FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-05-2009, 02:55 PM   #221
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
And the first "LORD" doesn't say "lord" in Hebrew. Of course, someone who couldn't read Hebrew might get confused over the two "lords" in this sentence and reinterpret it as two "gods" as Jesus apparently did.
I think you are misunderstanding Jesus' argument here, an argument which, whether right or wrong, would have been plausible in ancient rabbinic debate.

David [the supposed author of the Psalm] says "The Lord [God/Yahweh] said to my lord [The Messaiah/the Son of David] .... "

But fathers do not normally refer to their sons as "my lord"
Hence the Messiah can't be just a descendant of David because if so David would not show him such respect. Therefore the Messiah must be more, maybe much more, than a descendant of David.

NB I am trying to clarify what Jesus' argument is. We both accept that there are problems with the argument, but it is not evidence that Jesus could not read Hebrew.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 05:02 AM   #222
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
It is not a psalm "by" David. It's a psalm about David. Your quote from whatever website you are uncritically quoting from can't read Hebrew, Greek, or English. The very first words in the psalm are "to/about David, a psalm". The Hebrew phrase is לְדָוִד, מִזְמוֹר LDVD MZMVR "L'David Mizmor" which literally means "to David, [a] praise".

And the first "LORD" doesn't say "lord" in Hebrew. Of course, someone who couldn't read Hebrew might get confused over the two "lords" in this sentence and reinterpret it as two "gods" as Jesus apparently did.
The Psalm begins with the opening Hebrew words "Mizmor l'David." The word "Mizmor" means "a song," and thus the opening phrase of this Psalm is, "A Song of David." In fact, the word Psalms comes from the Greek word psalmos, which means "a song." http://tmt.urj.net/archives/2socialaction/100306.htm

There are no writings that indicate the Psalms was written to David, as being written by David.
I don't know where you're receiving your information, but someone is lying to you.
IBelieveInHymn is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 06:46 AM   #223
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
It is not a psalm "by" David. It's a psalm about David. Your quote from whatever website you are uncritically quoting from can't read Hebrew, Greek, or English. The very first words in the psalm are "to/about David, a psalm". The Hebrew phrase is לְדָוִד, מִזְמוֹר LDVD MZMVR "L'David Mizmor" which literally means "to David, [a] praise".

And the first "LORD" doesn't say "lord" in Hebrew. Of course, someone who couldn't read Hebrew might get confused over the two "lords" in this sentence and reinterpret it as two "gods" as Jesus apparently did.
The Psalm begins with the opening Hebrew words "Mizmor l'David." The word "Mizmor" means "a song," and thus the opening phrase of this Psalm is, "A Song of David." In fact, the word Psalms comes from the Greek word psalmos, which means "a song." http://tmt.urj.net/archives/2socialaction/100306.htm

There are no writings that indicate the Psalms was written to David, as being written by David.
I don't know where you're receiving your information, but someone is lying to you.
You realize that the etymology of "psalm" you just looked up gives away why this is not a prophetic song and thus cannot be about any sort of future "messiah". This is a song about David. The Greek word ψαλμος is derived from the verb ψάλλω. When I fingerpick my guitar, I psallw it. The psalms are songs to be sung; the hopes and dreams of Jews written to the sound of a stringed instrument. In the case of Psalm 110, this is probably a song to be sung at David's funeral, which makes sense of the entire psalm. Not some divine, prophetic utterance. This is why the psalms are in the ketuvim, not the books of the prophets. You should probably give the Tanakh back to the Jews instead of bastardizing it for Christian polemics.

This, also, ironically gives away why the entire crucifixion scene is fiction, since so much of it is derived from psalm 22.
show_no_mercy is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 07:12 AM   #224
Sai
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: usa
Posts: 4,380
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
It is not a psalm "by" David. It's a psalm about David. Your quote from whatever website you are uncritically quoting from can't read Hebrew, Greek, or English. The very first words in the psalm are "to/about David, a psalm". The Hebrew phrase is לְדָוִד, מִזְמוֹר LDVD MZMVR "L'David Mizmor" which literally means "to David, [a] praise".

