Davidic Covenant

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Carson Weber, Mar 3, 2002.

  1. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi everyone,

    I've been very busy as midterms are arriving and Spring Break is almost here, so I apologize for my lack of participation on the board if I have left any posts unanswered. I gave this presentation to a friend yesterday to explain the basis of Catholicism and thought it would be appropriate for everyone here. Unfortunately, I will be unable to follow up on it, and I promise you that it's worth your time to investigate.

    This is why Jesus is referred to as the Son of God, Son of David, and the Christ.

    Jesus Christ came to fulfill the Davidic covenant and transform/elevate the Davidic Kingdom by grace into the Kingdom of Heaven in the New Covenant established in his blood.

    The Davidic Covenant is established between God and David's son through the prophecy of Nathan in 2 Samuel 7:

    (v.5-17) - ""Go and tell my servant David, `Thus says the LORD: Would you build me a house to dwell in? I have not dwelt in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent for my dwelling. In all places where I have moved with all the people of Israel, did I speak a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, saying, "Why have you not built me a house of cedar?"' Now therefore thus you shall say to my servant David, `Thus says the LORD of hosts, I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep, that you should be prince over my people Israel; and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make for you a great name, like the name of the great ones of the earth. (David sees that God is confirming and elevating the original covenant made w/ Abraham in Gn. 12 with David, who is of Abraham's seed) And I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in their own place, and be disturbed no more; and violent men shall afflict them no more, as formerly, from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover the LORD declares to you that the LORD will make you a house. When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. (This is a prophecy that has a two-fold fulfillment: (1) The covenant is being made with Solomon, who becomes the son of God, builds a house (the Jerusalem Temple) for God, and rules over the kingdom and (2) it points forward to the coming of Jesus.) When he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men; but I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure for ever before me; your throne shall be established for ever.'" In accordance with all these words, and in accordance with all this vision, Nathan spoke to David.

    David responds in v. 19 with, "And yet this was a small thing in thy eyes, O Lord GOD; thou hast spoken also of thy servant's house for a great while to come, and hast shown me future generations, O Lord GOD"

    "future generations" in Hebrew is "torah 'adam", which translates much better to "law for all mankind"; "torah" means "law" and "adam" means "mankind".

    This covenant is for all of mankind, not just for the nation of Israel. Hence, the Davidic Kingdom, beginning with Solomon is to bring all nations to God. The largest area of the Temple structure was the court of the Gentiles, in which the Gentiles were to worship God. Some of the prophets even prophesied to Gentile nations because these nations were now in a covenant relationship with God. The Davidic covenant opens God's family to an international, not just a national scope.

    Solomon was:

    1. The Son of David
    2. The anointed one (christos/messiah)
    3. The Temple builder
    4. King of the Davidic Kingdom

    However, Solomon's kingdom didn't last forever as God promised to David in 2 Sam 7. In 930, it was divided between north and soul (Israel/Judah), in 722, the Assyrians took Israel into captivity & exile, and in 586, Judah was exiled by the Babylonians as the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem was laid to waste.

    Due to more Messianic prophecies, the Jewish people (those who returned from exile from the tribe of Judah) were longing for their Davidic king. They had been suppressed under Roman rule since their return and had experience incredible oppression and torment (at one point thousands of Jews were crucified in public before Jesus arrived on the scene).

    The one to come would be the Messiah (anointed one) because he would be a King (Kings and Priests were anointed with oil.. Jesus was the last of a long line of legitimate messiahs, though the Chair of David had been empty for about 600 years before Jesus came). This Messiah would have the status of "son of God" as Solomon was a son to God. Most of all the Davidic Kingdom would be restored.

    Matthew (Levi the taxcollector), who wrote to a Jewish audience, geared his Gospel to this crowd, which was intimately familiar with Jewish language, law, ritual, and covenant. He doesn't call the kingdom "The Kingdom of God" (except for only 2 instances) but instead calls it "The Kingdom of Heaven" so that the Jews would know that the kingdom wasn't merely a political kingdom established on earth by the authority of God, but that it is actually not finally of this world, but has its place in Heaven (where final Beatitude with God exists).

    Jesus is:

    1. The Son of David
    2. The anointed one (christos/messiah)
    3. The Temple builder (the Church)
    4. King of the (fulfilled) Davidic Kingdom

    I will restrict my analysis here to merely one of the many instances Matthew relates the Kingdom of Heaven to the fulfillment and elevation of the Davidic Kingdom.

    In the Davidic Kingdom, Solomon appointed a cabinet of royal ministers. He had ministers of defense, commerce, transportation, etc. We witness 12 of these royal ministers (1 Kings 4:7 - "Solomon had twelve officers over all Israel").

