Was King David hypocritical here (not about the mother of Solomon)?

[NewChapter]

I didn't see this answer from any Jewish commentaries, this is coming from myself.
There is a Jewish law that a king can't forgive an affront to his honor even if he wants to because his honor doesn't belong to him, it belongs to the entire nation. It is the honor of the nation that is being breached and the individual does not have the ability to forgive the honor of a group. When a person sins against G-d though, G-d is able to forgive breaches against His own honor. Therefore, David can ask G-d to forgive him, but must ask G-d to destroy his enemies.

Peace, Bro. Tumah!

Can I ask you a question as a Jew (a question as you are Jewish)? Can I ask you brother, would you interpret Jesus saying on the cross, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me," which is what King David said in Psalm 22:1, as Jesus saying that he is the expected David to come?

Peace to you,
Bro. Noah

 

[Tumah]

Peace, Bro. Tumah!

Can I ask you a question as a Jew (a question as you are Jewish)? Can I ask you brother, would you interpret Jesus saying on the cross, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me," which is what King David said in Psalm 22:1, as Jesus saying that he is the expected David to come?

Peace to you,
Bro. Noah

In literature older than the the creation of chapter numbers, passages were called by their starting words. We find this all the time. When Jews are in plight, we says Psalms. So I would interpret this as Jesus saying that Psalm.
David is not expected to come.

 

[Fool]

This is getting fun. Lets pretend that I understand Genesis 49 at all, although I don't necessarily.

Genesis 49:9
"You are a lion's cub, Judah" this means Judah is destined to be great. Its current state is like a cub relative to some future greatness, however there is no indication here that Judah will be violent. Its simply going to be very strong. This can be interpreted to mean it is strong through Torah observance rather than military strength. I insist its not about military strength. If it were about that then Judah wouldn't need the Torah to be strong. Perhaps 'Cub' indicates moral development or character development, too.

"The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet," sceptres are measuring units. A royal defines new measurements based upon their bodies, and these are used as the standard of justice. The sceptre represents the justice of a ruler. This sceptre is held by Judah but does not belong to Judah and is passed to 'Whom it belongs'. The Torah was handed to Judah for the world's sake unless I am mistaken, but it was not given by a man unless you think it came from Moses or angels. So to whom does it belong? How can it belong to some fellow? It must mean that Judah will no longer be the standard bearer of justice at some future day, because the giver of the Torah will fulfil that role. It reminds me of various other prophetic writings that talk about some time when Jews will no longer need to study the Torah.

"He will tether his donkey to a vine." Absolutely have no idea. I have zero idea what he is saying. Therefore I could be mistaken about the entire chapter, but I am not. I'm right about it. Kings are evil in Judaism.

judah means praised

 

[Tumah]

This is getting fun. Lets pretend that I understand Genesis 49 at all, although I don't necessarily.

Genesis 49:9
"You are a lion's cub, Judah" this means Judah is destined to be great. Its current state is like a cub relative to some future greatness, however there is no indication here that Judah will be violent. Its simply going to be very strong. This can be interpreted to mean it is strong through Torah observance rather than military strength. I insist its not about military strength. If it were about that then Judah wouldn't need the Torah to be strong. Perhaps 'Cub' indicates moral development or character development, too.

I don't understand what you did here. You are saying the lion metaphor refers to Torah observance rather than military strength because if it were about military strength Judah wouldn't need Torah to be strong.
That doesn't make sense to me. If the verse is talking about military strength, than its not talking about Torah whatsoever and vise versa.

"The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet," sceptres are measuring units. A royal defines new measurements based upon their bodies, and these are used as the standard of justice. The sceptre represents the justice of a ruler. This sceptre is held by Judah but does not belong to Judah and is passed to 'Whom it belongs'. The Torah was handed to Judah for the world's sake unless I am mistaken, but it was not given by a man unless you think it came from Moses or angels. So to whom does it belong? How can it belong to some fellow? It must mean that Judah will no longer be the standard bearer of justice at some future day, because the giver of the Torah will fulfil that role. It reminds me of various other prophetic writings that talk about some time when Jews will no longer need to study the Torah.

