Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 361 of 427 (546343)
02-10-2010 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 335 by purpledawn
02-06-2010 12:11 PM


Re: The Throne
Speaking of nonsense. Context can only be understood within the confines of grammar. Ignoring the rules means you're ignoring the context.
You continue to speak of context, but provide none.
I guess you missed the part where I said grammar is important. I guess you missed the part where I said yours and Pegs interpretation were both correct. Your simply isolating a verse of scripture to determine Gods Gods Gods plan on the whole subject, of Israel, Kingdoms and Kingship of that kingdom.
The context you say I am not providing is that to which you have now agreed, includes the whole of what the Old testament has to say on the subject, of Israel, the kingdom and kingship of that kingdom.
It has been demonstrated to you to many times now that the kingdom is Gods overall and the promise was made to David concerning his throne.
Your schtick is to keep harping on some detail of that process (as in 7:13) as if to imply indirectly that this is the entirity of what scripture has to say on the subject. Probably because you can see the force of what is being presented to you. You have many twists and turns to avoid simple teachings and points.
here is another.
I'm sure it is nonsensical to you. I'm actually reading the words provided in the context they were provided or at least trying. You are creating fiction to suit yourself.
No, your reading words in one verse and pretending this is all the scriptures has to concerning the subject. Your grammar is correct and your interpretation is valid, its your method that is faulty and suspect
You think if you keep repeating yourself about what is actually written in a single passage and pretend to believe this everything concerning that subject, that no one will pay attention to the fact that you have avoided the context of not only that book and chapter, but the entire Old Testament.
How can I be creating fiction concerning God and what the ENTIRE text says on the matter. On the contrary your picking out of it what you like and throwing the rest under the bus, so to speak.
here is another. You keep pointing to the fact and correctly so, that a specific verse is dealing with CERTAIN PHYSICAL DETAILS of the kingdom and kingship, then separate that from the fact that it is actually Gods kingdom with plans that strech further than that verse or chapter, then scream to everyone, "Cant you just see that that is all there is to it people". "Cant you make a distinction between what God did for a specfic person or persons, verses what he did as God himself, people"
PD there is no distinction that you are atttempting to demonstrate, that will allow your isolate interpretations Gods plan included more than Solomon and the temple, more than a geneaolgy, through humans
Peg writes in 358, speakiing to you
I have done this over and over but you just dont get it.
The promise to David is not just for a temple to be built, but for an heir to take the throne of David and rule on it forever. 2 Samuel 7:11 says that the house that Solomon was to build was actually for David. "And Jehovah has told you that a house is what Jehovah will make for YOU (David)."
So right from the beginning, the house/temple was actually for Davids posterity...not for Solomon or any of his sons. The purpose in this covenant was to provide a kingly dynasty based on Davids throne and to provide a means of identifying the seed that was to come.
More evidence that Davids covenent did not end is found from the prophet ezekeil. 4 years before Zedekiah was dethroned by Babylon Ezekiel said at Ezekeil 21:25-27
We are really just speaking about Gods throne here PD, whether EVEN, if it refers to Davids throne through an unbreakable promise to David.
It could be said of the same promises made to Abraham, no matter what Israel did, the promises to Abraham would stand. But even with Abraham, it was still only about God himself
"I will make of the a great nation and through t hy seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed". Of course culminationg in Christ, which is God, therefore still and only abut God from the start.
Of course neither of you have been able to support your interpretation without breaking English language rules. IOW, you change what God supposedly said.
How can I break the rules of Grammar when we both agree with you concerning that verse.
Where did we change what God said, in a verse, chapter or the entire Old Testament or New Testament.
You see PD, now that we are agreeing with you on grammar and interpretation of 7:13, it is forcing you to move to the entire context. Something that will destroy your theories
EAM
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by purpledawn, posted 02-06-2010 12:11 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 362 by purpledawn, posted 02-10-2010 12:36 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 362 of 427 (546362)
02-10-2010 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by Dawn Bertot
02-10-2010 10:13 AM


