ECT Fundamental question: how can the one David referred to be his son?

[Interplanner]

One part of understanding this line is the scene itself; the other part is to notice this is after the vineyard and wedding parables and before ch 23.

We know that Judaism was looking for David's son to appear because of all the MAD/D'ist people here obsessed with that. (D'ism is a way of doing Judaism with a modern twist). So it was logical in Mt 22:42 to do a climactic come-back to Judaism, to all its pesky questions. 'What do you (Judaism) think about the Christ? Whose son is he?'

We know the answer.

But this is not what Ps 110 is saying. The psalm is saying that he is the Lord of the universe, and David's lord. So he can't just be David's son as they knew it.

That is the whole point. Christ is not then nor in the future to be that kind of son. It is not what those passages were about. They were shadows or copies or 'types' of the reality that was coming in Christ. D'ism and MAD, like Judaism, are stuck in the former.

By the way, he won. I'm not sure if D'ism gets that.

Then came ch 23, the blast on Judaism, which ends with the declaration that the 'house' is already desolate (the term from Dan 9, which pops up again in 20 verses), except for those who sing Psalm 118 about him.

THE SETTING
But we can't forget that this comes after the general dismissal of Judaism in 21's vineyard parable and 22's wedding parable. The vineyard parable was 'talking about them.' He said another 'ethne' was going to take the place of Judaism. Not just take the place either. There would be destruction. There was going to be a king whose wedding invite was chided. The refused king sends his ARMY and BURNS down the city of the refusers. It was a pretty rough week for Judaism in general.

And now this--this denunciation of their doctrine of the son of David, which is what our friends here think is still going to happen. Apparently they can accuse people of making God a liar, but if God punishes a whole city for the wrong 'son of David' and then blesses that city X000 years later for the wrong son of David, it's OK. Yeah, right.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

:chuckle:

Poor obsessed IP.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

IP is constantly scrambling to "figure out" the Bible instead of just believing what it says.
Wicked skepticism...

 

[steko]

Sounds to me like Jesus of Nazareth is the literal, physical son[descendant] of David.

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

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:

Rom_1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;


2Ti 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

 

[Tambora]

We know that Judaism was looking for David's son to appear because of all the MAD/D'ist people here obsessed with that.

You need to correct this statement.
It is not because of MAD/D'ist people that Israel was looking for David's son to appear.
It is because GOD told them He would be a physical descendant of David's own flesh body.

 

[steko]

IP is constantly scrambling to "figure out" the Bible instead of just believing what it says.
Wicked skepticism...

I think it's some kind of triadic mental process...thesis > antithesis > synthesis.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I think it's some kind of triadic mental process...thesis > antithesis > synthesis.

He's too "smart" to take it at face value.

 

[Tambora]

Sounds to me like Jesus of Nazareth is the literal, physical son[descendant] of David.

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

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:

Rom_1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;


2Ti 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

:thumb:
Scripture leaves no doubt about it!

Plenty more:

Matthew 21:9 KJV
(9) And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.​

Mark 11:9-10 KJV
(9) And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:
(10) Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.​

John 7:42 KJV
(42) Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?​

 

[steko]

:thumb:
Scripture leaves no doubt about it!

Plenty more:

Matthew 21:9 KJV
(9) And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.​

Mark 11:9-10 KJV
(9) And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:
(10) Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.​

John 7:42 KJV
(42) Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?​

Yep! How doth one miss it?

 

[Interplanner]

Yep! How doth one miss it?

You are missing the whole point L&Gs. He was that lineage AND IT DID NOT MATTER!!! How can he then be his son? is the final question from the Lord Jesus Christ and it stops the Davidolatry of the Pharisees in its ruts.

 

[Interplanner]

I think it's some kind of triadic mental process...thesis > antithesis > synthesis.

Just knock it off and reconstruct what happened there when he shut down the Pharisees.

 

[Interplanner]

He stopped Davidolatry, as he should.

