Dehann's book was written in 1943. DNA was discovered years later.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Two Prophecies in One
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
It says, literally, that David will be their king. Do you get to cherry pick what you want to apply literally and what you want to apply metaphorically?
4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without king, and without prince, and without sacrifice, and without pillar, and without ephod or teraphim:
5 afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek Jehovah their God, and David their king, and shall come with fear unto Jehovah and to his goodness in the latter days. Hos 3
23 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.
24 And I, Jehovah, will be their God, and my servant David prince among them; I, Jehovah, have spoken it. Ezek 34
24 And my servant David shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in mine ordinances, and observe my statutes, and do them.
25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, they, and their children, and their children`s children, for ever: and David my servant shall be their prince for ever. Ezek 37
8 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith Jehovah of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds; and strangers shall no more make him their bondman;
9 but they shall serve Jehovah their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them. Jer 30
Just checked. Matthew has Joseph's genealogy through Solomen. Luke has Mary's through Nathan another son of David.
The coming Kingdom reign upon the earth will be when the Will of God is done here upon the earth as now in heaven , as there shall be no more false reli9gions, poverty, crime, wars etc when Jesus sets up shop here!
Again, DNA comes from both parents. And Biblically Christ is the "seed of David." I've not said a single word about Mary, and the Scriptures do not make a bid deal about Mary after she bore Jesus, but they do make a big deal out of Jesus being of the "house of David," besides being the "seed of David."
Luke 1:27--"To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary."
Luke 1:69--"And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;"
Luke 2:4--"And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David"
So again, you are mocking and not actually answering my OP, or even my secondary points.
Jesus was from the seed of David through Mary. He was descended from David via Nathan, not Solomon.
YHWH. Josephus said the holy name consisted of four vowels.
Nathan? He wasn't in the royal line. Check your facts. The curse on Joseph's line came after Solomon.
Anyway, what's you're point? The usual explanation, which I hold to, is that Joseph's was the cursed line, so Christ came through Mary's line, which was still a valid royal line of David.
You misunderstand. The KJV (and many other translations) use the capital name LORD to represent in English the Divine Name Yahweh (or YHWH, or whatever you want to make it). But anyway, Josephus did not say it was four vowels, because Hebrew only has consonants for letters in its alphabet.
Yahweh is used by many scholars. In fact, the Holman Christian Standard Bible uses it for the Divine Name (but not the revised CSB).
Sigh. Same old same old. No new arguments. Would anyone like to actually approach the points in the OP instead of these (mistaken) rabbit trails?
crickets
crickets
LOL, I really don't care what you're interested in, I'm interested in exposing your follies. That's what I care about, but If YOU'D care read the fourth post I said. "So what is signified by the Throne of David? I'm certain some pre-Darby commentator might have a thought about that," intimating that this chapter has already been well exegeted by eminent, and proven theologians, and they contradict your epiphany. I have nothing to add to them, and if any would care to look them up, the puerile errors you make would be glaring by contrast.
If you want sound exegesis, go, as I suggested, to pre-Darby commentators The Throne of David is symbolic of Christ's reign over the church, not a worldly kingdom. I'll just cut to the chase in the quotes. If you want the full exegeses read them yourself.
Matthew Henry: As the Prince of Peace, he reconciles us to God; he is the Giver of peace in the heart and conscience; and when his kingdom is fully established, men shall learn war no more. The government shall be upon him; he shall bear the burden of it. Glorious things are spoken of Christ's government. There is no end to the increase of its peace, for the happiness of its subjects shall last for ever. The exact agreement of this prophecy with the doctrine of the New Testament, shows that Jewish prophets and Christian teachers had the same view of the person and salvation of the Messiah. To what earthly king or kingdom can these words apply? Give then, O Lord, to thy people to know thee by every endearing name, and in every glorious character. Give increase of grace in every heart of thy redeemed upon earth.
