Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,396 Year: 3,653/9,624 Month: 524/974 Week: 137/276 Day: 11/23 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3478 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 211 of 427 (543103)
01-15-2010 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Dawn Bertot
01-15-2010 10:03 AM


Re: Spiritual Kingdom
quote:
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.
You've effectively made the word spiritual meaningless. 2 Samuel 7:13 speaks of a rulership over a specific group of humans by a specific human family. That rulership ended with the destruction of Solomon's temple. This promise does not lead to Jesus.
quote:
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.
No. Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins
quote:
Would you say that forgiveness of a moral principle as sin, is repleat throughout the Old and new testaments.
Forgiveness and mercy are most of the overall morals.
quote:
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?
No. Just because a man institutes something, doesn't make it manly. Just because a "spirit" institutes something doesn't make it spiritual.
Sometimes a kingdom is just a kingdom.
quote:
I cant believe Im actually formulating such questions, but anywho, what would you say?
I can. Stay on topic.

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 210 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-15-2010 10:03 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-16-2010 9:00 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4950 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 212 of 427 (543152)
01-15-2010 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by PaulK
01-15-2010 7:54 AM


Re: Am I correct?
PaulK writes:
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 ?
Thats right, because the prophecy comes in two parts and you are only reading one part of it. Also, prophecies cannot be read singularly as you are doing. The OT prophecies all interwine to give the real picture and what you are doing is cutting out all other prophecies to make it appear that Solomon is the one that the kingdom was to be established through....but that is not the case. It was to David that the covenant was made, not solomon. Solomon was simply the one who would build the temple. But the earthly throne was already established because David was ruling on it before Solomon was even born.
PaulK writes:
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.
No, Its Gods throne. It always was Gods throne. As 1 Chronicles 29:23 says "And Sol′o‧mon began to sit upon Jehovah’s throne as king in place of David his father
All the promises were made to David, not Solomon. And David himself prophecied in Psalm 110:1 that the Messiah would 'sit at Gods right hand'. The only place where one could sit at Gods right hand is in heaven...and no earthly king ascended into heaven. The only one who ascended into heaven was Jesus christ.
Paulk writes:
Which voided the promise...
You only think this because you assume the prophecy about the indefinitely lasting kingdom is about Solomon. The promise was made to the faithful king David. It was also made to Isreal who was also faithful...and Abraham who was Gods friend and with whom God had made a covenent. Why would God suddenly change his mind and forget his promise to all these faithful people?
The promise was never voided. Thru Ezekiel God told the nation at Ez 21:26, 27. "A ruin, a ruin, a ruin I shall make it. As for this also, it will certainly become no one’s until he comes who has the legal right and I must give it to him.
this was the consequences of the kings unfaithfulness. God took the throne away from them. Isreal became subjected to the rule of other nations...but the Messiah was still going to come and he was still going to rule the throne of God. Jesus was the one who God resurrected and who ascended to heaven to 'sit at Gods right hand'
PaulK writes:
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 ?
Because the prophecy is not only about Solomon. Its also about the Messiah. And the Messiah (Jesus) is Gods 'only begotten son'. This means that he was the only direct creation by God. All other things came into existence 'thru' Jesus. So Jesus is the only creature in the entire universe that can claim to be directly created by God himself. He is trully Gods Son. the firstborn of all creation.
PaulK writes:
Except, of course, that Solomon's Temple is also described as God's house. You've even quoted a verse which says as much !
You miss the point in that verse. After saying that the earth is his 'footstool' God askes them 'Where is the house that you people can build for me?
This was not a question they could answer because the point was obvious...there is no structure that we could build that could house God. If the whole earth is where he rests his feet, how could we build anything that could house him? That is what he was telling them. The temple was for their benefit only...God could not possibly dwell there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by PaulK, posted 01-15-2010 7:54 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by PaulK, posted 01-15-2010 6:49 PM Peg has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 213 of 427 (543157)
01-15-2010 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Peg
01-15-2010 5:57 PM