    The head minister (Prime Minister) was given the key of the Kingdom as the sign of his office/authority to have the same authority as the King when the King was away or unable to tend to particular issues.

    Isaiah prophesies to the corrupt Prime Minister Shebna that Eliakim will replace him in Isaiah 12:19-22 - "I will thrust you from your office, and you will be cast down from your station. In that day I will call my servant Eli'akim the son of Hilki'ah, and I will clothe him with your robe, and will bind your girdle on him, and will commit your authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open."

    Jesus appoints twelve royal ministers to tend to his kingdom with Peter as the prime minister. As Solomon built the Temple upon the rock of foundation (eben shetnyah), the new Solomon (Jesus) builds the new Temple (the Church) upon the new rock of foundation (Peter).

    In Mt 16:15-19, we see Jesus appoint Peter to this position: He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

    Peter is an English transliteration of the Gk for rock, which is "Petros", and the Gk. is a translation from the contemporary language of Jesus, which was Aramaic. The Aramaic word for rock is "Kephas" and the Gk. transliteration from the Aramaic is "Cephas". We have this name of Peter recorded 9 times in the NT. For instance, in John 1:42, the instant Jesus meets Simon, he renames Simon:

    "He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, 'So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas' which means Peter."

    Whenever God renames People in the Bible, he has large roles for them to fulfill. Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, Saul to Paul, Simon to Peter.

    The famous Protestant scholar W.F. Albright writes:

    "This is not a name, but an appellation and a play on words. There is no evidence of Peter or Kephas as a name before Christian times. . . . Peter as Rock will be the foundation of the future community. Jesus, not quoting the Old Testament, here uses Aramaic, not Hebrew, and so uses the only Aramaic word which would serve his purpose. In view of the background of vs. 19, one must dismiss as confessional interpretation any attempt to see this rock as meaning the faith, or the Messianic confession, of Peter. To deny the pre-eminent position of Peter among the disciples or in the early Christian community is a denial of the evidence. The interest in Peter's failures and vacillations does not detract from this pre-eminence; rather, it emphasizes it. Had Peter been a lesser figure his behavior would have been of far less consequence (cp. Gal 2:11 ff.). (W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1971), 195.)

    The Pope rightfully holds this office of Prime Minister as the successor to St. Peter here on Earth while our King mediates and intercedes for us in Heaven, building the Church day-by-day on earth upon Peter's office - which is the sign of sacerdotal unity. Just as the royal ministers held an office that had royal succession, the offices of the kingdom have apostolic succession. However, the King does not have successors because he reigns in heaven forever due to his resurrection.

    In 375 A.D., the Biblical scholar Jerome (who translated the OT and NT Scriptures from several different sources and languages to the Latin Vulgate that we have today) wrote to Pope Damasus I in Rome:

    ""Since the East, shattered as it is by the long-standing feuds, subsisting between its peoples, is bit by bit tearing into shreds the seamless vest of the Lord, woven from the top throughout,' since the foxes are destroying the vineyard of Christ, and since among the broken cisterns that hold no water it is hard to discover the sealed fountain' and the garden inclosed,' I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul. I appeal for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ. The wide space of sea and land that lies between us cannot deter me from searching for the pearl of great price.' Wheresoever the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together.' Evil children have squandered their patrimony; you alone keep your heritage intact. The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit an hundredfold; but here the seed corn is choked in the furrows and nothing grows but darnel or oats. In the West the Sun of righteousness is even now rising; in the East, Lucifer, who fell from heaven, has once more set his throne above the stars. Ye are the light of the world,' ye are the salt of the earth,' ye are "vessels of gold and of silver." Here are vessels of wood or of earth, which wait for the rod of iron,and eternal fire. Yet, though your greatness terrifies me, your kindness attracts me. From the priest I demand the safe-keeping of the victim, from the shepherd the protection due to the sheep. Away with all that is overweening; let the state of Roman majesty withdraw. My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built! This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails. But since by reason of my sins I have betaken myself to this desert which lies between Syria and the uncivilized waste, I cannot, owing to the great distance between us, always ask of your sanctity the holy thing of the Lord. Consequently I here follow the Egyptian confessors who share your faith, and anchor my frail craft under the shadow of their great argosies. I know nothing of Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I have nothing to do with Paulinus. He that gathers not with you scatters; he that is not of Christ is of Antichrist." (Epistle 15:1-2)

    I hope that I have shown you the Biblical basis for the centerpiece of Catholic thought. This is just one piece of the pie.. there are numerous more fulfillments of the Davidic Kingdom that Jesus comes to bring to fulfillment.

