Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 157 (8099 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-26-2014 1:11 PM
188 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: yudi
Happy Birthday: Bliyaal
Post Volume:
Total: 733,185 Year: 19,026/28,606 Month: 2,297/2,305 Week: 502/671 Day: 45/63 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2425
26
272829Next
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3185
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 376 of 427 (546518)
02-11-2010 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 375 by purpledawn
02-11-2010 10:47 AM


Re: The Throne
From post 303: purpledawn writes:
I don't see in his explanation or Peg's that the throne refers to anything other than the leadership of the Israelite's government. I think they're trying to imply it is God's "throne", but the text doesn't support that idea either. God had his own "throne" he didn't need David's.

After this far in the debate I hope you can now see how silly the above comment appears

Peg writes writes:

the bible does not agree with you

then Peg demonstrates from scripture why you have your head in the sand

Jeremiah 3:17 In that time they will call Jerusalem the throne of Jehovah; and to her all the nations must be brought together to the name of Jehovah at Jerusalem

Jeremiah 14:20 We do acknowledge, O Jehovah, our wickedness, the error of our forefathers, for we have sinned against you. 21 Do not disrespect [us] for the sake of your name; do not despise your glorious throne

Ezekeil 43:7 And He went on to say to me: “Son of man, [this is] the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I shall reside in the midst of the sons of Israel to time indefinite

1chronicles 29:23 " Solomon began to sit on Gods throne"

PD writes:

No they haven't. The text doesn't support that concept.

Have you been on this planet the last few weeks?

Now that your contention that God has his throne and David his, theory is destroyed maybe you can see the simple point that Leadership has to with behavior of specific people, NOT THE CONTIUANCE OF THE ENTIRE THRONE OF GOD.

here is asimple illustration to demonstrate that your theory about continuance of the throne is depedant on behavior is faulty.

there were MORE wicked kings in Israel than not. that being the case God should have very quickly removed the kingship and kingdom from Israel, regardless of his perserverance and patience.

thus you theory is not sound, that the entire throne depended upon faithfulness verses the theory that it was ALWAYS Gods throne for very specfic purposes, that extended past individuals and thier adherence to rules

Thus the promise to David is everlasting, because it is actually Gods throne which has no end

Anything and everything God does is EVERLASTING, how could it be anything otherwise. You simply getting a specific method or approach by God at any given time mixed up with his ultimate purpose, which are always everlasting. Dont get hung up on a detail

his ultimate purpose from time everlasting was to reunite man with himself, he did this in many different ways in the form of kings and the such like, until he himself was offered to accomplish the ultimate goal. the is no end to his kingship. really could there ever be?

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 375 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 10:47 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 12:53 PM Dawn Bertot has responded

    
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 377 of 427 (546529)
02-11-2010 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 376 by Dawn Bertot
02-11-2010 11:07 AM


Re: The Throne
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 = Company
David's Throne = CEO position

David didn't own God's Company he only managed the day to day human aspects of it.

quote:
Jeremiah 3:17 In that time they will call Jerusalem the throne of Jehovah; and to her all the nations must be brought together to the name of Jehovah at Jerusalem

Jeremiah 14:20 We do acknowledge, O Jehovah, our wickedness, the error of our forefathers, for we have sinned against you. 21 Do not disrespect [us] for the sake of your name; do not despise your glorious throne

Ezekeil 43:7 And He went on to say to me: “Son of man, [this is] the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I shall reside in the midst of the sons of Israel to time indefinite


Message 320

quote:
1chronicles 29:23 " Solomon began to sit on Gods throne"
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:
Now that your contention that God has his throne and David his, theory is destroyed maybe you can see the simple point that Leadership has to with behavior of specific people, NOT THE CONTIUANCE OF THE ENTIRE THRONE OF GOD.
2 Samuel 7:13 isn't about the Company. It concerns the position of CEO within the Company.

