Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ARCHIVE: Reason to Believe: Ps. 22

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    David (or whoever is traditionally associated with Psalmic authorship) is asking God, in the present tense, to help him defeat his enemies. Read Psalm 12-18. He is asking for help for defending himself against a military threat, not making a prophecy. When he is defeated by the Gentile armies, they divided up his possessions and David prays in desperation to be saved from starvation, dehydration and battle wounds.

    If Jesus selectively used these verses to apply to himself--then good for him! But they have nothing to do with prophecy.

    We can all talk about implications. They are not evidence but belong to the realm of speculation.

    Comment


    • #62
      Sounds like one or two folk have embraced theologies that preclude the plain implications contained in the 22nd Psalm. May I suggest that instead of twisting the meaning of Psa 22 to conform to your theology, you instead adjust your theology to conform to what Psa 22 says.
      Mateo,
      Perhaps you could share your view. Do you regard Psalm 22 as messianic?
      That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world.
      Philippians 2:15

      Comment


      • #63
        LightSon,

        Not to duck your question, but haven't we had this discussion already?

        http://www.theologyonline.com/vbulle...5&pagenumber=2
        FAITH IS AS FAITH DOES---- Forest Gump?
        http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10576

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Mateo
          LightSon,

          Not to duck your question, but haven't we had this discussion already?
          You have a good memory.
          Yes I do recall discussion Psalm 22 with you. As I recall, your main point was
          I do not believe God turned His back on His Son at the cross. This notion gained some currency in several of the patented answer factories (seminaries, cemetaries, whatever) by those who either could not or would not make the connection between what Jesus uttered on the cross and the first line of Psalm 22. Jesus was pointing any and all to the Psalm which spoke of the cross so long before He was ever nailed to it. He was not lamenting the absense of His omnipresent Father or His gaze.

          Concerning the notion that God cannot look upon sin and turned His back on His Son because of it, I leave you with the following verses:
          So I understand you reject the notion of God "turning His back on sin and hence His Son", although I must confess I was really never satisfied with your interpretation of what exactly Jesus meant by exclaiming, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

          Your view as to whether the Psalm is messianic in a larger context is still obscure to me, but that's okay. I find many of the Psalms to be messianic, reflecting the very heart of Christ.
          That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world.
          Philippians 2:15

          Comment


          • #65
            LightSon,

            By way of clarification; to me it is somewhat ludicrous to conclude that lines which are so crucifixion/Christ specific should be attributed to David. The following are but a few examples:



            Psa 22:7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
            8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

            Luke 23:35 And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God.
            36 And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar,
            37 And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself.



            Psa 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
            (I am unaware of anything in the history of David that would account for this line but Christ's crucifiction is a worthy match).



            Psa 22:18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

            Mat 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots. ( exactly which prophet do you contend is referred to here if not David?)



            Ps 22:22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.

            Heb 2:11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,
            12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.



            There is nothing in the record of David's life which would allow for these passages to be attributed to his experience which in my mind begs the question, "If not David , who?". For me and others the answer is obvious. For you it is apparently not... a pity.


            Love,

            Mateo
            FAITH IS AS FAITH DOES---- Forest Gump?
            http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10576

            Comment


            • #66
              "There is nothing in the record of David's life which would allow for these passages to be attributed to his experience..."

              What rules of evidence are you using here? More importantly, why are such passages written in the Psalms?

              Comment


              • #67
                "What rules of evidence are you using here?"


                The Bible...


                "why are such passages written in the Psalms?"


                For our admonition.
                FAITH IS AS FAITH DOES---- Forest Gump?
                http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10576

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Mateo
                  "What rules of evidence are you using here?"
                  The Bible...

                  "why are such passages written in the Psalms?"
                  For our admonition.
                  We use rules of evidence to evaluate Scripture, even if we are not aware of them. It pays to discover what these rules are (often described under the umbrella term hermenuetics).
                  An unexamined approach to the Bible is not worth much when discussing theology.

                  To put the question in a more focused way, what biblically-based legitimate standards are you using for what is presented in the Psalms to determine which parts apply to David's experience (the traditional view) and which parts apply to Jesus' life?

                  And given these standards, how are they applied in a consistent methodology?