    God bless,

    Carson
     
  2. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know it's a long post, but I promise it's worth its weight in gold.

    [ March 05, 2002, 06:04 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]
     
  3. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    any comments? [​IMG]
     
  4. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know there are eager souls out there!
     
  5. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    any questions?
     
  6. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since you asked,

    On 2 Sam 7:19, you need to consult some commentaries and translations. It is a question: "Is this your usual or customary way of dealing with man?" You apparently are reading the RSV but it missed the point here.

    You further err when you say that the covenant was made with David’s son. It was not; it was made with David and included a promise to his son.

    Then you say that the covenant was for all mankind when such is foreign to the text. The covenant was made with David and expressly affected the nation of Israel as opposed to the rest of the gentile nations (vv. 10-11).

    You make God a liar when you say, “Solomon's kingdom didn't last forever as God promised to David in 2 Sam 7.” Clearly, this is not what God said. He said the throne of the kingdom, thereby indicating that it was a ruling family that he was establishing. No other family (besides David’s) would ever sit on the throne of Israel. The closest threat was in Isaiah 7 and it was thwarted. To this day, no one besides a descendant of David has ever sat on David’s throne. The “chair of David” as you say is still empty since the kingdom to which is belongs is not currently a theocracy.

    The Davidic covenant has nothing to do with Peter. It had to do with the ruling line of the nation of Israel. Here, you have stepped off the edge into something completely unsupported by Scripture. However, this line of thought shows the necessity you feel for papal authority. Were it not for papal authority such things would never be said because they certainly cannot be derived from Scripture.

    Thus, we can see that the Davidic covenant has not been fulfilled. Christ is not presently reigning on the Davidic throne. Rev 3:21 clearly shows that Christ is currently sitting on the Father’s throne and one day he will sit on his own. His own throne will be the Davidic throne when the kingdom of God is restored to earth.

    The (mediatorial) Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are the same thing and it is the earthly reign of the King over his realm. It is not presently in existence as Scripture describes it.

    Anyway, these are just a few brief comments about your post.
     
  7. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Pastor Larry,

    Thank you for your comments.

    Before I begin, I would like to point out 9 quick characteristics of the Davidic Kingdom:

    1. The son of David is the son of God.
    2. The Davidic King is the anointed one (Messiah/Christ)
    3. The kingdom is worldwide in scope (e.g. the Court of the Gentiles is the largest part of the Temple).
    4. It is established at Zion, not Sinai
    5. It involves the building of the Temple on the 'eben shetiyah (stone of foundation) w/ the Court of the Gentiles as opposed to the Tabernacle Tent which was exclusively for the 12 tribes of Israel.
    6. The Wisdom literature of the OT is the Torah (Law) of the Davidic Covenant (and is applicable to all of mankind) vs. the Mosaic Law, which was only for Israel.
    7. Prime Minister who was given the keys of the House of David (Is 22:9-23)
    8. Queen Mother (Gebirah = great lady - 1 Kg 2:19) ruled alongside the King for over 400 years as the lady counselor of wisdom
    9. The Todah offering (thank "Eucharistia" offering - Ps 50) is the central offering of the Temple as opposed to the Hattat (sin offering) of the Mosaic Covenant.

    These 9 characteristics are elevated as part of the New Covenant Kingdom of God:

    1. Jesus is the son of David by lineage, the Son of God by nature.
    2. Jesus is the Messiah/Christ (due to his Davidic pedagree and levitical anointing by John the Baptist)
    3. The kingdom is worldwide/universal (Catholic)
    4. The only time Jesus uses the word "covenant" is in the institution of the Eucharist in the Upper Room upon Mt. Zion when he says, "for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins."
    5. Jesus, the new Solomon (Mt 12:42), builds his Church, the new Temple, upon Peter, the new 'eben shetiyah.
    6. The Wisdom Literature speaks to us today as Christians.
    7. The New Prime Minister is Peter, whom is given the keys of the Kingdom (Mt 16:16-18).
    8. The New Gebirah (Queen Mother) is Mary (e.g. "Hail! Mary" in Luke 1:28).
    9. The New Todah is the Eucharist.

    You wrote, "On 2 Sam 7:19 .. It is a question: "Is this your usual or customary way of dealing with man?" You apparently are reading the RSV but it missed the point here."

    Yes, I'm reading the RSV, and I went past the RSV to quote the Hebrew, which is: "torah 'adam Adonai Jehovah", lit. "law for mankind (all of man) LORD God".

    "torah" = law & "'adam" = mankind.