Re: Am I correct?
quote:
Thats right, because the prophecy comes in two parts and you are only reading one part of it.
Well that's not true for a start.
quote:
Also, prophecies cannot be read singularly as you are doing.
Why can't this one be read alone, aside form the fact that you don't like what it really says ?
quote:
The OT prophecies all interwine to give the real picture and what you are doing is cutting out all other prophecies to make it appear that Solomon is the one that the kingdom was to be established through....but that is not the case.
So it doesn't mean what it says ? Wouldnt that mean that it is wrong ?
quote:
It was to David that the covenant was made, not solomon. Solomon was simply the one who would build the temple. But the earthly throne was already established because David was ruling on it before Solomon was even born.
In other words it is it only wrong, it's stupid. Well, it's your holy book, so if you say it's stupid because it disagrees with your beliefs, that's up to you.
quote:
All the promises were made to David, not Solomon. And David himself prophecied in Psalm 110:1 that the Messiah would 'sit at Gods right hand'. The only place where one could sit at Gods right hand is in heaven...and no earthly king ascended into heaven. The only one who ascended into heaven was Jesus christ.
Since the Nathan prophecy is about Solomon, not the Messiah, that would seem to be irrelevant.
quote:
You only think this because you assume the prophecy about the indefinitely lasting kingdom is about Solomon.
It would be more accurate that you disagree with it because you refuse to accept that the prophecy means what it says. In fact Purpledawn and I have both cited verses which indicate that the prophecy was negated, and as I have also mentioned, Jeremiah states that all such promises are conditional on good behaviour - a view which the author of 2 Samuel and 1 Kings may well have shared.
quote:
The promise was made to the faithful king David. It was also made to Isreal who was also faithful...and Abraham who was Gods friend and with whom God had made a covenent. Why would God suddenly change his mind and forget his promise to all these faithful people?
1 Kings 11 tells us exactly why. I even quoted the relevant section. Didn't you read it ?
quote:
Because the prophecy is not only about Solomon. Its also about the Messiah. And the Messiah (Jesus) is Gods 'only begotten son'. This means that he was the only direct creation by God. All other things came into existence 'thru' Jesus. So Jesus is the only creature in the entire universe that can claim to be directly created by God himself. He is trully Gods Son. the firstborn of all creation.
That is what you are trying to argue for. However it is not what the text describes. What it describes is more like an adoptive relationship - "he will become my son" implies a change of relationship.
quote:
You miss the point in that verse. After saying that the earth is his 'footstool' God askes them 'Where is the house that you people can build for me?
I am afraid that you have got it wrong again. The question is not what Isaiah 66 says, the question is whether it's ideas agree with those in 1 Chronicles 17. Now 1 Chronicles 17 refers to the Temple as the house of God - as I pointed out - so you can't simply assume that it refers to something in Heaven because of what Isaiah says.
quote:
If the whole earth is where he rests his feet, how could we build anything that could house him? That is what he was telling them. The temple was for their benefit only...God could not possibly dwell there
I thought that Christians believed that with God, all things are possible. However, the Bible contradicts you on this. 1 Chronicles 17:4-5 indicate that the Temple is a dwelling place for God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 5:57 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 11:35 PM PaulK has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4950 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 214 of 427 (543188)
01-15-2010 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by PaulK
01-15-2010 6:49 PM


Re: Am I correct?
I guess this discussion just goes to show that there are many different ways that these passages are being read. The real test as to which way is correct is if your interpretation of the samuel verse fits in with the rest of the OT.
I can tell you right now that your interpretation contradicts many other passages of scripture. And for that reason I am 100% confident that your interpretation is incorrect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by PaulK, posted 01-15-2010 6:49 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by PaulK, posted 01-16-2010 6:10 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 216 by purpledawn, posted 01-16-2010 6:43 AM Peg has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 215 of 427 (543209)
01-16-2010 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Peg
01-15-2010 11:35 PM


Re: Am I correct?
quote:
I guess this discussion just goes to show that there are many different ways that these passages are being read.
No, it just shows that you care more about your own beliefs than about what the Bible says. The fact is that the verse refers to one person, there is no other possible reading.
quote:
The real test as to which way is correct is if your interpretation of the samuel verse fits in with the rest of the OT.
If, as in this case, there is only one valid reading there is no need to look elsewhere in the OT.
quote:
I can tell you right now that your interpretation contradicts many other passages of scripture.
If that is true - and the contradictions you have introduced have generally been your own interpretations - all that means is that there are contradictions within the Bible.
quote:
And for that reason I am 100% confident that your interpretation is incorrect.
In other words you are 100% certain that the Bible is wrong and you are right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 11:35 PM Peg has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3478 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 216 of 427 (543210)
01-16-2010 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by Peg
01-15-2010 11:35 PM