                  I feel it is important for today's believers to engage in this behavior I call "thinking." It keeps us from rolling over and accepting conventional wisdom that may have nothing to do with actual textual data and evidence.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    aikido7 stated:

                    "We use rules of evidence to evaluate Scripture, even if we are not aware of them. It pays to discover what these rules are (often described under the umbrella term hermenuetics).
                    An unexamined approach to the Bible is not worth much when discussing theology."


                    Well freind, I have a passing familiarity with English and I have read the passage above several times but I can't seem to make heads or tales of it.


                    "To put the question in a more focused way, what biblically-based legitimate standards are you using for what is presented in the Psalms to determine which parts apply to David's experience (the traditional view) and which parts apply to Jesus' life?

                    And given these standards, how are they applied in a consistent methodology?"


                    If I understand the question above correctly (and that's a big if) I offer the following sciptures by way of reply;

                    James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

                    john 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
                    13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
                    14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
                    15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

                    Prov 2:6 For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.

                    1Cor 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
                    13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.


                    "I feel it is important for today's believers to engage in this behavior I call "thinking." It keeps us from rolling over and accepting conventional wisdom that may have nothing to do with actual textual data and evidence."

                    This is all well and good. Just have a care that you don't become too enamored of your own intellect. The best of us know nothing now as we should.

                    Love,

                    Mateo
                    FAITH IS AS FAITH DOES---- Forest Gump?
                    http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10576

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      You cannot argue from rules or standards by invoking those same standards as a basis for your arguments.

                      One cannot, for instance, say that a stop sign means "stop" simply because it is a stop sign.

                      Similarly, one cannot (with integrity) make a statement such as "There is nothing in the record of David's life which would allow for these passages to be attributed to his experience..." without providing specific evidence and/or a methodology out in the open for all to review that demonstrates first, that there is nothing in the life of David which makes possible such passages and second, that the Psalms are traditionally said to have been written by David himself.

                      And because I maybe paid attention in high school English class, do a lot of reading or worked on expanding my vocabulary does not mean I am "too enamored of (my) own intellect." You are again making a judgement without firm evidence.

                      We all see the Bible through a different lens. It is only honest to recognize the lens you are using, admit to it and use information to back up your choices.
                      Last edited by aikido7; October 19, 2003, 01:29 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        "One cannot, for instance, say that a stop sign means "stop" simply because it is a stop sign."







                        Remind me to introduce you to Hilston...
                        FAITH IS AS FAITH DOES---- Forest Gump?
                        http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10576

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Great answer! You didn't duck the question, you actually thought about what was written and you did it with honor and grace!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Friend, you just said a stop sign does not necessarily mean stop. This logic carried forward to the subject at hand would eventually arrive at the door step of God isn't necessarily God, Jesus isn't necessarily Jesus, etc. If, like Hilston, you redifine words as you go it is impossible to have any meaningful dialog. It's like talking to someone on LSD... reality is malliable. Though I have attempted to talk to the likes of Squeaky, Polycarp et. al. in the hopes of communication, even I am not willing to go this far.

                            Love,

                            Mateo
                            FAITH IS AS FAITH DOES---- Forest Gump?
                            http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10576

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              "One cannot, for instance, say that a stop sign means "stop" simply because it is a stop sign."

                              "...you just said a stop sign does not necessarily mean stop."

                              (... and so much for the validity of passing on written and oral tradition)

                              So it is truly an amazing miracle that our two ears are even with our eyes so that eyeglasses will fit, or that God put holes in the skin of cats exactly where their eyes are located!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Mateo
                                Friend, you just said a stop sign does not necessarily mean stop. This logic carried forward to the subject at hand would eventually arrive at the door step of God isn't necessarily God, Jesus isn't necessarily Jesus, etc. attempted to talk to the likes of Squeaky, Polycarp et. al. in the hopes of communication, even I am not willing to go this far.
                                Love,

                                Mateo
                                Our idea of God is way below what God is; likewise our idea of Jesus comes (to most believers) through the canonical gospels which are second- and third-hand information.

                                If, like Hilston, you redifine words as you go it is impossible to have any meaningful dialog. It's like talking to someone on LSD... reality is malliable.
                                You claim I redefined words in this thread and stopped meaningful dialogue. I am not aware that I did, but maybe you are right. Why don't you show me specific instances and we can go over them together?

                                (For the record, I think truth and reality are absolute, but our perspectives on them are malleable. I have only to read the New Testament or these message boards for any evidence of that fact)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X