    You wrote, "the covenant was for all mankind when such is foreign to the text. The covenant was made with David and expressly affected the nation of Israel as opposed to the rest of the gentile nations (vv. 10-11)"

    The covenant transforms Israel into a Dynasty/Kingdom, which is essentially a nation (Israel) that rules over other Gentile nations (e.g. England ruled over Australia, India, America, etc.).

    You wrote, "You make God a liar when you say, “Solomon's kingdom didn't last forever as God promised to David in 2 Sam 7.”"

    Well, thanks for the benefit of the doubt. Your benevolence couldn't be greater.. [​IMG]

    You wrote, "Clearly, this is not what God said. He said the throne of the kingdom, thereby indicating that it was a ruling family that he was establishing. No other family (besides David’s) would ever sit on the throne of Israel. The closest threat was in Isaiah 7 and it was thwarted. To this day, no one besides a descendant of David has ever sat on David’s throne. The “chair of David” as you say is still empty since the kingdom to which is belongs is not currently a theocracy."

    My point is that Jesus came to fill the chair of David as the "son of David", of which is referred to numerously throughout the New Testament. (Mt 1:1; Mt 9:27; Mt 12:23; Mt 15:22; Mt 20:30-31...)

    If you look at the first chapter of Matthew's Gospel, you'll see that Jesus has true Davidic lineage - 1:1 - "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham."

    This is crucial to understanding that Jesus is the "Messiah" and the "Son of David", which is none other than who Solomon was as well as the successive Davidic kings.

    v. 13 & 14 refer to both Solomon and Jesus (Solomon partially fulfilling the covenant promise and Jesus completely fulfilling it)

    "It is he who shall build a house for my name. And I will make his royal throne firm forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. And if he does wrong, I will correct him with the rod of men with human chastisements, but I will not withdraw my favor from him as I withdrew it from your predecessor Saul, whom I revoved from my presence. Your house and your kingdom shall endure forever before me; your throne shall stand firm forever."

    Has the Davidic kingdom endured forever? Yes, it has.. because Jesus came as the Son of David, true son of God, the anointed, to fulfill the Davidic covenant promises and elevate the covenant (as the Davidic Covenant elevates Israel from a nation to a national kingdom, the New Covenant elevates the national kingdom to an eternal kingdom). Since death has no power over Jesus, his kingdom is ensured to endure forever.

    You wrote, "The Davidic covenant has nothing to do with Peter."

    I show how Matthew, writing to a Palestinian/Jewish audience, portrays the Kingdom of Heaven as a fulfillment of the Davidic Kingdom with Ch. 16 showing Jesus est. the office of Prime Minister:

    Ch. 1 - Jesus has Davidic lineage
    Ch. 2 - Jesus is born in Bethlehem, David's birthplace
    Ch. 3 - Jesus receives a Levitical anointing in his Baptism, wherein John the Baptist, a Levite, baptizes Jesus and the Holy Spirit anoints him and God declares him as the Son of God (which Solomon was through the Davidic Covenant)
    Ch. 4 - Jesus proclaims the kingdom
    Ch. 5 - Jesus gives the royal law in the Sermon on the Mount
    Ch. 10 - Jesus establishes twelve Patriarchs or Cabinet Members (The 12 Apostolos) to rule over his kingdom.
    Ch. 16 - Peter is established as the Prime Minister

    My theme is not my own, but that of the New Testament; I'm merely pointing out what Matthew wrote.

    You wrote, "Here, you have stepped off the edge into something completely unsupported by Scripture. However, this line of thought shows the necessity you feel for papal authority. Were it not for papal authority such things would never be said because they certainly cannot be derived from Scripture."

    I believe that my presentation is comprised of none other than Scripture and the absolutely clear parallels between Jesus' actions/words and its OT Davidic background. The reader may decide for himself/herself, given the evidence.

    You wrote, "Thus, we can see that the Davidic covenant has not been fulfilled. Christ is not presently reigning on the Davidic throne."

    re: those verses that refer to Christ as "Son of David".

    You wrote, "Rev 3:21 clearly shows that Christ is currently sitting on the Father’s throne and one day he will sit on his own. His own throne will be the Davidic throne when the kingdom of God is restored to earth."

    With Jesus, the national Davidic Kingdom is elevated to the eternal kingdom of Heaven. No longer is the kingdom "of this world", but now it is eternal, heavenly.. the culmination of God's paternal care of his People on Earth - bringing them to their final end in heaven. The Davidic Kingdom was a prefigurement designed by God to foreshadow his rule over all creation.

    For a more in-depth look: http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/SLVHST4.TXT

    Thanks again for your comments.