quote:
there were MORE wicked kings in Israel than not. that being the case God should have very quickly removed the kingship and kingdom from Israel, regardless of his perserverance and patience.
We are discussing the promise made to David, not other kings. God removes and appoints people as he sees fit.

quote:
thus you theory is not sound, that the entire throne depended upon faithfulness verses the theory that it was ALWAYS Gods throne for very specfic purposes, that extended past individuals and thier adherence to rules
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:
Thus the promise to David is everlasting, because it is actually Gods throne which has no end
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:
the is no end to his kingship. really could there ever be?
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 motion—for 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 376 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-11-2010 11:07 AM Dawn Bertot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-11-2010 2:05 PM purpledawn has responded

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3185
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 378 of 427 (546539)
02-11-2010 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 377 by purpledawn
02-11-2010 12:53 PM


Re: The Throne
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 = Company
David's Throne = CEO position

David didn't own God's Company he only managed the day to day human aspects of it.

really? So tell me who the ruler, king or owner would be in this instance

2 Samuel 7:13 isn't about the Company. It concerns the position of CEO within the Company

really? Who makes up the company in Gods or Davids kingdom? Did David rule himself. Uhhh I think it is always about the company

We are discussing the promise made to David, not other kings. God removes and appoints people as he sees fit

I agree but it so happens that these kings were sitting in the same place david sat

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.

really? Why do you dole out these pearls of wisdom, when I dont have a pen handy

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.

No dynasty came to an end WHERE GOD IS THE OWNER AS YOU SUGGEST.

Right and the promise of the throne not the position continues because God is the owner and king, as the scriptures suggest

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.

It is not necessary for me to disagree with this for this to be true. jesus said in response to a query put to him.

"Are you king of the Jews, he replied, it is as you have spoken"

Jesus was physical, he had a physical audience as he does today, he claimed to be king of the Jews, as God he would certainly know who and what he was. When he was raised his body was CHANGED NOT EXCHANGED, it was still physical, he was still a king as he proclaimed over a physical kingdom A BODY OF PEOPLE REAL IN PHYSICALITY AND LOCATION, THE CHURCH.

Col 1:17, "He has (present tense) translated us out of the power of darkness into the KINGDOM of his dear Son, whereby we recieve the forgivenss of sins"

The only place this happens is in the Church or being added to the church, Acts chapter 2 "AND THERE WAS ADDED TO THE CHURCH DAILY, THEY THAT SUCH AS SHOULD BE SAVED"

I Cor 12

For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. I Corinthians 12:12-27.

Jesus said to peter, upon this rock, I will build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it and I will give to you Peter the keys to the kingdom"

Notice the interplay and usage of the words kingdom and church, body by all these different writers. Hmmm something must be going there, they must mean the samething.

Since Christ said he was king of the Jews as he suggested we must assume this is the same throne upon which David his father sat

A King, a Kingdom a body, a church comprising actual physical sevants in a real place on earth

He has an actual physical body of believers each in a physical location on earth, he therefore has a kingdom both physical and spiritual in nature

Here is one more valid point. I agree with you about ownership and that is the beauty of Christ in this circumstance. As God incarnate he was the king (owner) of the Jews before during and after his death burial and resurrection. So his claim to ownership and kingship is only made better when that point is demonstrated

Please explain to me how he was not a physical king please

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 12:53 PM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 379 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 3:50 PM Dawn Bertot has responded

    
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 379 of 427 (546573)
02-11-2010 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 378 by Dawn Bertot
02-11-2010 2:05 PM


Re: The Throne
quote:
really? So tell me who the ruler, king or owner would be in this instance
If you're talking about 2 Samuel 7:13, I already did. You quoted it.

quote:
really? Who makes up the company in Gods or Davids kingdom? Did David rule himself. Uhhh I think it is always about the company
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:
I agree but it so happens that these kings were sitting in the same place david sat
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:
No dynasty came to an end WHERE GOD IS THE OWNER AS YOU SUGGEST.
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:
Right and the promise of the throne not the position continues because God is the owner and king, as the scriptures suggest
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:
It is not necessary for me to disagree with this for this to be true. jesus said in response to a query put to him.