John Calvin:
Judgment and righteousness do not here relate to outward affairs of state. We must observe the analogy between the kingdom of Christ and its qualities; for, being spiritual, it is established by the power of the Holy Spirit. In a word, all these things must be viewed as referring to the inner man, that is, when we are regenerated by God to true righteousness. Outward righteousness indeed follows afterwards, but it must be preceded by that renovation of the mind and heart. We are not Christ's, therefore, unless we follow what is good and just, and bear on our hearts the impress of that righteousness which hath been sealed by the Holy Spirit.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this. By zeal I understand that ardent desire which God will display in preserving his Church, by removing all difficulties and obstructions which might otherwise have hindered its redemption. When we engage in any difficult undertaking, our earnestness, and the warmth of our feelings, overcome the difficulties which present themselves to baffle or retard our attempts. In like manner Isaiah shows that God is inflamed with an uncommon and extraordinary desire to promote the salvation of the Church, so that if believers cannot measure by their own capacity what he has just now promised, still they ought not to cease to entertain confident hope, for the manner of it is wonderful and inconceivable. In short, he intimates that God will come with no light or slow arm to redeem his Church, for he will be all on flame with amazing love of believers, and anxiety about their salvation.
John Gill:
upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom;
that is, on it the Prince of peace shall sit, who is David's son, according to the flesh, and so his heir; see ( Luke 1:32 Luke 1:33 ) and which must be understood spiritually of the church and people of Christ, who are his throne and kingdom; in whose hearts he reigns by his grace and Spirit: to order it;
Really sorry to hear that. You might call it theology, but it's just Darbyism.
But not to the foolishness you're belching.
LOL. You're a skit I saw once where a girl is brought to the ER because of severe abdominal pain. The Nurse says to the mother, she's in labor.Sigh. Same old same old. No new arguments. Would anyone like to actually approach the points in the OP instead of these (mistaken) rabbit trails?
crickets
The girl says, I'm not pregnant, Mom!
Then she gives birth.
That's not my baby, Mom!
In light of the very plain, undeniable Scriptural proof. Evidence readily at hand. I mean really low-hanging fruit. Your premise is cleary just wrong.
But you say, Same old, same old. Lol. Yep. Same old truth, you mean.
Matthew Henry: a beloved (by me, too) devotional commentary, but not exegetical.
Calvin: Really? No thanks.
John Gill: The most radical of Calvinists. Wouldn't even look at or preach to poor lost people who came to his church. I'll pass.
Let me see, what's your opinion of me: "follies," "purile errors," etc. Can't you post without being nasty and supercilious? I've not said similar things about you.
And as for exegesis, I want yours, not that of dead white men who agree with you. I'm assuming here that you do your own Bible study and are capable of your own exegesis. Can you do that?
Nope. He's nastier than you with his insults, and that's saying a lot.
I'm not here to be insulted, but to study the Bible with other Christ-loving Bible students. I don't mind sarcasm, but you mock people, look down on them, call them puerile (or whatever). If I want to be insulted like that, I'll go out street preaching, not log in on a website for discussing the Bible like the BB.
Do you really think your insults please Christ?
I can. But, as I said, I don't care what you want. If you have a pointed question, I will answer it, though.are capable of your own exegesis. Can you do that?
Last edited:
Then you don't know exegesis.
That's what I thought.
And there's your penchant for believing fairy tales coming through.
<see>
Lol, that’s a nasty thing to say…
Wrong. Here’s some of your fellow Darbyists that stick with ‘literal interpretation’ where you choose to go the 'metaphorical route':
"...We have seen that there has been, in the past, vice regents on the throne of Israel. And we have seen that in the millennium, there will be one shepherd over many “vice shepherds”. Therefore, the idea of David as Christ’s vice regent is not without precedence.
We have seen that there are a number of scriptures that tell us that David will indeed be king over Israel during the millennium. We have seen also that the most obvious reading of many of those verses refer to David, not Christ, the Son of David. Where the most obvious reading of a verse does not contradict other scriptures, I believe that it is the most obvious reading that the Holy Spirit intends us to understand.
The risen Christ is never referred to as a Servant. That fact alone points us to the conclusion that David will serve as Christ’s vice regent on the millennial throne.
WILL DAVID REIGN ON THE MILLENNIAL THRONE?
"...Dispensationalists, holding to their "literal" method of interpreting Scripture, argue that this passage teaches that David will be raised from the dead and will once again rule over God's people in the millennium. …"
David raised up to rule over God's people forever
Last edited: