A Psalm of David

S

Shibolet

Guest
A Psalm of David

Psalm 110 - "The Lord said to me, "Sit at My right hand until I make of your enemies your footstool." Now, here is how and why the above quote is right in spite of the Christian KJB: Logic states that it is how David was inspired to write the above psalm.

As the Psalm above was selected to be chanted by the Levites in the Temple, it must have become disingenuously awkward for the Levites to chant, "The Lord said to me." Hence, an amend was prone to be made and the Psalm became, "The Lord (God) said to my lord (David) sit at my right hand until I make of your enemies your footstool.

So, either the Hellenist who wrote the gospel of Matthew or the Fathers of the Church found no harm in capitalizing the second "lord" but a pious necessity to do so in order to enhance Jesus' credibility as the one. So, the forgery was done but, the Jewish JPS translation of the Hebrew text preferred to stick to the obviousness not to capitalize the second "lord".

Then a poster asked me, did David have any history of saying, "The Lord said to me?" Yes, if you read Psalm 2:7 in another Psalm of his which by the way was also plagiarized by Paul and interpreted in his letter to the Hebrews as a pious forgery. And the same poster said, "Let me try to rephrase my question: Do you have any history from anywhere else in the Scriptures akin to, the "Lord" said to my "lord", do this or that?

Yes, and by the way, that's a good question. We have in Numbers 36:2 which we read as follows: "The "Lord" commanded "my lord" to give the Land for an inheritance to the children of Israel... Okay, he said, it is all clear now. Thank you.
 
So he is enamored with the umop epispn 666??

reversin devil? never contemplated that....

I was wondering if Shib was separating himself from Ben's rhetoric? the new and improved Ben? I'd like to hear....
 
I don't know, we are an interfaith discussion board...yes there is anonymity on these online forums....but... our goal is amicable discussion, exchange of information, thoughts, beliefs... You can conceal who you are if you choose, no worries there...but leaving and then coming back as another without an explanation of the reason for two personas...

I see it as disingenuous to the forum... we do have other multiples....I don't know... for me, if you wanna have serious discussion...clear the air...state agendas.
 
wil said:
So he is enamored with the umop epispn 666??

reversin devil? never contemplated that....

I was wondering if Shib was separating himself from Ben's rhetoric? the new and improved Ben? I'd like to hear....
Click to expand...

I would like to remind you that the thread is about a Psalm of David and not about Ben or Shib. If you have read the thread, how about some more fruitful comment? Ben or Shib is not important.
 
wil said:
I don't know, we are an interfaith discussion board...yes there is anonymity on these online forums....but... our goal is amicable discussion, exchange of information, thoughts, beliefs... You can conceal who you are if you choose, no worries there...but leaving and then coming back as another without an explanation of the reason for two personas...

I see it as disingenuous to the forum... we do have other multiples....I don't know... for me, if you wanna have serious discussion...clear the air...state agendas.
Click to expand...

That's what I have been waiting for: Serious discussions and not about personal interests. When are you guys going to come up with some intelligent comments about Psalm 110 of David?
 
Net everyone will want to discuss what a poster wants to discuss, and sometimes we want to know why the poster posts what it posts. His agenda, as wil likes to put it.
 
While I look at content, I also like to review the source...and past statements made by the source, under whatever psuedonyms they choose...it provides additional information.

Who is “Jehovah” and who is “my Lord” in Psalm 110:1? “Jehovah” is God and “my Lord” is the Christ. The Christ is the Son of God, or the divine idea, man. As the only-begotten Son of God the Christ is the embodiment not of love (David) alone but of all divine ideas, including intelligence, life, substance, and strength. https://s3.amazonaws.com/truthunity/books/unity-bible-lessons/psalms-110.pdf
 
wil said:
While I look at content, I also like to review the source...and past statements made by the source, under whatever psuedonyms they choose...it provides additional information.