Re: The Throne
quote:
You see PD, now that we are agreeing with you on grammar and interpretation of 7:13, it is forcing you to move to the entire context. Something that will destroy your theories
It's about time.
So we agree that the promise to David in 2 Samuel 7:13 concerned his bloodline and the continuation of the kingship of Israel through Solomon. The throne was the human governing of Israel.
Unfortunately you haven't provided any "context" to address.
As I said to Peg: Supposedly David's bloodline does still exist. If the records are correct, then that part of the promise seems to be holding; but the kingship part did not. Leadership was dependent upon the behavior of Solomon and his descendants.
Jesus did not become a human king over Israel.

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 361 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-10-2010 10:13 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by Buzsaw, posted 02-10-2010 11:21 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 373 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-11-2010 10:18 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 363 of 427 (546446)
02-10-2010 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 360 by purpledawn
02-10-2010 8:33 AM


Re: The Davidic Covenant Does Not Refer To A Messiah
Hi PD,
this will be my final word about Davids covenant
From your septuagint link
Jeremias 23:5 writes:
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will raise up to David a righteous branch, and a king shall reign and understand, and shall execute judgment and righteousness on the earth. 6 In his days both Juda shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell securely
when was Jeremiah written? Soon after the destruction of the temple and the nation was captives to Babylon. Solomon was long gone, and from this point on, no more Davidic kings sat on the the throne of David.
So.
Your claim that the promise was to be made possible thru Solomon and his decendents is blown out of the water based on this scripture. At this point in time there are no more decendents of Solomon ruling on Davids throne and yet God tells the nation that one of Davids decendents will be raised up to rule on his throne.
As you've been told over and over, you cannot ignore the continued revelation of Gods expressed will and draw conclusions based on one verse.
Also, as you beleive the throne should be a physical throne, I would like to point out to you Davids own inspired words from Psalms 110
110 The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord is:
Sit at my right hand Until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet.
2The rod of your strength Jehovah will send out of Zion, [saying:]
Go subduing in the midst of your enemies.
If David was the head of the nation, why would he call this person his Lord?
Only because he knew this person was to be placed in the highest position even above David. He was to sit at Gods right hand....this could only be a heavenly position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 360 by purpledawn, posted 02-10-2010 8:33 AM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 364 by hERICtic, posted 02-10-2010 9:41 PM Peg has replied
 Message 370 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 7:52 AM Peg has not replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 364 of 427 (546451)
02-10-2010 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 363 by Peg
02-10-2010 7:32 PM


Re: The Davidic Covenant Does Not Refer To A Messiah
Peg writes:
Also, as you beleive the throne should be a physical throne, I would like to point out to you Davids own inspired words from Psalms 110
110 The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord is:
Sit at my right hand Until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet.
2 The rod of your strength Jehovah will send out of Zion, [saying:]
Go subduing in the midst of your enemies.
If David was the head of the nation, why would he call this person his Lord?
Only because he knew this person was to be placed in the highest position even above David. He was to sit at Gods right hand....this could only be a heavenly position.
The problem is that those arent Davids words. Those are words sung TO David. The LORD is god, the lord is David.
Edited by hERICtic, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by Peg, posted 02-10-2010 7:32 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by Peg, posted 02-10-2010 11:48 PM hERICtic has not replied
 Message 368 by hERICtic, posted 02-11-2010 7:24 AM hERICtic has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 365 of 427 (546455)
02-10-2010 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 362 by purpledawn
02-10-2010 12:36 PM


Re: The Throne
PD writes:
Jesus did not become a human king over Israel.
He wasn't suppose to until the end times according to the prophets and according to his own words. His desciples asked him when the end times would be. He answered by corroborating the OT prophets that the Jews would be scattered globally and return in the latter days/end times.
Jesus also answered the questions as to when his 2nd advent would be. He said after Jews scattered and return. When? After Jerusalem was no longer occupied by Gentiles. Go figure. Six Day War; 1967. Jews back in Jerusalem; Gentiles out. This all plus all of the other corroborating end time prophecies emerging into filfillment. Pd, until you come to grips with the reality of fulfilled prophecy, you'll never see Jesus as the messiah of the covenant and soon coming king of the messianic throne of Israel. You'll never understand who Jesus really is or his greatness.

