|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Then those who disagree should answer clearly and not change the laws of language to support their dogma, not what the Bible says, but their dogma. quote:Actually I think the skeptics are the ones actually bringing the observable data into the light. If your data doesn't hold up under the spot light, then the data is faulty. The Bible doesn't speak of global dispersion, just dispersion within the neighboring empires of the time. Not The Planet quote:Why complicate the issue with an unnecessary prerequisite that doesn't match what we know of Jesus? As Brian pointed out in Message 48, the servant songs do not refer to a future messiah. The wording itself (you know the word of God) supports that position. This has been debated ad nauseam on this board. I don't understand why those who claim to believe the Bible contains the "word of God" and the manuscripts were "authored" by God, don't accept what the text actually says. That's what's bogging this thread down. Getting those people to clearly explain and show how the text truly supports their dogma without bending the rules of language and ignoring the reality of the time. Jesus doesn't fit the prerequisites for the Jewish Messiah. He may have served as a messiah for the gentiles, but he doesn't fit the requirements for the Jewish Messiah. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Context: the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning. It all goes together Buz. Context doesn't change who the pronoun is referring to. quote:Eschatology (a branch of theology concerned with the final events in the history of the world or of humankind) is a Christian term. I would agree I'm not, because I'm reading the text, not looking at a belief system outside the text. Nothing should change the simple reading of the text. quote:The Bible I understand. It's the gymnastics, by those who supposedly believe it is the word of God, to make it say something it doesn't I don't understand. I have no problem with what the Bible says. quote:In this forum arguments have to be concise. We go where the argument takes us. When someone presents a verse or interpretation as support, but it doesn't add up; I question. That doesn't mean I haven't read more than that one verse or how it fits into the bigger picture of the time. It's your job to present a better argument that doesn't change the simple reading of the text or the writer's message to his audience. quote:See you say that, but you don't provide the OT verses that go along with your position and why it is a fulfillment of the OT verses. The messiah was to be a ruler, per the messianic prophecies. Do any of the messianic prophecies state that the messiah will prophesy that the 2nd temple (515 BCE) will fall? 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Nope it didn't. The thread isn't about his prophetic accuracy. It is about whether he fulfilled the job of the Jewish messiah. Brian's point is that he failed. You haven't shown evidence to the contrary. Biblical or otherwise. quote:Again, you don't provide the OT prophecies you're referring to or that the messiah was to have prophetic powers. He needs to fit all the requirements. The main job of the messiah was to free the Jews from their oppressors. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Maybe you could provide the number of the post, like I do when I've already address a point to someone else and don't want to repeat myself. It's not my job to figure out which prophecy you're referring to and go looking for 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
IOW, if all else fails repeat yourself without providing support. You've been asked repeatedly to show that the promise is not restricted to Solomon's line. Show me the text!
quote:I've shown you scripturally that the promise is fulfilled through Solomon. (Message 131 & Message 320) It's in the text. Show me where God has repeatedly stated that if any of David's sons became unfaithful they would be cut off from sitting on the throne. Show me that the promise is not dependent on David's descendants behavior, specifically Solomon's. 12 And it shall come to pass when thy days shall have been fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, even thine own issue, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build for me a house to my name, and I will set up his throne even for ever. 14 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. You haven't shown how the text supports your position. The pronouns are very clear. It is singular. The one who builds the temple is the one the promise continues through. No, the promise does not imply that the humans will never die. The promise is saying that David's dynasty will last a long time as long as Solomon's decendants behaved. David's dynasty ended with the destruction of the 1st temple. I don't think the messianic prophecies were referring to that promise. I think they were more along the lines that the messiah would free the Israelites from oppression and make the kingdom whole again as it was when David was king. Jesus didn't do that either.
quote:And I've shown you that that comment isn't in the Septuagint that the NT writers used. Yes, I've shown you that the NT writers quoted from the Septuagint. Show me that that isn't a later addition to the Jewish text or that the NT writers knew of that portion. I've shown you that the early church fathers used the Septuagint also. Message 332 Message 338 quote:Except that isn't what God said. If you disagree, then show me where God implies that. Message 131 In 1 Kings 9 God spoke to Solomon saying:
"But if you or your sons turn away from me and do not observe the commands and decrees I have given you and go off to serve other gods and worship them, then I will cut off Israel from the land I have given them and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. Israel will then become a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples." He didn't say if Solomon or his sons disobeyed he would put one of David's other sons on the throne. When God took Israel away from Solomon's line he didn't give it to another in David's line. He gave it to another family. Please provide support for your position.