    God bless,

    Carson

    [ March 09, 2002, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]
     
  8. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
  9. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    any other comments or questions?
     
  10. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi everyone,

    In case anyone on the board hasn't had a chance to read through the initial post in this thread, I want to bring it to the top of the list in order to give them a chance to do so.

    God bless,

    Carson
     
  11. Star

    Star
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    0
    Carson,

    I was SO BLESSED, thanks for sharing this here. I love your carefulness with scripture and the Testimony of Jesus Christ in it.

    God bless you In Christ Jesus [​IMG]

    In Him Kim
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    It never ceases to amaze me how lots of verbiage with bad theological argumentation gets the kudos of people. People think that anyone with a pen (or in this case a keyboard) and a concordance who can tie a couple of unrelated passages together has "killed the big one." We need to return to the discipline of critical thinking and exegesis rather than glib connections between unrelated ideas.
     
  13. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Pastor Larry,

    I absolutely agree with you.

    In this case, what I've presented above is a summary of a portion of what I have been learning this past Fall and this Spring from a Biblical scholar whose dissertation on Covenant and Kinship in Scripture has a Bibliography of 75 pages. He's also an internationally renown convert to Catholicism from a Calvinistic slant of Protestantism: the OPC. At age 26, he was offered the position of dean of seminary, and at one point in time was mentored by R.C. Sproul and himself taught R.C. Sproul's son Scripture.

    Maybe this bit of background information will give you an idea as to where I'm coming from.

    God bless,

    Carson
     
  14. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand where you are coming from. Where I am coming from however is based on the use of language, the patterns of fulfillment in Scripture, and the promises that remain as yet unfulfilled. No matter who the above comes from, if it does not match up with Scripture, then it is wrong and should be summarily rejected. Scripture is the test; not the degrees or background of the person presenting the material. We cannot permit Scripture to be misused if we are to maintain allegiance to it. For you and your persuasion, it is not as big an issue as it is for us because of your dual authority of Scripture and Tradition. For those of us who hold to Sola Scriptura, we cannot permit the misuse of Scripture. However, I will admit that many who claim Sola Scriptura do misuse Scripture. The person you reference above says what he does because of how he was trained. However, be that as it may, my point is that the material you presented above does not do justice to the biblical text and threatens to compromise the faithfulness of God by taking clear, explicit promises and leaving them unfulfilled.
     
  15. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Pastor Larry,

    You wrote, "The person you reference above says what he does because of how he was trained."

    Dr. Hahn was "trained" at a Protestant Calvinist seminary. And, being a Scripture scholar, he consults works apart from any "classes" he took years before in seminary. His doctoral dissertation is entitled "Kinship by Covenant" and is a work on the Bible alone.

    You wrote, "However, be that as it may, my point is that the material you presented above does not do justice to the biblical text and threatens to compromise the faithfulness of God by taking clear, explicit promises and leaving them unfulfilled."

    You assert that I implied God's promises were left unfulfilled, which runs contrary to what I posted. Now you're blindly attacking a straw man with a rod formulated out of ungrounded opinion. How can dialogue possibly remain fruitful with me if you can't "connect" with me by sticking to the facts? Why even post?

    The Promise God made to David:

    "He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. When he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men; but I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure for ever before me; your throne shall be established for ever.'"

    I said that this prophecy is immediately directed towards Solomon, but fulfilled in Christ. Never did I say that God made unfulfilled promises.

    Are you trying to say that Christ has absolutely nothing to do with the Davidic Covenant and that these words have nothing to do with Christ (all the while, we're employing the name "Christ", which means "anointed".. and is a Messianic title that refers explicitly to the King of David, who was the anointed over all of Israel)?

    I'm beginning to believe that you never even read the post in its entirety, taking together the points, to begin with.. in your haste to disagree with anything sounding "Catholic".

    God bless,

    Carson

    [ March 28, 2002, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]
     
  16. Star

    Star
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    0
    lol! Larry just "throws stones" (harmless really).

    Larry can you share with us the beauty of Christ in the scriptures?

    I felt what Carson shared was both edifying and beautiful. As a "pastor" you could "encourage" a bit more rather then fault find.

    Is there anything you consider uplifting, or do you have the ability in yourself to BE uplifting?

    You seem to lack the joy of the Lord whats the matter?

    In Him Kim

    [ March 28, 2002, 03:12 PM: Message edited by: Star ]
     
  17. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0


    I know this very well. Which is why I said what I did. The seminary at which is was taking classes suffers from some of the same difficulties I mentioned in the above post to you. Bad hermeneutics is not limited to Catholics.