Whose Interpretation Contradicts?
quote:
I guess this discussion just goes to show that there are many different ways that these passages are being read. The real test as to which way is correct is if your interpretation of the samuel verse fits in with the rest of the OT.
I can tell you right now that your interpretation contradicts many other passages of scripture. And for that reason I am 100% confident that your interpretation is incorrect. I guess this discussion just goes to show that there are many different ways that these passages are being read. The real test as to which way is correct is if your interpretation of the samuel verse fits in with the rest of the OT.
I can tell you right now that your interpretation contradicts many other passages of scripture. And for that reason I am 100% confident that your interpretation is incorrect.
Peg, we have shown you that our interpretation of 2 Samuel 7:13 is corroborated by scripture.
Even the songs reflect what we've been arguing concerning 2 Samuel 7:13.
Covenant Voided
Psalm 89:39
You have renounced the covenant with your servant and have defiled his crown in the dust.
Covenant for Dynasty was Conditional
Psalm 132:11-12
The Lord sore an oath to David, a sure oath that he will not revoke: "One of your own descendants I will place on your throne--if your sons keep my covenant and the statutes I teach them, then their sons will sit on your throne for ever and ever.
What you haven't shown is that any of the promises concerning David's Throne referred to something other than a physical earthly reign by a human being.
You've asserted that it does based on the idea that owlam means without end, which we've shown it doesn't.
Where does the text support the idea of reigning in an ethereal kingdom beyond human perception?
Edited by purpledawn, : Typo

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 214 by Peg, posted 01-15-2010 11:35 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Peg, posted 01-16-2010 11:55 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 3446 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 217 of 427 (543211)
01-16-2010 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by Peg
01-15-2010 5:38 AM


Re: Am I correct?
Sorry to just respond to this last bit, but everyone else seems to be handling the rest.
peg writes:
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.
Can you please tell me how that applies to Jesus? When did he do wrong so that God had to reprove him? I thought Jesus was perfect and without sin?

"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London
"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea

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 222 by Peg, posted 01-16-2010 11:39 PM Jaderis has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 103 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 218 of 427 (543217)
01-16-2010 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by purpledawn
01-15-2010 11:46 AM


Re: Spiritual Kingdom
You've effectively made the word spiritual meaningless. 2 Samuel 7:13 speaks of a rulership over a specific group of humans by a specific human family. That rulership ended with the destruction of Solomon's temple. This promise does not lead to Jesus.
In debate this is called 'Wave of the hand'. With a wave of the hand you think you can dismiss, what the actual context says concerning whos kingdom it actually is, you think you can ignore the context that DIRECTLY implies Gods involvement in the process. You think you can get your audience to not pay attention to the context if you keep repeating Physical, Physical. Guess what PD it doesnt work.
Perhaps they should start a catergory of Bible Study here called, 'In context bible study', 'Out of context bible study' and 'Whatever anybody chooses to use in the context Bible study'
My goodness man, how in the world have I rendered the word spiritual meaningless, when that is all I have been contending for in the context. ignoring the spirituality involved in the text and topic by yourself, does not go unnoticed by your audience
EMA writes:
quote:
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.
PD writes:
No.
Im sorry did I miss read something in the Old law
Forgiveness and mercy are most of the overall morals.
By whom and for what reason?
No. Just because a man institutes something, doesn't make it manly. Just because a "spirit" institutes something doesn't make it spiritual.
Sometimes a kingdom is just a kingdom.
really, and it is not my intention to be funny here but what would you say of Professional boxing, the UFC and pro football. Would you say these are stricly Manly sports. Sometimes when something is instituted it is with the express purpose of including men for obvious reasons. That makes it manly.
And you should ignore at this point that my wife can kick the crap out of me at any point, that is generally not the norm. But lets forget about that at present. in fact forget I even mentioned it
When something is instituted by God it is therefore spiritual in its purposes, plans and methods. Indeed how can it be anything else
Its Gods kingdom and therefore spiritual.
Peg writes and quotes
No, Its Gods throne. It always was Gods throne. As 1 Chronicles 29:23 says "And SoloEmon began to sit upon Jehovahs throne as king in place of David his father
On this point atleast, this passage forever more settles the question of what and who we are dealing with, so the conclusion should be obvious. That is, if as the context DIRECTLY STATES God is its author and all of the Old testament passages (Not just One or Two) are taken into consideration, along with the inspired New Testament writings and distinct plan and purpose unfolds in the nature of Christ as king and Messiah.
It is not necessary for every single person to agree on this point for it to be valid. but to go to the other extreme and suggest that this is ABSOLUTLEY WAS NOT GODS PLAN and to suggest that it cannot be demonstrated in any reasonable fashion is simply ureasonable and unobjective
Brian refers to this as ingenuity and imagination, but there is no valid reason to assume that inspiration was not involved in the whole process. As a matter of fact I dont see how anyone could come to any other conclusion when all is considered and studied
EAM
This is funny, as soon as I was done with this post I walked back to t he bedroom where she was watching the food network with some big Guy whipping up a meal. Lets just drop my observation in this connection altogether.
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 211 by purpledawn, posted 01-15-2010 11:46 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by purpledawn, posted 01-16-2010 10:51 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3478 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 219 of 427 (543224)
01-16-2010 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 218 by Dawn Bertot
01-16-2010 9:00 AM