quote:Again, that line is through Nathan and not Solomon. Royal lines are not through the mother. You haven't demonstrated that any descendant of David would fulfill the promise of 2 Samuel 7:13, which is what you're referring back to. That's what we've been asking you to do. quote:We are working with an English translation. If you have proof in Hebrew, lay it out. Otherwise you are saying the translators got it wrong, which then puts the whole English Bible in question. I agree the promise is made to David, but not for a dynasty that couldn't end. Part of the promise is that the dynasty would continue through Solomon's line. David's rulership ended when he died. The rulership was to continue through Solomon and Solomon's descendants. Read the text!
quote:Please show support. Yes, Jeremiah 33 was in the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the two verses you are referring to aren't in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Show me that they are! Please support what you're saying and stop repeating. You've said a lot, but shown nothing. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
It's not my job to find support for your arguments.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:I know you really can't be that dense when it comes to comprehending what is written in books. Try putting yourself in Nathan's position and act as though you are talking to David. God simply promised David that he would have descendants. His bloodline would continue. Men tend to worry about that. They still do today. God also promised that David's bloodline through Solomon would continue to rule all of Israel as long as they behaved. You have not explained how the pronouns in 2 Solomon 7:13 can refer to anyone but Solomon. 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.
quote:So you're ignoring the fact that the section is probably a later addition and we don't really know when it was written. Since you feel it is valid, let's look at the text. Verse 14: Refers to a promise made to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. 2 Samuel 7:13 is a promise made to David, not Israel. David was over a united kingdom. The wording has a divided kingdom view. So show me this promise. Verse 17: This verse also says that the Levites will also never fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices. This didn't pan out either. Odds are this section was added after the second temple resumed sacrifices. The reality doesn't agree with the section. The temple was destroyed and hasn't been rebuilt and there haven't been sacrifices there since.
quote:The promise is not for one heir to rule without end. That's physically impossible. The house for the ark is the temple. The house for David is his bloodline. It isn't the temple. quote:The seed to come was Solomon. The promise to David has nothing to do with the messiah. quote:Jesus wasn't crowned king. Jesus didn't rule over a united Israel. So Jesus was still a failure. Did you realize that Zerubbabel and Shealtiel are also from the cursed line of Jeconiah? They show up in both genealogies. quote:The promise was not for some descendant in the far future. The promise of an heir to the throne was referring to Solomon. The words of the text don't support your position, Peg. Reality doesn't support your position, Peg. God can and does change his mind. The text and reality support 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote: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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote: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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote: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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Yep, it's 5 o'clock somewhere. quote:None of the pre-exilic porphecies or the one's during the exile dealt with an eschatological end time. quote:There were no end time prophecies from the OT prophets for Jesus to fit. Jesus doesn't fit any prophecies in the OT. quote: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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:No they haven't. The text doesn't support that concept. quote: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: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: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:That position is not supported by the OT. quote: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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
In 2 Samuel 7:13, God is not giving David God's throne. God is giving David human rulership over Israel. Just like the analogy of an owner of a company and the CEO or manager of the company. The CEO doesn't own the company he only manages it.
God's Throne = CompanyDavid's Throne = CEO position David didn't own God's Company he only managed the day to day human aspects of it.
quote:Message 320 quote:Message 324 1 Chronicles 29:23 reads differently in the Septuagint.
23 And Solomon sat upon the throne of his father David, and was highly honoured; and all Israel obeyed him. quote:2 Samuel 7:13 isn't about the Company. It concerns the position of CEO within the Company. quote:We are discussing the promise made to David, not other kings. God removes and appoints people as he sees fit. quote:The Company continues, but the CEO's position does depend on the individual. The Owner can decide to remove the CEO position and run the Company himself. The Owner can be Owner/CEO, but the appointed CEO cannot be Owner/CEO. The appointed CEO is only a CEO. quote:Nope. The end was unknown to David and his descendants, but the Dynasty came to an end. The bloodline seems to be continuing. Two different parts of the promise. God's throne is the company. The company wasn't part of the promise, just the position of CEO. quote:Never implied God lost ownership. The OT does not support the idea of a CEO position that isn't a human king ruling over living people in Israel. Jesus wasn't a 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:If you're talking about 2 Samuel 7:13, I already did. You quoted it. quote:A CEO doesn't manage himself. The Company contains God's chosen people. David is going to manage the day to day issues of that Company. No the promise is not about the Company. It is about David's lineage and about David's position (CEO) in the Company. quote:Only Solomon's descendants were part of the promise. God decides when he's had enough. Talk to God if you don't like his timeframe. quote:Dynasty refers to David's descendants serving as CEO. It has nothing to do with the Owner's position. The Owner can continue using a CEO or not. His choice. quote:The word "throne" in 2 Samuel 7:13 is referring to the CEO position, not the Company. After the exile, the Jews had a foreign CEO, and a Jewish Plant Manager. IOW, they did not have a human Jewish king. quote:One isn't a CEO until one actually gets the gig. Show evidence that he was properly anointed. Show evidence that he functioned as a Jewish king. God usually made his choice clear to a priest so that a proper anointing can take place. The chosen one can't anoint himself. There's procedure so that all know who was chosen. The Jews weren't free to have a human king at that time.