"Are you king of the Jews, he replied, it is as you have spoken"


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:
Jesus was physical, he had a physical audience as he does today, he claimed to be king of the Jews, as God he would certainly know who and what he was. When he was raised his body was CHANGED NOT EXCHANGED, it was still physical, he was still a king as he proclaimed over a physical kingdom A BODY OF PEOPLE REAL IN PHYSICALITY AND LOCATION, THE CHURCH.
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 motion—for 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 378 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-11-2010 2:05 PM Dawn Bertot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 382 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-12-2010 10:11 AM purpledawn has responded
 Message 383 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-12-2010 10:12 AM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1306 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 380 of 427 (546603)
02-12-2010 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 368 by hERICtic
02-11-2010 7:24 AM


Re: The Davidic Covenant Does Not Refer To A Messiah
Hi heERICtic
heERICtic writes:

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 keep saying this because PD has made the claim that Davids covenent became void due to the disobedience of Davids sons.

Its for this reason that I have pointed out that the covenant with David was not dependent upon any of his sons remaining faithful. The covenant with David was a sure thing whether Solomon remained in favor with God or not for the reason that the covenant was not made with Solomon, but with David.

Davids faithfulness is what makes the covenant secure. Even after God had removed the last Davidic king (Zedekiah) from the throne, he still promised that a decendent of David would be given the throne and would bring peace and security to Isreal.

Jeremiahs and Ezekiels prophecies prove that the covenant had nothing to do with Solomon...except that Solomon was the one who would build the temple.

Edited by Peg, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 368 by hERICtic, posted 02-11-2010 7:24 AM hERICtic has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by purpledawn, posted 02-12-2010 8:30 AM Peg has responded

    
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 381 of 427 (546623)
02-12-2010 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 380 by Peg
02-12-2010 1:09 AM


King David is Dead
quote:
Its for this reason that I have pointed out that the covenant with David was not dependent upon any of his sons remaining faithful. The covenant with David was a sure thing whether Solomon remained in favor with God or not for the reason that the covenant was not made with Solomon, but with David.
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:
16 And his house shall be made sure, and his kingdom for ever before me, and his throne shall be set up for ever.

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:
Davids faithfulness is what makes the covenant secure. Even after God had removed the last Davidic king (Zedekiah) from the throne, he still promised that a decendent of David would be given the throne and would bring peace and security to Isreal.
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by Peg, posted 02-12-2010 1:09 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 387 by Peg, posted 02-12-2010 8:13 PM purpledawn has responded

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3185
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 382 of 427 (546626)
02-12-2010 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 379 by purpledawn
02-11-2010 3:50 PM


Re: The Throne
Even the casual reader of the scriptures knows this is not true, it represents God, Israel and everything God has to do with Israel. Just as the Ark was Gods presence in the desert, so the throne, temple and Israel are Gods presence latter on.

You have been overwhelmed with scriptures to put this point to rest. You are grasping at straws to defend a faulty position

EMA writes:

Jesus was physical, he had a physical audience as he does today, he claimed to be king of the Jews, as God he would certainly know who and what he was. When he was raised his body was CHANGED NOT EXCHANGED, it was still physical, he was still a king as he proclaimed over a physical kingdom A BODY OF PEOPLE REAL IN PHYSICALITY AND LOCATION, THE CHURCH.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

Since the throne and temple are not representations of the person, but God you are incorrect as usual. Its all about God, just ask the ark and the Mercy seat

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.