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 362 by purpledawn, posted 02-10-2010 12:36 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 367 by PaulK, posted 02-11-2010 1:51 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 369 by hERICtic, posted 02-11-2010 7:28 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 371 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 8:02 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 366 of 427 (546457)
02-10-2010 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 364 by hERICtic
02-10-2010 9:41 PM


Re: The Davidic Covenant Does Not Refer To A Messiah
hERICtic writes:
The problem is that those arent Davids words. Those are words sung TO David. The LORD is god, the lord is David.
The psalms are a collection of 150 sacred songs that were set to music and used in public worship at the temple in Jerusalem. Many of them have headings, or superscriptions which often name the writer. Seventy-three headings bear the name of David, including Psalm 110 stating that he was the writer.
Im sorry, im not sure what 'the lord is god, the lord is david' means... could you clarify that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by hERICtic, posted 02-10-2010 9:41 PM hERICtic has not replied

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


Message 367 of 427 (546465)
02-11-2010 1:51 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by Buzsaw
02-10-2010 11:21 PM


Re: The Throne
quote:
He wasn't suppose to until the end times according to the prophets and according to his own words. His desciples asked him when the end times would be. He answered by corroborating the OT prophets that the Jews would be scattered globally and return in the latter days/end times.
Interestingly enough two out of three accounts of the prophecy you are referring to make absolutely no mention of any such thing - and the third is quite different from the other two. So there's no way to be sure that Jesus said it at all.
All of the accounts strongly suggest a time limit of a single generation - from the time the prophecy was spoken. Even if we take the dubious approach of interpreting that a meaning that all the listed signs will take place within a single generation then the exile and return must BOTH occur within that timeframe.
Thus we can be sure that this prophecy failed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by Buzsaw, posted 02-10-2010 11:21 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 368 of 427 (546473)
02-11-2010 7:24 AM
Reply to: Message 364 by hERICtic
02-10-2010 9:41 PM


Re: The Davidic Covenant Does Not Refer To A Messiah
Peg writes:
The psalms are a collection of 150 sacred songs that were set to music and used in public worship at the temple in Jerusalem. Many of them have headings, or superscriptions which often name the writer. Seventy-three headings bear the name of David, including Psalm 110 stating that he was the writer.
Im sorry, im not sure what 'the lord is god, the lord is david' means... could you clarify that?
Hi Peg.
I know from past debates that when OT scripture is brought up, to check the translation. Especially if its suppose to refer to Jesus. By that I mean, comparing the Bibles translation of OT scripture to the Tanach. Many times, its mistranslated. Many times, the Bibles translation twists the OT to make something look messianic, refering to Jesus, when that is not the case. Since you brought up Pslams, I decided to do that. Here is an example (just a lil off topic of one I can think of right away):
KJV:
Daniel 9: 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood,
Christians use it to refer back to Jesus.
Take a look at: JPS Hebrew Tanakh:
26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more; and the people of a prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; but his end shall be with a flood;
Meaning changes drastically, doesnt it? Anyway, to get back on topic. I did a word search of Pslams, typing in Pslams 110 mistranslated. Many sites came up, dealing with this issue.
This explains, as does many others, that it should read "a song OF David", not "by David", which changes the context.
'The Lord Said to My Lord' To Whom Was the Lord Speaking in Psalm 110:1? | Outreach Judaism
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, I have read this thread from the beginning, incredible debate. But I am a lil confused on one issue. You keep stating that the bloodline did not have to go through Solomon. At least, thats how I am taking it. I just cannot understand why you keep stating that when it states it.
1 Chron 28:5-7
And of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.
And he said unto me, Solomon thy son, he shall build my house and my courts (Who will? Solomon): for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be his father.
Moreover I will establish his kingdom for ever (Who's kingdom forever? Solomon), if he be constant to do my commandments and my judgments, as at this day.
2 Sam 7:12-16
And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. (Bloodline, through David)
He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (Building the house, refers back to Solomon, doesnt it? If so, its refering back to the bloodline, which goes through Solomon).
I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
Thanks.
Edited by hERICtic, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by hERICtic, posted 02-10-2010 9:41 PM hERICtic has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 380 by Peg, posted 02-12-2010 1:09 AM hERICtic has not replied