Re: Spiritual Kingdom
quote:
My goodness man, how in the world have I rendered the word spiritual meaningless, when that is all I have been contending for in the context. ignoring the spirituality involved in the text and topic by yourself, does not go unnoticed by your audience
By saying that spiritual refers to anything that has to do with God, anything relating to God, plans attributed to God, methods attributed to God, ideas attributed to God, and God as a spirit, you have covered everything on the planet and the heavens from a religious standpoint. This means there is no difference between a spiritual kingdom or an earthly kingdom by your definition. It doesn't explain how the kingdom manifests itself.
Since you disagree with physical, then you must be talking about ethereal (of or relating to the regions beyond the earth). You haven't shown that the text refers to an ethereal kingdom.
quote:
Im sorry did I miss read something in the Old law
Yes, you did.
quote:
Its Gods kingdom and therefore spiritual.
Which (by your definition) doesn't say where the kingdom is located or how it manifests itself. In 2 Samuel 7:13 the kingdom is on the ground, with living people. David and Solomon were supposedly real living human beings governing over real living human beings day in and day out. Making laws, handling disagreements, dealing with enemies of the people and dealing with the everyday needs of real living human beings. (At least, they were supposed to be.)
Show me that it isn't.

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 218 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-16-2010 9:00 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2010 3:47 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 253 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-20-2010 10:02 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 220 of 427 (543243)
01-16-2010 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by purpledawn
01-16-2010 10:51 AM