And the first "LORD" doesn't say "lord" in Hebrew. Of course, someone who couldn't read Hebrew might get confused over the two "lords" in this sentence and reinterpret it as two "gods" as Jesus apparently did.
The Psalm begins with the opening Hebrew words "Mizmor l'David." The word "Mizmor" means "a song," and thus the opening phrase of this Psalm is, "A Song of David." In fact, the word Psalms comes from the Greek word psalmos, which means "a song." http://tmt.urj.net/archives/2socialaction/100306.htm

There are no writings that indicate the Psalms was written to David, as being written by David.
I don't know where you're receiving your information, but someone is lying to you.

Why are you so sure of your sources of information? I do know where you get your "flood geology" and I know that they are lying to you. Absolutely and with no room for interpretation of opinion. As flat out lying, as provably false as 2 plus 2 equals 6. You should be angry at being lied to, not embrace it!

As long as you rely on and quote utter rubbish in one area, what credibility do you expect to have in any other? Seriously.
Sai is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 07:36 AM   #225
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
The Psalm begins with the opening Hebrew words "Mizmor l'David." The word "Mizmor" means "a song," and thus the opening phrase of this Psalm is, "A Song of David." In fact, the word Psalms comes from the Greek word psalmos, which means "a song." http://tmt.urj.net/archives/2socialaction/100306.htm

There are no writings that indicate the Psalms was written to David, as being written by David.
I don't know where you're receiving your information, but someone is lying to you.
You realize that the etymology of "psalm" you just looked up gives away why this is not a prophetic song and thus cannot be about any sort of future "messiah". This is a song about David. The Greek word ψαλμος is derived from the verb ψάλλω. When I fingerpick my guitar, I psallw it. The psalms are songs to be sung; the hopes and dreams of Jews written to the sound of a stringed instrument. In the case of Psalm 110, this is probably a song to be sung at David's funeral, which makes sense of the entire psalm. Not some divine, prophetic utterance. This is why the psalms are in the ketuvim, not the books of the prophets. You should probably give the Tanakh back to the Jews instead of bastardizing it for Christian polemics.

This, also, ironically gives away why the entire crucifixion scene is fiction, since so much of it is derived from psalm 22.
To demonstrate that the Messiah is not the son of David, Jesus quotes Psalm 110, attributed in the Hebrew Bible to David himself. As the text of Mark (12:36) recites, David speaks in the psalm: “David himself, inspired by the Holy Spirit, declared...” Jesus then recites a passage from the psalm: “The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand, till I put thy enemies under thy feet.” Jesus then uses this passage to prove his point: “David himself calls him [the Messiah] ‘Lord,’ so how is he his son?” That is, David speaks of the Messiah as “my Lord,” rather than as “my son.” The Messiah therefore cannot be a son of David. Using Psalm 110 as his proof text, Jesus here refutes the scribes’ view that Christ, the Messiah, should be a son or descendant of David. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3812


Knohl’s alleged contradiction, between Jesus’ reference to Psalm 110 in the synoptic gospels and the biblical references of the Messiah being the “Son of David,” is easily resolved when the Bible is “rightly divided” (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus rejected neither His being the “Son of David,” nor “the Messiah.” In truth, He was both.

Jesus was the Son of Joseph. The 'Son of David' means Jesus was a decendant of David.