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 4516 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 369 of 427 (546474)
02-11-2010 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by Buzsaw
02-10-2010 11:21 PM


Re: The Throne
Buz writes:
He wasn't suppose to until the end times according to the prophets and according to his own words. His desciples asked him when the end times would be. He answered by corroborating the OT prophets that the Jews would be scattered globally and return in the latter days/end times.
Yet, nowhere in the Tanach does it ever state the messiah was to arrive without the "signs". Makes little sense that the messiah was to arrive without the "signs", when the Jews were looking for a messiah. Speaking of Jesus' own words, he is pretty clear in Matthew 24 whent he end times were to occur, during his followers lifetime. In fact, throughout the NT, its always the same-nearby, close, at hand, around the corner, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by Buzsaw, posted 02-10-2010 11:21 PM Buzsaw has not replied

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


Message 370 of 427 (546479)
02-11-2010 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 363 by Peg
02-10-2010 7:32 PM


Re: The Davidic Covenant Does Not Refer To A Messiah
quote:
Your claim that the promise was to be made possible thru Solomon and his decendents is blown out of the water based on this scripture. At this point in time there are no more decendents of Solomon ruling on Davids throne and yet God tells the nation that one of Davids decendents will be raised up to rule on his throne.
As you've been told over and over, you cannot ignore the continued revelation of Gods expressed will and draw conclusions based on one verse.
You're still stuck on the words for ever in spite of your own definitions. You can't draw a conclusion based on one word. Read the story of the Jews.
These books about David and the kings were written after the destruction of the temple. They were based on books that were already written. They were written to the people of the time. They were not written for us. They were not written for 1st century Jews. This was the time that Judaism was spawned.
The promise to David does not refer to a 1st century messiah because David was the anointed one for the people of his time. Psalm 110 is about David not a 1st century messiah. If you read about David, God did away with his enemies. The unknown psalmist is saying David was like Melchizedek who was a king and a priest. Melchizedek was the king of Salem. It's a song.
David is the anointed and the people have peace from their enemies. God promises David that his lineage will continue. IOW, you will have sons to carry on your name. God also promised David that his lineage through Solomon would also continue to rule Israel as long as they behaved. At the time of the promise, no end date is given. It is open ended.
Throughout the Bible, God makes it clear that he will chastise those who misbehave no matter what he has promised them and he will reward those who behave, no matter what he has promised them.
Move forward and Solomon's descendants lost rulership of Israel. They were left with Judah. The rulership of Israel is not given to a descendant of David.
Continue moving forward and the temple is destroyed and the Davidic Dynasty has ended due to misbehavior. The people are in exile and have no government of their own. Now they need another anointed.
They will not receive one until they return from exile. The exile is their punishment. Jeremiah warned them to repent. During the exile Ezekiel's message was that salvation from their current condition was through religious purity. Based on "A History of the Jews" by Paul Johnson, Judaism emerged. The laws were studied and read aloud, the sabbath was strongly reinforced, regular feasts were held, etc.
Ezekiel stressed that their situation was due to breach of the law, but unlike in the past when collective guilt due to kings and leaders was stressed; Ezekiel stressed individual responsibility. With no leader the exiled Jews could only blame themselves.
A small group of Jews were successful in returning to Jerusalem in 520bce. It had the full backing of Cyrus' son Darius and was under the official leader, Zerubbabel. Zerubbabel was a descendant of Solomon through the cursed line. Zerubbabel was appointed as Persian Governor of Judah. This group started rebuilding the temple.
The final group of exiles returned about 445 bce with Nehemiah, a Jew, who was given the governorship of Judah and the authority to build it into an independent city within the Persian empire. During this time the Jews made a new covenant with God.
Once the work was completed Jerusalem is calm. 400-200 bce are the lost centuries of Jewish history. No great events or calamities were recorded. The Jews seem to like the Persians the best of those who ruled them. The Jews didn't revolt against the Persians. The Persians allowed the Jews to practice their religion without interference.
The Jews were brought back from exile and restored to their homeland. They were at peace and safe. At this point they no longer need anyone to save them from exile or from their oppressors. They just needed to behave and follow God's laws.
The OT prophecies written prior to this time do not refer to a messiah in the 1st century. The prophets wrote for the people of the time. The warnings before exile and to raise hope of those in exile. Their time has passed. They served their purpose. That's why the old prophecies don't fit Jesus.
IMO, planetary renovation is a later development, possibly influenced by the Persian Zoroastriaism. Either in exile or post exile. I don't see the text of the prophets referring to a messiah to usher in planetary renovation.
This is the reality behind the Bible. This is the context of the writings in the Bible. Read the books as books, not just support for current dogma. These writers weren't concerned with the 1st century problems, they were concerned with the state of their country in their time.
The Davidic Covenant does not refer to a future messiah that will usher in the "end times."
Edited by AdminPD, : Added Bold
Edited by purpledawn, : Change ID