quote:Sorry doesn't fit the bill. The OT doesn't support that type of CEO. As I said earlier, the OT prophets weren't referring to any 1st century messiah. None of the Jewish prophecies claim the messiah would become God. 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:I'm not sure why you act as though King David is still alive. The Promise to David in 2 Samuel 7 in the Septuagint
9 And I was with thee wheresoever thou wentest, and I destroyed all thine enemies before thee, and I made thee renowned according to the renown of the great ones on the earth. 10 And I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, and they shall dwell by themselves, and shall be no more distressed; and the son of iniquity shall no more afflict them, as he has done from the beginning, 11 from the days when I appointed judges over my people Israel: and I will give thee rest from all thine enemies, and the Lord will tell thee that thou shalt build a house to him. The last line differs from what we have today. (The LORD declares to you that the LORD himself will establish a house for you) King David was and still renowned among the Jews.I think the promise fell a bit short concerning Israel's distress and no more affliction. In our current version, the house refers to David's lineage and that he will have one. That promise seems to be fulfilled if the records are correct for those claiming to be descendants today. So David's lineage has lasted a long time.
12 And it shall come to pass when thy days shall have been fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, even thine own issue, and I will establish his kingdom. The promise says that a child that comes from David's own sperm will reign over Israel after David's death. Future descendants do not come from David's own sperm. None of the translations present the "seed" as some distant descendant. This promise was also fulfilled in Solomon.
13 He shall build for me a house to my name, and I will set up his throne even for ever. The child from David's sperm will build a house for the ark. That's the temple and that was Solomon, who is from David's sperm. Solomon's reign lasted a long time. Promise fulfilled.
14 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. And when he happens to transgress, then will I chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the sons of men. 15 But my mercy I will not take from him, as I took it from those whom I removed from my presence. This same child from David's sperm, who builds the temple, (Solomon) will not be removed from God's presence if he screws up. Promise fulfilled. This only pertains to Solomon.
quote: This same child from David's sperm, who builds the temple, (Solomon) will have a lineage also and his reign will last a long time. Once Solomon dies, that's it. That's all that is in the promise to David as written in 2 Samuel 7. In Kings 2, David relays the promise to Solomon this way:
4 that the Lord may confirm his word which he spoke, saying, If thy children shall take heed to their way to walk before me in truth with all their heart, I promise thee, saying, there shall not fail thee a man on the throne of Israel. This follows the idea you presented that any of David's descendants would qualify if they behaved. Even though this is still conditional, we don't find this part of the original promise in 2 Samuel 7:13. This is interesting because one thought is that the same person wrote Samuel and Kings. It is still conditional. When we look at reality, the reign of Judah remained in Solomon's family (despite their behavior) and when God took Israel away from Solomon he didn't give it to another descendant of David. The idea of "never failing to have a man on the throne" implies no breaks and is conditional upon behavior. After the destruction of the first temple, there weren't any kings in Israel. So even that promise has ended due to misbehavior. So the promise to David was fulfilled and finished. What is written in 2 Samuel 7 really doesn't go past the death of Solomon. It doesn't refer to a future messiah.
quote:Jesus didn't bring peace and security to Isreal. Nehemiah did after the exile. The prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel are address to the people of the time. Not the 1st century. After the exile a descendant of Solomon did govern the Jews, but he wasn't king. Look at reality. The OT prophets don't refer to a 1st century messiah. Your whole argument is based on the idea that the words translated for ever mean without end, as opposed to a long time. So since the Dynasty ended, you go back to the promise and change the conditions to fit the idea of without end. Show me that "olam" means never ending.
Strong's 5769 long duration, antiquity, futurity Here are our current English definitions for forever Noun
a seemingly interminable time : excessively long (it took her forever to find the answer) Adverb 1 : for a limitless time (wants to live forever) 2 : at all times : continually (is forever making bad puns) Edited by purpledawn, : Added thought.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024