Another misunderstood text in the bible

The Messiah will come from the seed of David.
IBelieveInHymn is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 09:00 AM   #226
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post

You realize that the etymology of "psalm" you just looked up gives away why this is not a prophetic song and thus cannot be about any sort of future "messiah". This is a song about David. The Greek word ψαλμος is derived from the verb ψάλλω. When I fingerpick my guitar, I psallw it. The psalms are songs to be sung; the hopes and dreams of Jews written to the sound of a stringed instrument. In the case of Psalm 110, this is probably a song to be sung at David's funeral, which makes sense of the entire psalm. Not some divine, prophetic utterance. This is why the psalms are in the ketuvim, not the books of the prophets. You should probably give the Tanakh back to the Jews instead of bastardizing it for Christian polemics.

This, also, ironically gives away why the entire crucifixion scene is fiction, since so much of it is derived from psalm 22.
To demonstrate that the Messiah is not the son of David, Jesus quotes Psalm 110, attributed in the Hebrew Bible to David himself. As the text of Mark (12:36) recites, David speaks in the psalm: “David himself, inspired by the Holy Spirit, declared...” Jesus then recites a passage from the psalm: “The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand, till I put thy enemies under thy feet.” Jesus then uses this passage to prove his point: “David himself calls him [the Messiah] ‘Lord,’ so how is he his son?” That is, David speaks of the Messiah as “my Lord,” rather than as “my son.” The Messiah therefore cannot be a son of David. Using Psalm 110 as his proof text, Jesus here refutes the scribes’ view that Christ, the Messiah, should be a son or descendant of David. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3812


Knohl’s alleged contradiction, between Jesus’ reference to Psalm 110 in the synoptic gospels and the biblical references of the Messiah being the “Son of David,” is easily resolved when the Bible is “rightly divided” (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus rejected neither His being the “Son of David,” nor “the Messiah.” In truth, He was both.

Jesus was the Son of Joseph. The 'Son of David' means Jesus was a decendant of David.

Another misunderstood text in the bible

The Messiah will come from the seed of David.
Appeal to false authority. And simply repeating the same daft claims while using "proof" from the non-Jewish writer of pseudo-Paul does nothing to validate your spurious claims.

A Jew wrote Psalm 110. Maybe you should ask a Jew what Psalm 110 means, and not some pagan Christian.
show_no_mercy is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 09:12 AM   #227
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
To demonstrate that the Messiah is not the son of David, Jesus quotes Psalm 110, attributed in the Hebrew Bible to David himself. As the text of Mark (12:36) recites, David speaks in the psalm: “David himself, inspired by the Holy Spirit, declared...” Jesus then recites a passage from the psalm: “The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand, till I put thy enemies under thy feet.” Jesus then uses this passage to prove his point: “David himself calls him [the Messiah] ‘Lord,’ so how is he his son?” That is, David speaks of the Messiah as “my Lord,” rather than as “my son.” The Messiah therefore cannot be a son of David. Using Psalm 110 as his proof text, Jesus here refutes the scribes’ view that Christ, the Messiah, should be a son or descendant of David. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3812


Knohl’s alleged contradiction, between Jesus’ reference to Psalm 110 in the synoptic gospels and the biblical references of the Messiah being the “Son of David,” is easily resolved when the Bible is “rightly divided” (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus rejected neither His being the “Son of David,” nor “the Messiah.” In truth, He was both.

Jesus was the Son of Joseph. The 'Son of David' means Jesus was a decendant of David.

Another misunderstood text in the bible

The Messiah will come from the seed of David.
Appeal to false authority. And simply repeating the same daft claims while using "proof" from the non-Jewish writer of pseudo-Paul does nothing to validate your spurious claims.

A Jew wrote Psalm 110. Maybe you should ask a Jew what Psalm 110 means, and not some pagan Christian.
the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, “What do you think about the Christ, whose son is He?” They said to Him, “The son of David.” He said to them, “Then how does David in the Sprit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Until I put thine enemies beneath Thy feet?”’ If David then calls Him ‘Lord’, how is He his son?” (Matt. 22:41-45).

You can see Jesus totally refutes the claim of David's Son being the Messiah.

Bible critics try to dismiss the claims of Jesus being the Messiah because he wasn't "The Son of David", but this means, The messiah will be a decendant of David.