God made his choice clear at Christs Baptism and the mount of transfiguation. He annointed Christ, priest prophet anf king. There is no direction you can turn to disallow him what the scriptures say he has obtained

EAM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 3:50 PM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by purpledawn, posted 02-12-2010 10:17 AM Dawn Bertot has responded

    
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3185
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 383 of 427 (546627)
02-12-2010 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 379 by purpledawn
02-11-2010 3:50 PM


Re: The Throne
Purpledawn writes:
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.

Your adding your twist to ignore what these things meant in the scriptures

Even the casual reader of the scriptures knows this is not true, it represents God, Israel and everything God has to do with Israel. Just as the Ark was Gods presence in the desert, so the throne, temple and Israel are Gods presence latter on.

You have been overwhelmed with scriptures to put this point to rest. You are grasping at straws to defend a faulty position

EMA writes:

Jesus was physical, he had a physical audience as he does today, he claimed to be king of the Jews, as God he would certainly know who and what he was. When he was raised his body was CHANGED NOT EXCHANGED, it was still physical, he was still a king as he proclaimed over a physical kingdom A BODY OF PEOPLE REAL IN PHYSICALITY AND LOCATION, THE CHURCH.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Purpledawn writes:

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.

Since the throne and temple are not representations of the person, but God you are incorrect as usual. Its all about God, just ask the ark and the Mercy seat

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.

God made his choice clear at Christs Baptism and the mount of transfiguation. He annointed Christ, priest prophet and king. There is no direction you can turn to disallow him what the scriptures say he has obtained

EAM

Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

Edited by EMA, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by purpledawn, posted 02-11-2010 3:50 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

    
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 384 of 427 (546629)
02-12-2010 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 382 by Dawn Bertot
02-12-2010 10:11 AM


Re: The Throne
The OT does not state that the messiah was to become God and reign in Heaven.


Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motion—for 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 382 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-12-2010 10:11 AM Dawn Bertot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 385 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-12-2010 10:41 AM purpledawn has responded
 Message 389 by Peg, posted 02-13-2010 8:53 PM purpledawn has responded
 Message 391 by Buzsaw, posted 02-13-2010 9:24 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3185
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 385 of 427 (546634)
02-12-2010 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 384 by purpledawn
02-12-2010 10:17 AM


Re: The Throne
The OT does not state that the messiah was to become God and reign in Heaven.

More add ons and twist by yourself to distract the fact that Jesus Christ more than adequatley met the prophecies of the Old Testament. By mentioning the idea that the scriptures to not mention a detail about this or that, is to ignore what they do indicate and prove.

ITS YOUR RULE not the scriptures or Gods that they MUST mention that point. Besides all of that what does that have to do with what they do say concerning Christ and what he obviously fulfilled.

One more point concerning the throne, CEOs and leadership.

If it is God who decides who will be on the throne, then it is for all intents and purposes Gods throne. If it is his laws by which the throne is maintained, it is his throne.

Just like our Government (company owner) bailed out the motor companies and then became property of the Government. God bailed Israel out of Egypt and bought them at a price. The whole shabang to do with as he pleases.

Thats why Mr Obama can, no you wont give yourself bonuses and you will follow my rules or the governments rules.

Even your illustration of Comapany owner and CEO backfires on you in this circumstance

EAM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by purpledawn, posted 02-12-2010 10:17 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by purpledawn, posted 02-12-2010 11:22 AM Dawn Bertot has not yet responded

    
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 386 of 427 (546642)
02-12-2010 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 385 by Dawn Bertot
02-12-2010 10:41 AM


Re: The Throne
quote:
More add ons and twist by yourself to distract the fact that Jesus Christ more than adequatley met the prophecies of the Old Testament. By mentioning the idea that the scriptures to not mention a detail about this or that, is to ignore what they do indicate and prove.
IOW, you're free to add what you want.
quote:
ITS YOUR RULE not the scriptures or Gods that they MUST mention that point. Besides all of that what does that have to do with what they do say concerning Christ and what he obviously fulfilled.
You need some nouns in there so I know what "that" you're talking about. I have no idea what you're referring back to.