It kind of feels like you made a metaphor for the metaphor. Unless you have a verse that refers to the word here meaning scepter to a ruler, I don't see any reason to translate it as other than what it means "the staff that a ruler carries". And the verse means that ruler-ship will always remain with the tribe of Judah.
The Torah wasn't handed down to Judah, it was handed down to all 12 tribes.
I'm really having trouble following this.

"He will tether his donkey to a vine." Absolutely have no idea. I have zero idea what he is saying. Therefore I could be mistaken about the entire chapter, but I am not. I'm right about it. Kings are evil in Judaism.

Why is the messiah meant to be a king?

 

[NewChapter]

In literature older than the the creation of chapter numbers, passages were called by their starting words. We find this all the time. When Jews are in plight, we says Psalms. So I would interpret this as Jesus saying that Psalm.
David is not expected to come.

Actually brother, you are incorrect in saying that David is not to come. Here are some Bible passages from: http://zionusa.org/second-coming-christ-ahnsahnghong/king-david-and-christ-ahnsahnghong/

Ezekiel 37:24-27 “My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. They will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob, the land where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children’s children will live there forever, and David my servant will be their prince forever. I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant… I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

Ezekiel 34:11-24 “For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so I will look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness… As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will judge between one sheep and another. I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the LORD have spoken.

Hosea 3:4-5 For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or idol. Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the LORD and to his blessings in the last days.

I believe that Jesus was saying that he is the expected David when he said, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Peace to you,
Can I ask the believers in the Abrahamic religions this interesting question that came to me as I was reading the Bible yesterday. I noticed that King David in the Psalms confessed his evil and asked to be forgiven for it. But when his enemies did evil (to him) he asked that they be punished.
Why would he want his evil to be forgiven, but he wanted his enemies evil to be punished?

Which verses do you have in mind for the ^above^

 

[RabbiO]

Actually brother, you are incorrect in saying that David is not to come. Here are some Bible passages from: http://zionusa.org/second-coming-christ-ahnsahnghong/king-david-and-christ-ahnsahnghong/.

Actually, Tumah is correct.

From a Jewish standpoint, Rashi notes the reference to David refers to a king who is descendant of David, not David himself.

Even the Christian website you cite to stands for a similar proposition, in that it sees Jesus filling the role of a spiritual David, not that David himself comes back.

And, without meaning to sound snippy, I wonder why you think citing a Christian understanding of Jewish scripture carries any weight at all for Jews?

 

[NewChapter]

Which verses do you have in mind for the ^above^

We were talking about the story of David intending to kill a man who refused to help him, while generally throughout the Psalms he asks forgiveness for his evil.

The story is somewhere is 1 Samuel.

The brothers here have answered the question...perhaps David sought forgiveness in as much as he acknowledged his evil and repented, whereas those whom he prayed against & sought to kill did not "acknowledge and repent."

 

[NewChapter]

Actually, Tumah is correct.

From a Jewish standpoint, Rashi notes the reference to David refers to a king who is descendant of David, not David himself...

No, the Scripture says plainly, "David will rule them."

I know that it doesn't mean David will return from the grave. I know that it is a Messianic prophecy referring to the Messiah as David. That is what I meant when I said to Tumah, "...the expected David."

I believe that Jesus was saying that he is the expected "David" when he said, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

...And, without meaning to sound snippy, I wonder why you think citing a Christian understanding of Jewish scripture carries any weight at all for Jews?

That was not my intent...I just wanted to cite a source for Bro. Tumah. I am not a Christian and am infact not a member of any religion.

Peace and Blessings to you,
Noah

 

[Brickjectivity]

Sorry about getting us stuck in this little digression. You brought up Genesis 49, and its a passage that is interesting to me.

I don't understand what you did here. You are saying the lion metaphor refers to Torah observance rather than military strength because if it were about military strength Judah wouldn't need Torah to be strong.
That doesn't make sense to me. If the verse is talking about military strength, than its not talking about Torah whatsoever and vise versa.