Who is “Jehovah” and who is “my Lord” in Psalm 110:1? “Jehovah” is God and “my Lord” is the Christ. The Christ is the Son of God, or the divine idea, man. As the only-begotten Son of God the Christ is the embodiment not of love (David) alone but of all divine ideas, including intelligence, life, substance, and strength. https://s3.amazonaws.com/truthunity/books/unity-bible-lessons/psalms-110.pdf
Click to expand...
"the Christ"? since Christ is a greek-english translation of the anointed one, (of which all kings/leaders of Israel were) why do you assume it is talking about Jesus (PBUH) and not David (PBUH) who was also of the anointed? You would be far fetched to say every time God/prophet of God mentions "Son of God" that it is referring to Jesus (PBUH). Much of the OT goes to make it clear no man can be God, so using sources from the OT probably isn't the best way to validate your position. Numbers 23:19 seems very clear that God is not man, nor the Son of Man... So how could Jesus (PBUH) be God? How could you believe a God who tells you he isn't a man, and later becomes a man is also a bigger question? That's like me telling you I would kill someone for smoking crack, then you find me a year later behind a dumpster smoking crack. Would you believe me about anything later? What if my promise is what is keeping you alive? "I swear I will not have you killed, and I will kill anyone smoking crack." Then you caught me smoking crack even though I still (hypothetically... obviously)the power to have you killed. Would you want to stay under my rule or would you try to go for safety somewhere else?
 
I really don't understand how God CAN'T (as in it's not in his power) to take the shape of a man and speak through him. Why can't he do that? Why wouldn't he do that? Believing that he didn't do that is one thing, but that Jesus CAN'T be God is beyond my comprehension.
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
I really don't understand how God CAN'T (as in it's not in his power) to take the shape of a man and speak through him. Why can't he do that? Why wouldn't he do that? Believing that he didn't do that is one thing, but that Jesus CAN'T be God is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...
Power to do... I agree with you.

That God would Lie and say he is not man and then become man, is an attribute also in that same Numbers reference. If he will not (possibly cannot based on his attributes of goodness) Lie and he "is not man nor the son of man", then it is a very strong argument that Jesus (PBUH) (A man, and son of man (human)) is not/was not/ nor can be God.

However, in defense of some of the Christian logic, "is not" could be present tense and he later became, which is a few denomonations' view.
 
In response to both posts.... to be Christed.... Joe the Christ, Cup the Christ... Jesus the Christ... yeah...annointed one... one that grocks oneness with the One...
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
I really don't understand how God CAN'T (as in it's not in his power) to take the shape of a man and speak through him. Why can't he do that? Why wouldn't he do that? Believing that he didn't do that is one thing, but that Jesus CAN'T be God is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...
I know. It becomes doubly ludicrous when people insist on what can and can't be, and yet have no grasp of the meaning of incarnation or hypostatic union.

So basically the argument is opinion, no matter how erroneous, ill-informed or warped by prejudice, is declared as if that trumps a worked-out philosophy.

The subtext being, 'you can't believe in any testimony, except mine' :D
 
BigJoeNobody said:
That God would Lie and say he is not man and then become man, is an attribute also in that same Numbers reference. If he will not (possibly cannot based on his attributes of goodness) Lie and he "is not man nor the son of man", then it is a very strong argument that Jesus (PBUH) (A man, and son of man (human)) is not/was not/ nor can be God.
Click to expand...

Let's try this distinction. Jesus is God but God is no Jesus. See what I mean?

God was not born on the day Jesus was born, he was there all along, he is not man nor was he born by man. He did however, according to many Christians, have a part of him that was man-shaped.

Thomas, it has never occurred to me to ask, what was Jesus nature before he was born, or is it wrong to speak of the trinity before the son?
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
Let's try this distinction. Jesus is God but God is no Jesus. See what I mean?

God was not born on the day Jesus was born, he was there all along, he is not man nor was he born by man. He did however, according to many Christians, have a part of him that was man-shaped.

Thomas, it has never occurred to me to ask, what was Jesus nature before he was born, or is it wrong to speak of the trinity before the son?
Click to expand...
I think what this discussionis missing is a finite definition of belief. We can try to discuss how 1 = A but A =/= 1. Or we can discuss how the form was always there, but did not materialize until a certain time. Basically I'm saying that unless you pick which Christian you are talking to, it tends to get to, "No it's like this" back and forth...
 
Yes Joe, that works with most traditions hence the denominations of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism...

we are discussing the unknown...

Cup is asking for Thomas's viewpoint on this portion of the unknown.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top