Re: Spiritual Kingdom: I don't think so.
PD writes:
Since you disagree with physical, then you must be talking about ethereal (of or relating to the regions beyond the earth). You haven't shown that the text refers to an ethereal kingdom.
PD, with due respect for intelligence, your eschatological improprieties, nevertheless, are showing. The corroborating messianic prophecies, for the most part do not depict an ethereal kingdom.
In the first place it is the kingdom of God on earth as per the Lord's prayer; i.e. thy kingdom come; thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.
This corroborated by the prophets Ezekiel, Zechariah and just about all of the OT messianic prophecies;
Ezekiel, for example; what in Ezekiels messianic prophecies, cited below, depict an ethereal kingdom?
36:1 And thou, son of man, prophesy unto the mountains of Israel, and say, Ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of Jehovah.
36:2 Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because the enemy hath said against you, Aha! and, The ancient high places are ours in possession;
36:3 therefore prophesy, and say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because, even because they have made you desolate, and swallowed you up on every side, that ye might be a possession unto the residue of the nations, and ye are taken up in the lips of talkers, and the evil report of the people;
36:4 therefore, ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord Jehovah: Thus saith the Lord Jehovah to the mountains and to the hills, to the watercourses and to the valleys, to the desolate wastes and to the cities that are forsaken, which are become a prey and derision to the residue of the nations that are round about;
36:5 therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the nations, and against all Edom, that have appointed my land unto themselves for a possession with the joy of all their heart, with despite of soul, to cast it out for a prey.
36:6 Therefore prophesy concerning the land of Israel, and say unto the mountains and to the hills, to the watercourses and to the valleys, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I have spoken in my jealousy and in my wrath, because ye have borne the shame of the nations:
36:7 therefore thus saith the Lord Jehovah: I have sworn, (saying), Surely the nations that are round about you, they shall bear their shame.
36:8 But ye, O mountains of Israel, ye shall shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people Israel; for they are at hand to come.
36:9 For, behold, I am for you, and I will turn into you, and ye shall be tilled and sown;
36:10 and I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, even all of it; and the cities shall be inhabited, and the waste places shall be builded;
36:11 and I will multiply upon you man and beast; and they shall increase and be fruitful; and I will cause you to be inhabited after your former estate, and will do better [unto you] than at your beginnings: and ye shall know that I am Jehovah.
36:12 Yea, I will cause men to walk upon you, even my people Israel; and they shall possess thee, and thou shalt be their inheritance, and thou shalt no more henceforth bereave them of children.
36:13 Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Because they say unto you, Thou (land) art a devourer of men, and hast been a bereaver of thy nation;
36:14 therefore thou shalt devour men no more, neither bereave thy nation any more, saith the Lord Jehovah;
36:15 neither will I let thee hear any more the shame of the nations, neither shalt thou bear the reproach of the peoples any more, neither shalt thou cause thy nation to stumble any more, saith the Lord Jehovah.
36:16 Moreover the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying,
36:17 Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their way and by their doings: their way before me was as the uncleanness of a woman in her impurity.
36:18 Wherefore I poured out my wrath upon them for the blood which they had poured out upon the land, and because they had defiled it with their idols;
36:19 and I scattered them among the nations, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them.
36:20 And when they came unto the nations, whither they went, they profaned my holy name; in that men said of them, These are the people of Jehovah, and are gone forth out of his land.
36:21 But I had regard for my holy name, which the house of Israel had profaned among the nations, whither they went.
36:22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: I do not [this] for your sake, O house of Israel, but for my holy name, which ye have profaned among the nations, whither ye went.
36:23 And I will sanctify my great name, which hath been profaned among the nations, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the nations shall know that I am Jehovah, saith the Lord Jehovah, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.
36:24 For I will take you from among the nations, and gather you out of all the countries, and will bring you into your own land.
36:25 And I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.
36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them.
36:28 And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.
36:31 Then shall ye remember your evil ways, and your doings that were not good; and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.
36:32 Nor for your sake do I (this), saith the Lord Jehovah, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your ways, O house of Israel.
36:33 Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: In the day that I cleanse you from all your iniquities, I will cause the cities to be inhabited, and the waste places shall be builded.
36:34 And the land that was desolate shall be tilled, whereas it was a desolation in the sight of all that passed by.
36:35 And they shall say, This land that was desolate is become like the garden of Eden; and the waste and desolate and ruined cities are fortified and inhabited.
36:36 Then the nations that are left round about you shall know that I, Jehovah, have builded the ruined places, and planted that which was desolate: I, Jehovah, have spoken it, and I will do it.
37:14 And I will put my Spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I will place you in your own land: and ye shall know that I, Jehovah, have spoken it and performed it, saith Jehovah.
37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, whither they are gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
37:22 and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all; and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all;
37:23 neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions; but I will save them out of all their dwelling-places, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.
37:24 And my servant David shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in mine ordinances, and observe my statutes, and do them.
37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, they, and their children, and their children`s children, for ever: and David my servant shall be their prince for ever.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Empold for emphasis

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 219 by purpledawn, posted 01-16-2010 10:51 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by purpledawn, posted 01-16-2010 5:24 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3478 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 221 of 427 (543249)
01-16-2010 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by Buzsaw
01-16-2010 3:47 PM


Re: Spiritual Kingdom: I don't think so.
quote:
The corroborating messianic prophecies, for the most part do not depict an ethereal kingdom.
In the first place it is the kingdom of God on earth as per the Lord's prayer; i.e. thy kingdom come; thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.
This corroborated by the prophets Ezekiel, Zechariah and just about all of the OT messianic prophecies;
Ezekiel, for example; what in Ezekiels messianic prophecies, cited below, depict an ethereal kingdom?
I'm not arguing that the kingdom is ethereal. I contend that 2 Samuel 7:13 speaks of an Earthly kingdom.
Jesus didn't rule over an Earthly kingdom.
Thanks for supporting my position.

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 220 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2010 3:47 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by Buzsaw, posted 01-17-2010 9:20 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4950 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 222 of 427 (543290)
01-16-2010 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Jaderis
01-16-2010 6:48 AM


Re: Am I correct?
Jaderis writes:
Can you please tell me how that applies to Jesus? When did he do wrong so that God had to reprove him? I thought Jesus was perfect and without sin?
it doesnt apply to Jesus. It applies to the sons of king David...they are the ones that God would reprove.
I have been pointing out to PaulK that the prophecy cannot be read as applying to one individual. He seems to think that the rules of english grammar must apply and therefore the prophecy is applying to one person.
But there are many examples in the bible of where characters are changing within one passage. An example of this is in the prophecy of the destruction of Tyre. Also Daniels prophecy is full of changes of identity within the one passage. These are examples of how the hebrew language is dynamic and flexible and do not contain the same gramatical rules as our english does.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Jaderis, posted 01-16-2010 6:48 AM Jaderis has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4950 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 223 of 427 (543291)
01-16-2010 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by purpledawn
01-16-2010 6:43 AM