Jesus didn't fulfill any OT prophecies.

quote:
If it is God who decides who will be on the throne, then it is for all intents and purposes Gods throne. If it is his laws by which the throne is maintained, it is his throne.
God didn't need the human king's chair. He had his own. The ark.

The position of human king is just a position, not a thing to own. The position wasn't there until God created it for Saul. It's just a job. Before kings they had judges. People need humans to deal with the day to day governing of a civilization.

Even Moses had to listen to people's troubles and make decisions on day to day issues of the community.

Remember Solomon's wise decision concerning the two women and the baby? Try taking that problem before God or Jesus. Do not talk to any human or read any religious book. No decision from our own head. How will the decision be presented?

quote:
If it is God who decides who will be on the throne, then it is for all intents and purposes Gods throne. If it is his laws by which the throne is maintained, it is his throne.

Just like our Government (company owner) bailed out the motor companies and then became property of the Government. God bailed Israel out of Egypt and bought them at a price. The whole shabang to do with as he pleases.

Thats why Mr Obama can, no you wont give yourself bonuses and you will follow my rules or the governments rules.

Even your illustration of Comapany owner and CEO backfires on you in this circumstance


Actually, that analogy still supports what I'm saying.

I never said the kings didn't answer to God or follow God's laws. I said they govern the day to day dealings of the people. The priests were the mouth pieces of God.

I'm not sure why you need to make the human kingship over Israel more than it was. Civilizations need a human government.

ABE: Especially since you feel that God didn't want kings to begin with.

Edited by purpledawn, : Added thought.


Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motion—for 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 385 by Dawn Bertot, posted 02-12-2010 10:41 AM Dawn Bertot has not yet responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1306 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 387 of 427 (546680)
02-12-2010 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 381 by purpledawn
02-12-2010 8:30 AM


Re: King David is Dead
purpledawn writes:

I'm not sure why you act as though King David is still alive.

Matthew 22:29 In reply Jesus said...31 As regards the resurrection of the dead, did YOU not read what was spoken to YOU by God, saying, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’? He is the God, not of the dead, but of the living."

Gods ability and plan to resurrect people means that they are in a state of rest. All those whom God resurrects will be as though they have never died at all which is why Jesus said "they are all living to him"

that may not be your view, but it certainly is Gods.

purpledawn writes:

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.

No. What I have done is taken the progressive revelation about the seed into consideration and not just one verse.

Davids covenant is the continuation of a previous promise made to other individuals. Its the promise of a 'seed' who would be the one to deliver mankind from their fallen condition. It began in Genesis with the promise to "crush the head of the Serpant" at Gen3:15. In order for the seed to be able to destroy a spriitual enemy, he would have to be a spirit person himself.

The identity of who this seed would appear among progressed to the man Abraham who God made the promise that thru his decendents the seed would appear: Gen 22:18 And by means of your seed ALL NATIONS of the earth will certainly bless themselves due to the fact that you have listened to my voice.’”
And notice that the seed would benefit, not only Isreal, but ALL NATIONS.

Then from Abrahah, it was narrowed down to Isaac at Gen21:12 “It is by means of Isaac that what will be called your seed will be
Then again it was promised thru Isaacs son Jacob at Gen 28:14 it was said of Jacob "By means of you all the nations of the ground shall bless themselves"

then later the seed was identified as coming thru the tribe of the tribe of Judah at Ge 49:10 and then finally, thru the covenant with David, the seed would come thru Davids line of decendents. at 2Sa 7:12-16

So, do you see why its impossible that Davids covenant could have become voided?
Probably not, but just to reiterate...it was the continuation of the existing promise to provide a deliverer for ALL the nations of the earth. That promise will not end until the deliverer has accomplished his task to destroy Satan the Devil, and to redeem all of mankind from sin and death.

purpledawn writes:

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.