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 363 by Peg, posted 02-10-2010 7:32 PM Peg has not replied

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


Message 371 of 427 (546481)
02-11-2010 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by Buzsaw
02-10-2010 11:21 PM


Re: The Throne
quote:
He answered by corroborating the OT prophets that the Jews would be scattered globally and return in the latter days/end times.
The OT prophets do not state that the Jews were to be scattered globally. I explained that before.
In the OT prophecies, the people would be scattered to the surrounding nations. No global scattering. As I pointed out to Peg, the OT prophets were not speaking of a 1st century messiah or the eschatological end times. That is a later view.
I'm very clear on the reality of prophecy. I just don't milk another meaning out of it.

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 365 by Buzsaw, posted 02-10-2010 11:21 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 372 by Buzsaw, posted 02-11-2010 9:02 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 372 of 427 (546497)
02-11-2010 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 371 by purpledawn
02-11-2010 8:02 AM


Re: The Throne
Purpledawn writes:
In the OT prophecies, the people would be scattered to the surrounding nations. No global scattering. As I pointed out to Peg, the OT prophets were not speaking of a 1st century messiah or the eschatological end times. That is a later view.
Either way, we know they were scattered. The land did not becme nearly totally unoccupied by Jews and desolate waste until after 70 AD. None of the corroborating prophecies relative to end times had fulfilled until the modern restoration of Israel. Messiah did not die for the people as per the prophets. Nobody but Jesus fulfilled those prohecies. Nothing phenomenal happened until what we observe today. The latter day restoration was to be forever. The modern restoration is the only one that meets all of the criteria.
Add up all of the evidence, admit to something supernatural; things that God does and go, figure, lest like the foolish virgins in Jesus's parable, the bridegroom comes and you miss it, not having oil in your lamp, so to speak.

