Job's Wish

Rachel Redux

Active member
It's easy to see RR in Psalm 89:13 that God's right arm is associated with strength and might.

Psalm 89:21,25, show that God's right arm strengthens David, and David uses his right arm in a show of strength.
That does NOT answer my question. When was David ever promised that he would sit at God's right hand?
Saying that God's right arm represents strength is something else entirely.

And this point knocks Jesus out of contention since he was not the fruit of a male descendant of David. Isaiah 11:1 brings home this point since the shoot, stump, root, branch, and fruit must all be male. Mary has no part in any of this.
He was Joseph's adopted son. How is he ruled out?
 

Rachel Redux

Active member
THIS PSALM is what states that David sits at God's right hand. It is a figurative remark (God has no right hand to sit on) that speaks of the importance and dearness of David to God, and means that David acts on behalf of God (the right hand signifying strength.)
Um...no...it's a specific promise to David's descendant. It doesn't apply to David. Nice try, though.

Of the fruit of thy body I will set upon THY throne (not my throne). This only means that davids descendents will also be royal.

Still waiting for YOUR evidence that Psalm 110 applies to the messiah.
It's all over the NT. Since you'll just come back saying you don't believe the NT, I won't bother answering you.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
That does NOT answer my question. When was David ever promised that he would sit at God's right hand?
God doesn't have hands, feet, and body, etc. Do you understand what's going on?

Saying that God's right arm represents strength is something else entirely.
No. Sitting by God's right side is not to be taken literally. Even Jesus tells Peter that God is neither flesh nor blood.

He was Joseph's adopted son. How is he ruled out?
Because Davidic lineage is by physical descent from the fathers. That's why the references to fruit, shoot, branch, root, are all in the male form.

From the male loins and seed of David. Unless your woke, Mary has neither.
 

Open Heart

Well-known member
Um...no...it's a specific promise to David's descendant. It doesn't apply to David. Nice try, though.
It never mentions anyone's descendents. You made that up.
It's all over the NT. Since you'll just come back saying you don't believe the NT, I won't bother answering you.

So if you knew my answer, why did you bother? Anyhow, ignore away.
 
Last edited:

Yodas_Prodigy

Well-known member
Oh, did I?
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.” Psalm 132:11
That would be his descendents. 😉

Yes, Jesus is a descendent of David... But you deny that and don't accept the New Testament...
 

Rachel Redux

Active member
You have been informed MANY times that Davidic descent goes through the bio fathers. Not mothers. Not foster dads. So unless you are willing to say that Joseph is Jesus bio dad, you are out of luck.
You're wrong.

[While it is true that kingship must be by bloodline, not adoption, this assumes that Jesus was adopted by Joseph. There is no reason to believe he was, Scriptural or otherwise. In fact, Jesus was counted as legally Joseph’s son and, therefore, available to inherit everything from Joseph. This is because Joseph did not put Mary aside—“divorcing” her within the betrothal period—thereby acknowledging that the baby was legally to be his son. The issue of DNA is irrelevant. DNA might be useful in today’s society for proof of blood lineage, but it has no place in the legal system of first-century Jewish thinking.

However, contrary to the opinion of your correspondent, it is, in fact, possible for women to inherit tribal affiliation under certain conditions. The key passage in the Old Testament proving this point is Numbers 27:1–11.

So, the red herring of mtDNA and Y-DNA is irrelevant. Old Testament law accepts that both Mary and Jesus are of the tribe Judah.]

 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
I don't see that it's all that clear it has to be through the male line.
It's clear if you look at the prophecies given here to you and previously when we've discussed this.

Mary can neither sit on throne nor pass this legal right to her children. The rights are passed king to king, male to child in the case of tribal lineage.
 
Top