    God made a covenant to David that is explicit. Yet you have redefined this covenant. That is why I said what I did. I do agree that the Covenant is fulfilled in Christ. But it has not yet happened. Christ is not ruling on the throne of David. When God says that he will preserve David's throne, he meant that. He did not mean anything other than that. Yet you would have us believe he meant something else ... some kind of papal throne or some such entity.



    Your position of necessity compromises the promises of God by changing the throne of David to something else.



    No. Christ is the ultimate Davidic ruler. This is testified to in numerous places in Scripture. The fallacy you have made is not this. It is the fallacy of changing the content of the promise away from what the promise actually says. I will show only a couple of places:

    You say However, Solomon's kingdom didn't last forever as God promised to David in 2 Sam 7. In 930, it was divided between north and soul (Israel/Judah), in 722, the Assyrians took Israel into captivity & exile, and in 586, Judah was exiled by the Babylonians as the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem was laid to waste.

    The Davidic kingdom did continue in the southern tribes which the Davidic descendant ruling. 1 Kings explicitly tells us this was because of the covenant made to David (1 Kings 11:13). In 586, the southern kingdom was taken captive. Yet the nation was not destroyed and more importantly, the throne of Israel was never occupied after 586 (the last Davidic descendant to sit on it) until this day. The reason is because there will never sit anyone other than a descendant of DAvid on that throne. Thus Christ is not yet sitting on the throne of David, something still to come, since God promised it.

    As an example of totally irrelevant passages being placed together, you cite 12 ministers of Solomon and 12 apostles of Christ. Yet if you look at the previous verses there are other offices in teh kingdom that preclude such cavalier identification. Just because the number 12 is used, we should not assume they refer to the same thing. Then you reference Shebnah (who was a scribe under Hezekiah, not a "prime minister" under Solomon) and comment on how he was replaced by Eliakim. Yet if you read to the end of the passage you find that Eliakim was also cut off. You simply cannot lift these Scriptures out of their historical and literary context, no matter who you are. Not even Scott Hahn should do this.

    Then you say that the Pope holds the position of Prime Minister. You give no Scriptural indication that the twelve apostles are in any related to 12 deputies of Solomon. Nor do you address that the role of these 12 deputies was to provide for the palace food for one month out of every year. They seem to have had no other role. Yet you have seized on the "twelve" aspect of it and made it to be something it never was meant to be.

    In your second post you say, The covenant transforms Israel into a Dynasty/Kingdom, which is essentially a nation (Israel) that rules over other Gentile nations (e.g. England ruled over Australia, India, America, etc.).

    Yet this is totally wrong with regard to the Davidic covenant. The davidic covenant came after Israel was already a dynasty/kingdom. The davidic covenant established a line of rulers and peace for the nation forever (2 Sam 7:10-11), something that has not yet happened. In your scheme, this promise goes unfulfilled. This is why I say that your position compromises the faithfulness of God by denying the fulfillment of clear promises.

    Then you say, Has the Davidic kingdom endured forever? Yes, it has.

    Yet here you show a misunderstanding of the Davidic kingdom. It was real kingdom with a throne and land and a people. Christ is the Davidic ruler yet he clearly is not ruling on the Davidic throne. Here you compromise the promises of God by changing the promise to be something now that it wasn't then. You cannot simply redefine a promise because you don't like the way that it is fulfilled. The fact that Jesus is the Son of David has nothing to do with his ruling. David had many sons who never ruled on the throne. I do not disagree with Jesus being the Son of David; he obviously was. I simply think that it has more biblical significance than you are willing to attach to it.

    You say, I believe that my presentation is comprised of none other than Scripture and the absolutely clear parallels between Jesus' actions/words and its OT Davidic background. The reader may decide for himself/herself, given the evidence

    This was in my response to your assertion that the pope is the successor of Peter. You still have not proven this from Scripture. Your "absolutely clear parallels" are far from it when they are actually studied in context.

    You say that the the national Davidic Kingdom is elevated to the eternal kingdom of Heaven. No longer is the kingdom "of this world", but now it is eternal, heavenly. Yet you offer no scriptural proof of this. In fact, you must again compromise the promises of God if this is to stand.

    I did read it. In fact, I read it several times before I decided to post on it. I have just now read it again briefly to address some points above. This view (linking the pope with the Davidic covenant) is so far out of mainstream evangelical thought that I questioned whether or not it was worth addressing.

    Anyway, our disagreement is on authority and hermeneutics.