Re: Whose Interpretation Contradicts?
Purpledawn writes:
Peg, we have shown you that our interpretation of 2 Samuel 7:13 is corroborated by scripture.
Even the songs reflect what we've been arguing concerning 2 Samuel 7:13.
Covenant Voided
You may think the covenent was voided. 2 Samuel was written in 1040BCE yet when Jerimiah acted as prophet over 500 years later, what was he instructed to write about the covenent God made with David?
Jerimiah 33:20 This is what Jehovah has said, ‘If YOU people could break my covenant of the day and my covenant of the night, even in order for day and night not to occur in their time, 21 likewise could my own covenant be broken with David my servant so that he should not come to have a son ruling as king upon his throne; also with the Levites, the priests, my ministers. 22 Just as the army of the heavens cannot be counted, neither the sand of the sea be measured, so I shall multiply the seed of David my servant and the Levites who are ministering to me.’
As I said, your view is in complete contradiction with Gods inspired prophets. Davids Covenent was still in force 500 years later and God said that there is nothing that could break it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by purpledawn, posted 01-16-2010 6:43 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by PaulK, posted 01-17-2010 4:15 AM Peg has replied
 Message 228 by purpledawn, posted 01-17-2010 6:02 AM Peg has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 224 of 427 (543296)
01-17-2010 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by Peg
01-16-2010 11:55 PM


Re: Whose Interpretation Contradicts?
quote:
You may think the covenent was voided. 2 Samuel was written in 1040BCE yet when Jerimiah acted as prophet over 500 years later, what was he instructed to write about the covenent God made with David?
2 Samuel - at least in the form we have it is much more recent than that. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia it was compiled from various sources shortly before the Exile, ant quite likely that 2 Samuel 7 is mainly the work of compiler. And as Purpledawn has pointed out this person may even have been Jeremiah's scribe, Baruch,
quote:
As I said, your view is in complete contradiction with Gods inspired prophets. Davids Covenent was still in force 500 years later and God said that there is nothing that could break it.
Of course you are again distorting the truth - and ignoring the texts which indicate that the promise was voided. But even then, according to Jeremiah 33:26 the covenant allows for interruptions in the rule of the kings. For times with no king at all on the throne. If you think that that is how 2 Samuel 7:13 should be interpreted then you have thrown out your own arguments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Peg, posted 01-16-2010 11:55 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Peg, posted 01-17-2010 4:52 AM PaulK has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4950 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 225 of 427 (543298)
01-17-2010 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 224 by PaulK
01-17-2010 4:15 AM


Re: Whose Interpretation Contradicts?
PaulK writes:
2 Samuel - at least in the form we have it is much more recent than that. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia it was compiled from various sources shortly before the Exile, ant quite likely that 2 Samuel 7 is mainly the work of compiler. And as Purpledawn has pointed out this person may even have been Jeremiah's scribe, Baruch,
thats all speculation
From the writings we know that Jeremiah wrote in the 13th year of the reign of King Josiah of Judah.
2nd Samuel was written by the same writers as 1st Samuel. They were originally one scroll written by the prophets Nathan and Gad. Gad was a close associate of King David... so lets not speculate on when these books were written...lets look at their internal evidence for when they were written.
PaulK writes:
Of course you are again distorting the truth - and ignoring the texts which indicate that the promise was voided.
the promise was not voided at all. As i've shown you, Jeremiah wrote 500 years later that Davids covenent was still a reality.
The text does not say that the promise for an indefinately lasting kingdom was voided.
PaulK writes:
But even then, according to Jeremiah 33:26 the covenant allows for interruptions in the rule of the kings. For times with no king at all on the throne. If you think that that is how 2 Samuel 7:13 should be interpreted then you have thrown out your own arguments.
I dont think thats how samuel should be interpreted, i have maintained that this scripture is about the 'throne' being established to time indefinite
"I shall certainly establish the throne of his kingdom firmly to time indefinite"
You keep saying that its Solomon who is being established to time indefinite yet that is not what the scripture says.... it clearly says...and i'll write it again
"I shall certainly establish the "throne" of his kingdom firmly to time indefinite"
It is the 'THRONE' that is established, not solomon.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by PaulK, posted 01-17-2010 4:15 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Iblis, posted 01-17-2010 5:10 AM Peg has replied
 Message 229 by PaulK, posted 01-17-2010 6:14 AM Peg 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