But you have the wrong idea of what a 'seed' means. When the Bible speaks of “seed” in a symbolic sense, it does not refer to literal children, or offspring, but to those who follow the pattern of their symbolic “father,” . At Gen 3:15 it says that the Serpant will have his own 'seed'

1 John 3:10-12 identifies Adam and Eve’s first son Cain is an example of one of the Serpent’s offspring. “The children of God and the children of the Devil are evident by this fact: Everyone who does not carry on righteousness does not originate with God,...not like Cain, who originated with the wicked one and slaughtered his brother.”

So Davids 'seed', in the symbolic sense, would be one of his decendents who was as faithful to God as David was. He did not have to come from his sperm.

purpledawn writes:

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.

Thats exactly right and its why I keep saying that the covenant was not dependent upon any of Davids sons. The covenent was still in place even though the kings were unfaithful. The promise for a seed of David to regain the throne after Babylon had removed the last king and destroyed the temple, was still on offer.

purpledawn writes:

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.

Yes that was true for the line of Davidic kings. God had removed the throne from them because of their badness just as he had said he would do....but you cant ignore that when he did remove the throne, he also promised that the seed would still come and be given the throne again

Ezekiel 21:25-27 “Remove the turban, and lift off the crown. This will not be the same. Put on high even what is low [the series of Gentile world powers, one after another], and bring low even the high one [the Messianic kingdom in David’s family line]. 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 shows us that Davids covenant for an everlasting kingdom would still become a reality...it would become a reality when this promised 'seed' would be given the throne of David.

Was Jesus given the throne of David? Yes. This happened after the fortold 'times of the gentiles' When that time ended, God gave Jesus, who resided in heaven at Gods right hand, the throne of David his father. Its a huge subject in itself and probably deserves a thread of its own.

Edited by Peg, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by purpledawn, posted 02-12-2010 8:30 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 388 by purpledawn, posted 02-13-2010 8:58 AM Peg has responded

    
purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 388 of 427 (546737)
02-13-2010 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 387 by Peg
02-12-2010 8:13 PM


Re: King David is Dead
quote:
Matthew 22:29 In reply Jesus said...31 As regards the resurrection of the dead, did YOU not read what was spoken to YOU by God, saying, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’? He is the God, not of the dead, but of the living."

Gods ability and plan to resurrect people means that they are in a state of rest. All those whom God resurrects will be as though they have never died at all which is why Jesus said "they are all living to him"


I seriously doubt that it is God's view.

IMO, Matthew is written as a satire and if you check out the quote, you would see that God was talking to Moses. He was identifying which god he was. Remember, Moses grew up in Egypt. What God said had nothing to do with whether the men were still alive or not.

The resurrection doctrine came about later either while they were in exile after the destruction of the temple or after. Probably influenced by the Persians and Zoroastrianism. A promise of real resurrection of dead bodies is not in the OT that I've seen.

quote:
Its the promise of a 'seed' who would be the one to deliver mankind from their fallen condition.
There is no such promise.

quote:
So, do you see why its impossible that Davids covenant could have become voided?
In dogma world ,yes, because it really messes up your belief system. In reality, no.

quote:
That promise will not end until the deliverer has accomplished his task to destroy Satan the Devil, and to redeem all of mankind from sin and death.
That also isn't a promise in the OT. The good and evil battle is also a later development. Again, probably influenced by Zoroastrianism.

quote:
But you have the wrong idea of what a 'seed' means. When the Bible speaks of “seed” in a symbolic sense, it does not refer to literal children, or offspring, but to those who follow the pattern of their symbolic “father,” . At Gen 3:15 it says that the Serpant will have his own 'seed'
You and I have been down this road before and you apparently still have trouble differentiating between when the text is referring to seed as offspring and when it is referring to someone following a pattern of someone else as in 1 John 3:10-12.

2 Samuel 7:12 is very specific. From thine own issue. It very definitely is from David's own sperm. Sorry. Look at the parallels.

English Standard Version
When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom.