 

[steko]

You are missing the whole point L&Gs. He was that lineage AND IT DID NOT MATTER!!! How can he then be his son? is the final question from the Lord Jesus Christ and it stops the Davidolatry of the Pharisees in its ruts.

He was of that lineage and it mattered immeasurably.
Christ Jesus, because of His lineage, is the only man since Jehoachin qualified to inherit the throne of David.

 

[steko]

He stopped Davidolatry, as he should.

Who worshipped/worships King David?

 

[Interplanner]

Who worshipped/worships King David?

When you place it so important as to miss that Christ jesus and his gospel was what it was all about, you are worshipping David. You then think he will be reincarnated. You think his son has a magic power. These things are only true in Christ, but if they had been true in the sense which Judaism held, there would not have been the stubborn silence of rejection found in those conversations in Mt 22.

The NT is saying that those passages are about Christ as we now know him. They are not meant in the ordinary sense about a theocracy to be set up in Judea back then or in our future.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Just knock it off and reconstruct what happened there when he shut down the Pharisees.

Barking orders? Are you a Mod now?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

When you place it so important as to miss that Christ jesus and his gospel was what it was all about, you are worshipping David. You then think he will be reincarnated. You think his son has a magic power. These things are only true in Christ, but if they had been true in the sense which Judaism held, there would not have been the stubborn silence of rejection found in those conversations in Mt 22.

The NT is saying that those passages are about Christ as we now know him. They are not meant in the ordinary sense about a theocracy to be set up in Judea back then or in our future.

:chuckle:

Poor skeptic

 

[steko]

We know that Judaism was looking for David's son to appear because of all the MAD/D'ist people here obsessed with that.

We know that many in Israel were looking for David's son to appear because Israel's prophets said so.

There were no MADists there. MAD stands for Mid-Acts-Dispensationalism, which respects the Lord Jesus selection of Saul of Tarsus to be his unique Apostle to the nations, post-Pentecost, post-Stephen's death.

(D'ism is a way of doing Judaism with a modern twist).

Dispensationalism recognizes GOD's setting aside the nation of Israel from their former position of privilege and has no connection to Rabbinical Judaism.

So it was logical in Mt 22:42 to do a climactic come-back to Judaism, to all its pesky questions. 'What do you (Judaism) think about the Christ? Whose son is he?'

Yhe fact which Christ was pin-pointing in Mt 22:42-45 was not a denial that He was the literal genealogical descendant of King David, but that He was both that and LORD/Deity at the same time.
Christ's deity was the reality that the Pharisees, Scribes...leadership of Israel could not accept and repeatedly attempted to kill Him for claiming it.

We know the answer.

Actually...you don't appear to.

But this is not what Ps 110 is saying. The psalm is saying that he is the Lord of the universe, and David's lord. So he can't just be David's son as they knew it.

True.

That is the whole point.

No...it's half the point.

Christ is not then nor in the future to be that kind of son.

You mean He's not intended to be the 'kind of son' that is the legitimate heir of His father David's throne as GOD plainly declared through the Prophets?

It is not what those passages were about.

Yes, they are. They are about David's Son as being both LORD/Deity and Messiah/man.

They were shadows or copies or 'types' of the reality that was coming in Christ.

No, it's plain fact.

D'ism and MAD, like Judaism, are stuck in the former.

Dispensationalists believe what GOD says literally about the SON of David. It's too bad, you don't.

By the way, he won.

Indeed, He did.

I'm not sure if D'ism gets that.

We get it and more than you understand.

Then came ch 23, the blast on Judaism, which ends with the declaration that the 'house' is already desolate (the term from Dan 9, which pops up again in 20 verses), except for those who sing Psalm 118 about him.

The 'blast' was on that generation and leadership of the nation of Israel for their unbelief.

Those that sing Ps 118 were multitudes of Israelites in Mt 21:9 as Christ fulfilled Zech 9:9, literally. He will fulfill Zech 9:10 in the future just as literally.
Another generation of called Israel, to whom the Kingdom will be given, will yet address Christ, "Baruch habah b'shem Yeshua Adonai!!!".