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 371 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 8:02 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 10:24 AM Buzsaw has not replied

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


Message 373 of 427 (546506)
02-11-2010 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 362 by purpledawn
02-10-2010 12:36 PM


Re: The Throne
EAM writes:
You see PD, now that we are agreeing with you on grammar and interpretation of 7:13, it is forcing you to move to the entire context. Something that will destroy your theories
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PD writes:
It's about time.
But no one ever disagreed with your ridgid grammatical interpretation, only with your isolation of meanings and ideas concerning the kingdom, pointing to only that verse of scripture.
So we agree that the promise to David in 2 Samuel 7:13 concerned his bloodline and the continuation of the kingship of Israel through Solomon. The throne was the human governing of Israel.
Yes. So what. But you have left out the most important part that it was actually Gods throne, Gods rule Gods legislation, not simply a humans, regardless of whether they obeyed or not. Yes of course he could and and would pu;; thrones and positions depending upon obedience and adherence, but that is to LIMIT what the rest of the scriptures, has to say concerning Gods overall involvement in the process.
Peg has quoted passages that both demonstrate that its GODS THRONE and that the plans for it extend beyond any human being or thier obedience. here is another that drives home whos authority and plans we are discussing
Duet 17:
14"When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, 'I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,'
15you shall surely set a king over you WHOM THE LORD YOUR GOD CHOOSES, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman.
16"Moreover, he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor shall he cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, since the LORD has said to you, 'You shall never again return that way.'"
One may even go as far as saying Davisd and others were puppets, in the greater picture, if it were not for thier love for God and his response to that consderation they gave to him
Unfortunately you haven't provided any "context" to address.
Not only have we provided context but provided passages, context, and content that directly state whos kingdom and throne it actually, but Peg and Buzz have demonstrated beyond any doubt that it was to extend past any human being or group of people
As I said to Peg: Supposedly David's bloodline does still exist. If the records are correct, then that part of the promise seems to be holding; but the kingship part did not. Leadership was dependent upon the behavior of Solomon and his descendants.
As it has been demonstrated to many times now the timeline and purposes of the throne, were only limited in and as to who would posses the throne at any given time. Yes leadership was dependant on the behavior, for thier (Solomon's and others) purposes, but not for the continued and perpetual existence of the throne itself.
Now, if you can IN CONTEXT of what the scriptures has to say entirely concerning the kingdom, without isolating passages and pointing to obvious details of physical aspect only, demonstrate that it was not ACTUALLY GODS THRONE AND GODS KINGDOM, you will have demonstrated your point and won the debate. You can only do this by isolating passages, detaching them from others that concern the kingdom and then buid arguments from that silly approach
Your task is so impossible, that even a quick glance and simple reading of the prpohets and Old Testament will wipe away your contentions and methodology
Jesus did not become a human king over Israel.
Just as you miss the point that God is actually in charge of all that happened to Israel from beginning to end. Just as you miss the point that its Gods throne (not stricly Davids) and he always wanted to be the exclusive king over Israel as Samuel clearly indicates. Just as you will not take into consideration what ALL OF GODS WORD has to say concerning the prophets, the Messiah, the kingdom and kingship, YOU TOTALLY MISS THE POINT of Gods utimate purposes from the foundation of the world.
Christ (God again) was and is a physical and spiritual king over Israel, as he was and intended from the beginning.
So what. We exist in a physical world, of course there will be physical aspects of this or that rule. but where God is involved there will be much more than the physical. The moral code of the Law alone should suggest this from the outset.
Further, "Blessed is the man to whom GOD DOES NOT IMPUT SIN"
A moral and ethical concept that superceeds any phisical considerations.
Christ was AND IS PRESENTLY a physical and spiritual king in a way that superceeds any stricly physical rule could ever accomplish. when from the very beginnig would God LIMIT his influence to some physical throne, aribitrating between land disputes and the such like.
Even the Old testament makes it very clear Gods plans and involvement go much deeper than these important but trivial considerations. Again even a simple reading destroys your considerations of Gods involvement and how and when that was accompleshed.
Ultimately and finally you are failing to distiquish between a covenant and a promise. Leadership was dependant upon the covenant with Israel, the throne and its eternality was dependant upon the Promise God made to David, that would not be broken anymore than Gods promises to Abraham would be broke, depending upon what Israel as a people did in thier covenant with God in the Law, verse what God had promised to Abraham, concerning the people of Israel
there is a big difference
You insult God PD with your methodology and approach to his word and plans
EAM
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
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 362 by purpledawn, posted 02-10-2010 12:36 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 10:47 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

