ECT The Throne of David
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
Lon
Well-known member
:think:
:think: Neither abusive nor name calling.... :nono:
:think: Neither abusive nor name calling.... :nono: You actually called a name in his quote of you though :noway:
:think: Neither abusive nor name calling.... :nono:
You are going to have to find me name-calling and abuse. I see you name-calling. Sometimes you attribute things like 'cat lady' or 'bag lady' to people that never did say it to you. You have accused me of this a number of times. I have never called you a name. You don't seem to keep good track of who is who but rather treat us all the same way and bin us all together as name-callers and abusers.
Are you SURE Dodge called you a name or was abusive? Wasn't he always rather saying your scripture understanding is wrong and your teaching is false? Did he ever call you a name? You'd have to find either for me. I didn't find it. :idunno:
Lon
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
Yes it sounds all right and proper until you know the clincher exchange Jesus had with the leaders of Judaism: 'if Christ calls him Lord, how can he be the 'son of David' in the usual descendancy sense.' and then the Acts 2 text plainly says that Christ is on the throne anticipated by David. Two strikes.
Acts 2 does not say that Christ is on the throne anticipated by David.
It says that Christ would be raised 'to sit' on David's throne.
David's throne is defined clearly throughout scripture and it's on this earth Jerusalem over the twelve tribes in the land and takes place when GOD restores the Kingdom to Israel.
Act 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
What Acts 2 does plainly say is that Christ is presently seated at GOD's right hand 'until'....
Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Act 2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
Typically, you are reading something into the text which is not there.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Not at all. I'm just not doing D'ism, which thinks Judaism gets another round. The passage says it is not David who went up on his 'eternal' throne; it was Christ. Why would he say that if it wasn't David's throne (the foreseen one in the verse before) that was meant?
Once again, you refuse with most d'ists to see/say what is actually there.
What sense would it make right there to start talking about something that was going to happen in or to Judaism which had just rejected Christ. Instead he is saying the resurrection is the enthronement, just like the magnificent passage of eph 1 says, and then says the same power is at work.
There is no need to have Judaism have another 'round' and it is not going to happen. There is no sense in the NT that some HUGE aspect of Messiah is missing, because they knew Dan 9 and they knew the country was going to be decimated without ever mentioning a restoration of the country and the worship system as such. it was instead 'set aside' Heb 10:9.
Stop doing D'ism and just let the passage speak what it wants to.
Interplanner
Well-known member
v31 seeing what was ahead he spoke of the Christ, about his (David's) throne.
Excellent.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Only you think so . . .
Interplanner
Well-known member
Tam refuses to diagramm v31 which means it can be Buddhist, occult or D'ist.
The Father's throne existed long before David's throne was established therefore David's throne does not equal the Father's throne, though GOD is sovereign over both.
The throne of David:
2Sa_3:10 To translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba.
2Sa_7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
2Sa_7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
Solomon ruled from the throne of David.
Where was it? In heaven?
No, in earthly Jerusalem.
1Ki_2:12 Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly.
The LORD's throne:
Psa_11:4 The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD'S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men.
Psa_93:2 Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.
The LORD's throne was established long before David's throne.
Did David ever rule from the LORD's throne in heaven?
No.
Can the LORD's throne in heaven justifiably be called David's throne.
No, David's throne was established on earth over the twelve tribes from Dan to Beersheba in the promised land.
Psa_103:19 The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all.
If the LORD's throne in the heavens is equivalent to David's throne then that must mean that David ruled not only the twelve tribes but he must have ruled over all creation, as well. :nono:
Yet, the LORD has promised David again and again:
Psa 132:11 The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.
Psa 132:12 If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore.
Psa 132:13 For the LORD hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation.
Psa 132:14 This is my rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.
GOD spoke through Gabriel to Mary:
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
I find no justification to change the meaning of terms plainly laid out in Scripture.
Others somehow believe that they have justification.
I would like them to demonstrate for us their justification to freely tinker with the inspired Scripture.
The throne of David:
2Sa_3:10 To translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba.
2Sa_7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
2Sa_7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
Solomon ruled from the throne of David.
Where was it? In heaven?
No, in earthly Jerusalem.
1Ki_2:12 Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly.
The LORD's throne:
Psa_11:4 The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD'S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men.
Psa_93:2 Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.
The LORD's throne was established long before David's throne.
Did David ever rule from the LORD's throne in heaven?
No.
Can the LORD's throne in heaven justifiably be called David's throne.
No, David's throne was established on earth over the twelve tribes from Dan to Beersheba in the promised land.
Psa_103:19 The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all.
If the LORD's throne in the heavens is equivalent to David's throne then that must mean that David ruled not only the twelve tribes but he must have ruled over all creation, as well. :nono:
Yet, the LORD has promised David again and again:
Psa 132:11 The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.
Psa 132:12 If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne for evermore.
Psa 132:13 For the LORD hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation.
Psa 132:14 This is my rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.
GOD spoke through Gabriel to Mary:
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
I find no justification to change the meaning of terms plainly laid out in Scripture.
Others somehow believe that they have justification.
I would like them to demonstrate for us their justification to freely tinker with the inspired Scripture.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The whole structure of the NT is to move on past what was there in Judaism: temples, worship, rituals, etc etc etc. They don't matter any more. They are shadow; Christ is reality. Yes, the early Luke songs mention the throne of David because it is 'new' in Christ in Acts 2:31. Why do quote one you 'like' (Luke) and not the other? (Acts)
Dan 9: the answer to the prayer for the restoration is that the nation will be ruined in the destruction of Jerusalem, but what Messiah does succeeds! (the mission).
:down:
BRAVO!
It is written.
Interplanner
Well-known member
You are just favoring one verse and not another, and not the one in the context that matters most. So your view is pointless.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The bravo would be that it is fulfilled in Christ. Go back to the shortest summary of Acts 5:29+ and you'll see that Christ is exalted, is Prince, is Savior, is at the right hand (Ps 110), is dispensing forgiveness, and pouring out his Spirit to witness this even further.
You know nothing about what was supposed to happen or how. There are longer passages, but this one puts everything stated in the above OT and Lukan songs into fulfilled status, as was the intention of the apostles teaching.
They are exulting in the total fulfillment of these things even though the land (city and sanctuary) will get destroyed as Dan 9 said.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Thick thick irony...
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
More irony...