The Messiah will come from the seed of David. Meaning, this could be anyone. Not necessarily David's Son. And Jesus seems to fit this description.

I don't know of any other Jewish Messiah's that will come after God already predicted the outcome.

The Jews are waiting for their Messiah, but truly, their messiah has already come and gone, and he's going to return to prove he is the Jewish Messiah.
IBelieveInHymn is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 09:18 AM   #228
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by show_no_mercy View Post

Appeal to false authority. And simply repeating the same daft claims while using "proof" from the non-Jewish writer of pseudo-Paul does nothing to validate your spurious claims.

A Jew wrote Psalm 110. Maybe you should ask a Jew what Psalm 110 means, and not some pagan Christian.
the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, “What do you think about the Christ, whose son is He?” They said to Him, “The son of David.” He said to them, “Then how does David in the Sprit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Until I put thine enemies beneath Thy feet?”’ If David then calls Him ‘Lord’, how is He his son?” (Matt. 22:41-45).

You can see Jesus totally refutes the claim of David's Son being the Messiah.
:rolling: ...
show_no_mercy is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 05:05 PM   #229
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Killeen, TX
Posts: 1,388
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBelieveInHymn View Post
Knohl’s alleged contradiction, between Jesus’ reference to Psalm 110 in the synoptic gospels and the biblical references of the Messiah being the “Son of David,” is easily resolved when the Bible is “rightly divided” (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus rejected neither His being the “Son of David,” nor “the Messiah.” In truth, He was both.

Jesus was the Son of Joseph. The 'Son of David' means Jesus was a decendant of David.

Another misunderstood text in the bible

The Messiah will come from the seed of David.
But Jesus was not of the seed of David, nor was he the son of Joseph, except as an adopted son. His bloodline, according to the texts, is the son of Mary and YHWH, with David as the stepfather. This leaves off the contradictory lines of ancestors (and the hysterical - "one is the bloodline of Mary" faux argument), but let's skip that for now. Basically, the line of David was shooting blanks.

But I'm sure you'll have a link to an apologist site that "proves" this is not the case. I'm hoping you'll skip the Mary gambit, but I'm guessing it will be the "He's considered Joseph's son by law or inheritance" of the "He's the spiritual descendant of David". Am I right?
badger3k is offline  
Old 10-06-2009, 06:04 PM   #230
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 814
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by badger3k View Post
But Jesus was not of the seed of David, nor was he the son of Joseph, except as an adopted son. His bloodline, according to the texts, is the son of Mary and YHWH, with David as the stepfather. This leaves off the contradictory lines of ancestors (and the hysterical - "one is the bloodline of Mary" faux argument), but let's skip that for now. Basically, the line of David was shooting blanks.

But I'm sure you'll have a link to an apologist site that "proves" this is not the case. I'm hoping you'll skip the Mary gambit, but I'm guessing it will be the "He's considered Joseph's son by law or inheritance" of the "He's the spiritual descendant of David". Am I right?
God promised David He would:

1. Make a house for David, a physical temple built by Solomon.
2. After his death He would set up and establish the kingdom of David’s own seed or descendant, but NOT forever.
3. The descendant of David (Messiah) will build a house for Yahweh’s name, and Yahweh will establish the throne of his Messiah’s kingdom FOREVER.
4. The Messianic descendant of David will be Yahweh’s son, and Yahweh will be his Father.

David’s genealogy is found in the Book of Ruth. he belonged to the tribe of Judah: his ancestor Nahshon was leader of the whole tribe of Judah and Nahshon became the brother-in-law of Aaron the high priest. Aaron married Nahshon’s sister, and through this lineage is found the bloodline of Joseph, husband of Mary, mother of Jesus.

It's safe to say that Jesus is from the seed of David.

http://bibleanswerstand.org/seed.htm
IBelieveInHymn is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:28 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.