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


Message 374 of 427 (546508)
02-11-2010 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 372 by Buzsaw
02-11-2010 9:02 AM


Re: The Throne
quote:
Either way, we know they were scattered.
Yep, it's 5 o'clock somewhere.
quote:
None of the corroborating prophecies relative to end times had fulfilled until the modern restoration of Israel.
None of the pre-exilic porphecies or the one's during the exile dealt with an eschatological end time.
quote:
Nobody but Jesus fulfilled those prohecies. Nothing phenomenal happened until what we observe today. The latter day restoration was to be forever. The modern restoration is the only one that meets all of the criteria.
There were no end time prophecies from the OT prophets for Jesus to fit. Jesus doesn't fit any prophecies in the OT.
quote:
Add up all of the evidence, admit to something supernatural; things that God does and go, figure, lest like the foolish virgins in Jesus's parable, the bridegroom comes and you miss it, not having oil in your lamp, so to speak.
As far as OT prophecies are concerned, the wedding is over.

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 372 by Buzsaw, posted 02-11-2010 9:02 AM Buzsaw has not replied

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


Message 375 of 427 (546515)
02-11-2010 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 373 by Dawn Bertot
02-11-2010 10:18 AM


Re: The Throne
quote:
Not only have we provided context but provided passages, context, and content that directly state whos kingdom and throne it actually, but Peg and Buzz have demonstrated beyond any doubt that it was to extend past any human being or group of people
No they haven't. The text doesn't support that concept.
quote:
As it has been demonstrated to many times now the timeline and purposes of the throne, were only limited in and as to who would posses the throne at any given time. Yes leadership was dependant on the behavior, for thier (Solomon's and others) purposes, but not for the continued and perpetual existence of the throne itself.
Sure it was. Human rulership of Israel by Solomon's descendants lasted as long as they behaved. For ever doesn't mean without end. It just means the end is unknown. The end was witnessed by the exiles.
quote:
Now, if you can IN CONTEXT of what the scriptures has to say entirely concerning the kingdom, without isolating passages and pointing to obvious details of physical aspect only, demonstrate that it was not ACTUALLY GODS THRONE AND GODS KINGDOM, you will have demonstrated your point and won the debate.
The promise to David concerns David and his descendants and their physical rulership of Israel. The promise doesn't impact the fact that the Israelites are God's chosen people. Human kings come and go, but that doesn't change that the Israelites are God's chosen people. Symbolically there are two different thrones. The one promised to David is a human rulership, which ended with the destruction of the first temple.
My task is simple. It's right there in the book.
quote:
Just as you miss the point that God is actually in charge of all that happened to Israel from beginning to end. Just as you miss the point that its Gods throne (not stricly Davids) and he always wanted to be the exclusive king over Israel as Samuel clearly indicates. Just as you will not take into consideration what ALL OF GODS WORD has to say concerning the prophets, the Messiah, the kingdom and kingship, YOU TOTALLY MISS THE POINT of Gods utimate purposes from the foundation of the world.
I haven't missed anything and I've probably read more of the Bible than you have. You're talking various concept and trying to justify melting them together in spite of reality.
What you're saying about God's kingdom has nothing to do with the promise to David. The promise to David has nothing to do with a 1st century messiah.
quote:
Christ (God again) was and is a physical and spiritual king over Israel, as he was and intended from the beginning.
That position is not supported by the OT.
quote:
You insult God PD with your methodology and approach to his word and plans
And you insult God by ignoring his text that you claim he wrote.

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 373 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-11-2010 10:18 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 376 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-11-2010 11:07 AM purpledawn 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