Please don't try to present the it-meant-offspring-then-but-is-symbolic-now ploy. It is BS like this that makes me doubt that you understand the Bible within the context it was intended and not from the context of your own dogma.

quote:
Thats exactly right and its why I keep saying that the covenant was not dependent upon any of Davids sons. The covenent was still in place even though the kings were unfaithful. The promise for a seed of David to regain the throne after Babylon had removed the last king and destroyed the temple, was still on offer.
Took the part you liked and missed the other part. No the promise spoken in 2 Samuel 7 to David didn't promise kingship past Solomon, only lineage.

As I pointed out the conditional part relayed later doesn't show up in the original promise. So where is the conditional promise God made to David?

These books were written after the fact. The writers already knew who had been king and who hadn't. Unfortunately we don't have any way to know what was in the original memoirs of Samuel.

Of course the promise is really irrelevant to the issue. As I showed you, the OT prophets were not speaking of a messiah for the 1st century. They were prophesying for their people in their time. They were already saved from exile and had peace and were governed by one of their own even though he wasn't king. The Jews didn't have a problem with Persian rule. In fact they began to recover and flourish under Persian rule. The Greek invasion brought new conflicts. In the first century some, not all, Jews were unhappy with Roman rule. That's what they wanted to be saved from.

Jesus didn't fulfill any OT prophecy or relieve the Jews from oppression. He didn't govern the Jews in any way.

quote:
This shows us that Davids covenant for an everlasting kingdom would still become a reality...it would become a reality when this promised 'seed' would be given the throne of David.
No it doesn't. You're reading that into it. It just says that God will eventually give leadership of Israel to someone more deserving. God picked Zerubbabel to govern after the exile and then Nehemiah. Then the Maccabees ruled. God didn't say it would be from David's line.

Like I said, the prophets weren't talking about something to come beyond the time of their audience.

quote:
Was Jesus given the throne of David? Yes. This happened after the fortold 'times of the gentiles' When that time ended, God gave Jesus, who resided in heaven at Gods right hand, the throne of David his father. Its a huge subject in itself and probably deserves a thread of its own.
I still disagree. The prophets weren't speaking of an ethereal throne. David's throne wasn't in heaven. It was on earth ruling very live people.


Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motion—for 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 387 by Peg, posted 02-12-2010 8:13 PM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by Peg, posted 02-13-2010 9:02 PM purpledawn has responded

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 1306 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 389 of 427 (546785)
02-13-2010 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 384 by purpledawn
02-12-2010 10:17 AM


Re: The Throne
purpledawn writes:

The OT does not state that the messiah was to become God and reign in Heaven.

heavenly position, heavenly kingdom, rulership over entire earth

Daniel 7:13 “I kept on beholding in the visions of the night, and, see there! with the clouds of the heavens someone like a son of man happened to be coming; and to the Ancient of Days he gained access, and they brought him up close even before that One. 14 And to him there were given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him. His rulership is an indefinitely lasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin


This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by purpledawn, posted 02-12-2010 10:17 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by purpledawn, posted 02-14-2010 5:21 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Peg
Member (Idle past 1306 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 390 of 427 (546787)
02-13-2010 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 388 by purpledawn
02-13-2010 8:58 AM


Re: King David is Dead
purpledawn writes:

I seriously doubt that it is God's view.

do you realise that you will never know because you refuse to let God speak.

PD,

When ever a scripture is posted that contradicts your view, you immediately claim the scriptures to be fraudulent. You do no allow the bible to explain itself because you refuse to accept that it is a legitimate and honest work.

Its not a very honest debate when you continually do this.

You want christians to explain and prove from the scriptures why they believe this or that, but when they do you say the scriptures they are using are false. You are not allowing an honest debate so this is my last post on the subject to you.

Edited by Peg, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by purpledawn, posted 02-13-2010 8:58 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 396 by purpledawn, posted 02-14-2010 6:01 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2425
26
272829Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014