    [ March 28, 2002, 03:26 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
     
  18. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0


    Yes I can when the beauty of Christ is shown. What Carson shared approaches a direct denial of the promises of God and therefore of the person of God. It also involves some very weak theological argumentation. Carson is a theological student. He should be used to having his views rigorously examined by others. What he is sharing here does not directly affect soteriology. Yet it has other ecclesiological and eschatological ramifications that he has apparently not delved deeply enough into. The hermeneutical construct with which he approaches the text is unsound. It has built a very weak house that is not based on accurate understanding of Scripture.



    I consider biblical truth very uplifting. In fact, this afternoon I am working on my Sunday message on "A Life Worth Living." I find it encouraging. In fact, I miss it even as I writing this becuase I do not find this encouraging. I find it rather disheartening.



    Not at all. I rejoice in the Lord every day. What I do not rejoice in in bad theology, no matter where it comes from.

    I have noticed in your posts Star that you do not exercise critical thinking skills in evaluating Scripture and ideas. We need to be developing this skills to understand the Word of God. We cannot simply take "hook, line, and sinker" those things which contain a Scripture or two. We must search the SCriptures daily to evaluate every thought, deed, and action and to bring it into obedience to Christ.

    I am concerned that on this board much false teaching is being propogated. Carson and others may be sincere and loving and nice people. Yet if they believe what the church believes, they are in serious trouble. This stuff that I and others are saying is neither new nor unloving. Many times, one of teh most difficult moments in ministry is to confront those who are disobedient to the truth. Most often it is rejected. Yet it does not lessen my responsibility as a pastor to love God and the His truth so much that I am willing to take a stand for it, even when it is unpopular. Our first allegiance is to God and his Truth. When I post I try to be loving and tactful but I will not beat around the bush, especially with a theology student who should know better.
     
  19. Star

    Star
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have noticed in your posts Star that you do not exercise critical thinking skills in evaluating Scripture and ideas. We need to be developing this skills to understand the Word of God. We cannot simply take "hook, line, and sinker" those things which contain a Scripture or two. We must search the SCriptures daily to evaluate every thought, deed, and action and to bring it into obedience to Christ.

    lol! Larry, where does it say we need superior intelligence in order to understand the spiritual truths of the scriptures? I thought, "not many of us were wise". So if someone sees something of Christ in the scriptures and brings forth Christ having in him a motive to see Christ theres nothing wrong with that. At least they are listening to Jesus in that He said the scriptures testify of Him.

    I do read the scriptures everyday [​IMG] All of us that love His word dig into it. But I do know one thing, that no matter what anyone shares is always a point in dispute with someone else. If your in one church you should be in another.If you say "grace" another says "law" that ol' double edge has us rightly divided among ourselves [​IMG] How brilliant is that?

    I must marvel though at those who say the love His word yet rarely use it at all, and when they use it all they find is a bunch of "dos and don'ts" not much unlike Isreal (history often repeats itself I suppose).

    I find Carson refreshing in his pursuit of seeing Jesus and I would encourage Him. I see what He is saying about "the twelve" I think he's onto something there that will be revealed as He continues. I haven't studied that one as in depth and would be greatly blessed in his sharing. Although I don't see "the pope" in it at all I think scripture bear witness of Christ in many ways and His connections are being drawn for spiritual insight concerning them. God rewards those who seek Him.

    What I find strange is to find Christian boards filled with mostly everything BUT the pursuit of Christ and the expounding of those things which are suppose to speak of HIM only to find a literal "reading" verses the testimony of Christ. I wouldn't want to put out the spiritual fire in anyones heart. If you speak of Jesus I'm there and WANT to be there. I find Carson to be going in that direction and I think hes right on. God gives more, understanding is with God by His Spirit.

    I am concerned that on this board much false teaching is being propogated. Carson and others may be sincere and loving and nice people. Yet if they believe what the church believes, they are in serious trouble. This stuff that I and others are saying is neither new nor unloving. Many times, one of teh most difficult moments in ministry is to confront those who are disobedient to the truth.

    To be sincere and loving is BEING OBEDIENT TO THE TRUTH. The Truth is the person of Christ and all the law and the prophets hang on love of both God and man. I see Carson searching everything out with the ability God has given him. The disciples walked with Christ three years and still didn't understand everything. In fact its very scriptural to determine to know nothing except Christ and Him crucified. Better yet to "think" you know anything at all is NOT to know as you ought. Because you can know all mysteries, have all knowledge and have not love and be nothing am isn't that true?

    What does scripture have to say about being "disobedient" to the truth? I think love is enough myself and walking in it toward others.We are to "grow" in the grace and knowledge of Christ, and encourage others in that respect. Jesus lowered himself in order to elevate the disciples, washing the feet of the disciples is a genuine show of humilty toward those who knew no better.

