Thus it could legitimately refer to the institution of kingship or to Solomon's line.
quote:
Did solomon remain in Gods favor? No.
Which voided the promise...
quote:
Solomon turned to false worship toward the end of his reign, so its imposible that this could be refering to Solomon and his rulership. Do you read anywhere in the OT that Solomon was called the 'son of God'? No.
Clearly it is not referring to a literal blood relationship. Why could God not adopt Solomon in this way ? Don't Christians call God "Father" and describe themselves (often meaning all humanity) as God's children ?
quote:
This part is even more pointed because where is Gods house? Isiah 66 tells us its in heaven.
‘The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Where, then, is the house that you people can build for me, and where, then, is the place as a resting-place for me?’
So the one who is to stand in Gods house has to be a spirit person.
Except, of course, that Solomon's Temple is also described as God's house. You've even quoted a verse which says as much ! Even worse, you are relying on the Chronicles account including significant information omitted from 2 Samuel.
quote:
With a bit of background information it becomes quite clear that Solomon was not the one being spoken of in the prophecy. There is plenty of evidence for this.
In fact there is plenty of evidence for it. As your yourself have pointed out Solomon misbehaved, and the promise became void. Therefore the fact that the promise did not continue is not evidence against Solomon at all. And who - after all - built the Temple ?
quote:
you already mentioned that the "in all the translations quoted, both parts refer to the same person. The rules of English grammar demand it." Well the Hebrew language did not follow the rules of english grammer and im sure you can appreciate why.
But we are not reading Hebrew We are reading an English translation which must follow the rules of English grammar. If you mean that all the translators got it wrong - including the translator of your preferred version - then say so. But you can't say that English grammar doesn't apply. You can go to the Hebrew text if you like, but I doubt that it will help you.
quote:
The grammar could have looked like this....
13 He is the one that will build a house for my name, and I shall certainly establish the throne of his kingdom firmly to time indefinite I myself shall become his father, and he himself will become my son.
14 When he does wrong, I will also reprove him with the rod of men and with the strokes of the sons of Adam.
Which still indicates the same person throughout. No, you need a far more drastic rewrite.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 5:38 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 5:57 PM PaulK has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 210 of 427 (543088)
01-15-2010 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by purpledawn
01-15-2010 7:20 AM


Re: Spiritual Kingdom
2 Samuel 7:13 does not speak of sacrifices, forgiveness of sin, or blood. It is simply taking about David's Dynasty. Very straightforward.
That Dynasty ended with the destruction of the first temple.
That verse still doesn't lead to Jesus.
But herein lies you problem PD and it is my guess that you are probably nothing more than a deist wrap in some form of religious garb.
BTW, dont put that down as an argument just yet, its a simple observation that i accidentally verbalized. If however, I am wrong then by all means explain what your position on God, miracles and the such like may be. But that is simply just a suggestion not a demand, to help the discussion along
You are correct PD, that particular verse does not address in DETAIL all of Gods intentions concerning Davids throne, but the rest of the book that claims to be from God does and the same God that made or inspired that statement speaks of sacrfice for the forgiveness of sins and many miraculous and spiritual things.
The rest of the scriptures Old and New WILL lead you to Jesus. i have already mentioned and addmitted its not contained in one verse.
You feel the walls closing in on your argument because it is my guess that you dont really believe God was involved in any of this or that any of these writers were actually guided by God in thier formation. And no, that is not another topic when we are discussing a text repleat with God, intervention, inspiration and it claiming in nearly every other word, God saying I will do this or that
Message 204 didn't do anything to counter the argument presented by Iblis and myself, that owlam doesn't not mean without end; so I won't be responding to that message. No sense in repeating myself.
Your problem is that you are to exclusive concerning the word forever, certainly it can mean a fixed period or an indefinate period but in connection with God it can also mean forever.
Oh I think there is a very good reason you dont want to respond to most of my arguments and passages, as you keep avoiding them directly, because they throw a wrench in your mostly humanistic approach, to a text that without question demands otherwise.
But if your humanist approach makes you happy just stick with it
Iblis has also posted concerning the idea that God didn't intend for there to be kings, so I won't be responding to that issue either since it really has nothing to do with what the text says in 2 Samuel 7:13.
But the verses he quoted are after God had made his original intentions known to the prophet. But that is assuming we are CONCERNED with what Gods intentions were in the first place.
Oh yeah thats right, you said it doesnt matter what God intended and what God intended was irrelevant.
Back to square one PD. Gods intentions and plans are not summed up in one verse. thats assuming you actually believe God has anything to with any of this in the first place
It would be nice if you just gave a meaning. Since you didn't, I have to guess.
The closest meaning I can find for spiritual used as an adjective to what you have described is:
Since I thought it would be obvious to anyone what I meant by spiritual ie, having to do with or relating to God, or God as a spirit and his plans, methods and ideas over vast periods of time, perhaps you could tell me exacally what you believe God is or is not, soo as to clear up any confusion.
here is a couple of simple questions. Would you say that forgiveness of sins by animal sacrifice was a plan God gave to the Irsaelites in his law to them in the old testament.
Would you say that forgiveness of a moral principle as sin, is repleat throughout the Old and new testaments.
Would you say that because God is the one that institued such things (atleast in the old and New testaments), that these could be considered spiritual principles, since God is described as spirit?
I cant believe Im actually formulating such questions, but anywho, what would you say?
EAM
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by purpledawn, posted 01-15-2010 7:20 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by purpledawn, posted 01-15-2010 11:46 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024