THE SETTING
But we can't forget that this comes after the general dismissal of Judaism in 21's vineyard parable and 22's wedding parable. The vineyard parable was 'talking about them.' He said another 'ethne' was going to take the place of Judaism. Not just take the place either. There would be destruction. There was going to be a king whose wedding invite was chided. The refused king sends his ARMY and BURNS down the city of the refusers. It was a pretty rough week for Judaism in general.

The dismissal was of the religious leadership of Israel and the unbelieving populace of Israel in that generation.

The 'another ethne/nation' will be another generation of that people....Israel.

Luk 12:32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.



The Body of Christ in this dispensation is not 'a nation' but is a new creation composed of believers from all nations without partiality. The 'nations', as a group, are now grafted into the position of blessing and privilege which Israel formerly occupied as the chosen nation.

And now this--this denunciation of their doctrine of the son of David, which is what our friends here think is still going to happen.

Their doctrine of the son of David lacked the recognition of His Deity. They were not wrong concerning the physical lineage from which the Son of David was to come. The physical lineage of Luke 3 and the Kingly lineage of Mt 1, GOD placed there for an important reason. You evidently think they're not important.

Apparently they can accuse people of making God a liar, but if God punishes a whole city for the wrong 'son of David' and then blesses that city X000 years later for the wrong son of David, it's OK. Yeah, right.

Well, He obviously wasn't the wrong Son of David and He won't be at 'His appearing and His Kingdom'. 2Ti 4:1

 

[Tambora]

He was of that lineage and it mattered immeasurably.
Christ Jesus, because of His lineage, is the only man since Jehoachin qualified to inherit the throne of David.

Yeppers.

 

[Tambora]

We know that many in Israel were looking for David's son to appear because Israel's prophets said so.

There were no MADists there. MAD stands for Mid-Acts-Dispensationalism, which respects the Lord Jesus selection of Saul of Tarsus to be his unique Apostle to the nations, post-Pentecost, post-Stephen's death.



Dispensationalism recognizes GOD's setting aside the nation of Israel from their former position of privilege and has no connection to Rabbinical Judaism.



Yhe fact which Christ was pin-pointing in Mt 22:42-45 was not a denial that He was the literal genealogical descendant of King David, but that He was both that and LORD/Deity at the same time.
Christ's deity was the reality that the Pharisees, Scribes...leadership of Israel could not accept and repeatedly attempted to kill Him for claiming it.



Actually...you don't appear to.




True.



No...it's half the point.



You mean He's not intended to be the 'kind of son' that is the legitimate heir of His father David's throne as GOD plainly declared through the Prophets?




Yes, they are. They are about David's Son as being both LORD/Deity and Messiah/man.




No, it's plain fact.




Dispensationalists believe what GOD says literally about the SON of David. It's too bad, you don't.



Indeed, He did.



We get it and more than you understand.



The 'blast' was on that generation and leadership of the nation of Israel for their unbelief.

Those that sing Ps 118 were multitudes of Israelites in Mt 21:9 as Christ fulfilled Zech 9:9, literally. He will fulfill Zech 9:10 in the future just as literally.
Another generation of called Israel, to whom the Kingdom will be given, will yet address Christ, "Baruch habah b'shem Yeshua Adonai!!!".





The dismissal was of the religious leadership of Israel and the unbelieving populace of Israel in that generation.

The 'another ethne/nation' will be another generation of that people....Israel.

Luk 12:32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.



The Body of Christ in this dispensation is not 'a nation' but is a new creation composed of believers from all nations without partiality. The 'nations', as a group, are now grafted into the position of blessing and privilege which Israel formerly occupied as the chosen nation.



Their doctrine of the son of David lacked the recognition of His Deity. They were not wrong concerning the physical lineage from which the Son of David was to come. The physical lineage of Luke 3 and the Kingly lineage of Mt 1, GOD placed there for an important reason. You evidently think they're not important.




Well, He obviously wasn't the wrong Son of David and He won't be at 'His appearing and His Kingdom'. 2Ti 4:1

Very good post.