    Who of us believes alike according to all thats written? A babe is not aquainted in Righteousness, the natural mind sees the letter, the Spiritually minded see the Spirit yet not one of us knows everything and if we think we do we know not as we ought.

    A rebuke for sound doctrine would definately be in the realm of teaching that godliness is a means to "financial gain", something that appeals to the flesh and greed of men, and the like. But rebuking when obviously someone is getting into the word and "picking" when one has obviously has both a sincere and seeking heart looking for the hidden testimony of Christ in Gods word is another thing.

    I wish I found more like Carson in that regard. As great as it is seeing Jesus Christ its even better when someone shares in seeing the beauty of Him along side of you. I have woken up a long time ago believing that this is impossible unless God makes it happen, in the mean time I'll enjoy what I see alone because it blesses me in Christ, though it may not bless anyone else. I think it would be one fine day when the body of Christ starts looking for Him and sharing HIM from the word and their hearts, what a day that will be [​IMG]

    In Him Kim

    A student of "theology" or a student of Christ? The approaches can differ one from the other. One can be a "manmade" system constructed in the interpretation the other is by means of the Spirit by "revelation".The one uses "mind of man" the other the "Mind of Christ".

    [ March 28, 2002, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: Star ]
     
  20. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Pastor Larry,

    Thank you for addressing my post.

    You wrote, "I do agree that the Covenant is fulfilled in Christ. But it has not yet happened. Christ is not ruling on the throne of David."

    I believe that Christ, the son of David, is ruling over the Kingdom of Heaven, which is the restoration of the Davidic Kingdom.

    You wrote, "When God says that he will preserve David's throne, he meant that. He did not mean anything other than that. Yet you would have us believe he meant something else ... some kind of papal throne or some such entity."

    What is David's throne? It is a sign of the Davidic Covenant that stands for the son of David, who rules the Kingdom. There have been many of these (e.g. Solomon, Hezekiah, Josiah, etc.), and Jesus is the son of David.

    You wrote, "Thus Christ is not yet sitting on the throne of David, something still to come, since God promised it."

    So you're still looking for Christ to return as a political Messiah like the Jews still long for? I believe that Christ currently rules over his Kingdom, which is "of God" and "of Heaven"; it's both on Earth and in Heaven, hence, "Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven."

    You wrote, "As an example of totally irrelevant passages being placed together, you cite 12 ministers of Solomon and 12 apostles of Christ. Yet if you look at the previous verses there are other offices in teh kingdom that preclude such cavalier identification. Just because the number 12 is used, we should not assume they refer to the same thing."

    I apologize for my lack of clarity. I meant to show how Solomon had many different ministers to help him in caring for the Kingdom (and Jesus shares his authority w/ his Apostles - Mt 18:18 - as Solomon did w/ his royal ministers).

    Solomon explicitly had 12 royal ministers to provide food for the king and his household; this prefigures the 12 apostles who provide the Eucharist for the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth (as the 12 Tribes of Israel foreshadow the 12 Apostles of Jesus, the New Israel).

    You wrote, "Then you reference Shebnah (who was a scribe under Hezekiah, not a "prime minister" under Solomon) and comment on how he was replaced by Eliakim. Yet if you read to the end of the passage you find that Eliakim was also cut off."

    Hezekiah is a successor of Solomon; he was a christed son of David.. a Davidic king. As the office of kingship was genealogical by pedigree, the office of the prime royal minister was appointed by selection.

    God tells Isaiah, "Come, go to this steward, to Shebnah, who is over the household, and say to him.." Shebnah, under the Davidic king Hezekiah, was "over the household".

    This Davidic imagery provides a sensible background to understanding Jesus words to Peter in Mt 16; granted, it grants viability to the Papal office if it's true, and I wouldn't expect for you to affirm that.

    You wrote, "Christ is the Davidic ruler yet he clearly is not ruling on the Davidic throne. Here you compromise the promises of God by changing the promise to be something now that it wasn't then."

    But I do see Christ clearly ruling on the Davidic throne.. in heaven. I don't have the worldly vision of the Jews; my vision has been lifted to the spiritual vision of eternity.

    You wrote, "You say that the the national Davidic Kingdom is elevated to the eternal kingdom of Heaven. No longer is the kingdom "of this world", but now it is eternal, heavenly. Yet you offer no scriptural proof of this. In fact, you must again compromise the promises of God if this is to stand."

    Mt 3:2 - "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

    Mt 16:19 - "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

    God bless,

    Carson

    [ March 28, 2002, 11:15 PM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]
     

Share This Page

Loading...