I could have explained it better. Cubs are small, cute and not deadly; but they grow into large beasts. The lion is never harassed by other creatures, and Jacob makes mention of this fact in his prophecy. What is he encouraging Judah to become? Do you think he is telling Judah to be bloodthirsty like a lion? That cannot be the case as it completely contradicts everything else, such as his curse on anger. He is telling Judah to become strong; so this is about strength and growth but what kind of strength and growth? Military strength? I do not think so. I am interpolating but there are so many Bible passages about trusting in the L-RD and not trusting in military strength. Sampson is an example...Hannah's song...David defeating goliath...Daniel in the lion's den, etc. So that leads me to believe it is a different kind of strength, and what is that strength? Well this is probably inaccurate but I will say its Torah.

It kind of feels like you made a metaphor for the metaphor. Unless you have a verse that refers to the word here meaning scepter to a ruler, I don't see any reason to translate it as other than what it means "the staff that a ruler carries". And the verse means that ruler-ship will always remain with the tribe of Judah.
The Torah wasn't handed down to Judah, it was handed down to all 12 tribes.
I'm really having trouble following this.

Good grief I can't believe I said that! Yes it did go to all twelve. However does rule actually go to Judah? I don't see that happening in evidence. Each tribe gets its own land and has its own elders. King Saul is the first of the listed kings, and his father is from Benjamin not Judah. It is throwing me off the scent.

Why is the messiah meant to be a king?

In general I have trouble making sense of it. What makes you so sure this is about a person? Judah is a whole tribe, so why would the rulers staff pass from a whole tribe to an individual? Besides I can't completely discount the kings. They are anointed by priests, and that is supposed to make them rulers I think.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I would like to point out, New Chapter, that religious forums is not a platform for missionary work, and its not acceptable to use a thread as bait to miss-ionize people. It hurts the forum and is therefore against the rules that you have already agreed to keep.

 

[Tumah]

Actually brother, you are incorrect in saying that David is not to come. Here are some Bible passages from: http://zionusa.org/second-coming-christ-ahnsahnghong/king-david-and-christ-ahnsahnghong/

Ezekiel 37:24-27 “My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. They will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob, the land where your fathers lived. They and their children and their children’s children will live there forever, and David my servant will be their prince forever. I will make a covenant of peace with them; it will be an everlasting covenant… I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

Ezekiel 34:11-24 “For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so I will look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness… As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will judge between one sheep and another. I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the LORD have spoken.

Hosea 3:4-5 For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or idol. Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the LORD and to his blessings in the last days.

Its referring to David's lineage. Not David himself.

I believe that Jesus was saying that he is the expected David when he said, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Ok.

 

[NewChapter]

I would like to point out, New Chapter, that religious forums is not a platform for missionary work, and its not acceptable to use a thread as bait to miss-ionize people. It hurts the forum and is therefore against the rules that you have already agreed to keep.

I am not doing any missionary work...like I have repeatedly said, I AM NOT A MEMBER OF ANY RELIGION.

Can I ask what gave you the impression that I am doing "missionary work."

Nor did I "bait" anyone; that is something that you are imagining...I just asked a general question in the GENERAL section for DISCUSSING the Abrahamic religions...

 

[NewChapter]

Its referring to David's lineage. Not David himself.

But the Scripture uses the name "David" to refer to the Messiah...that is what I meant by "the expected David who was to come."

 

[Tumah]

Sorry about getting us stuck in this little digression. You brought up Genesis 49, and its a passage that is interesting to me.

I could have explained it better. Cubs are small, cute and not deadly; but they grow into large beasts. The lion is never harassed by other creatures, and Jacob makes mention of this fact in his prophecy. What is he encouraging Judah to become? Do you think he is telling Judah to be bloodthirsty like a lion? That cannot be the case as it completely contradicts everything else, such as his curse on anger. He is telling Judah to become strong; so this is about strength and growth but what kind of strength and growth? Military strength? I do not think so. I am interpolating but there are so many Bible passages about trusting in the L-RD and not trusting in military strength. Sampson is an example...Hannah's song...David defeating goliath...Daniel in the lion's den, etc. So that leads me to believe it is a different kind of strength, and what is that strength? Well this is probably inaccurate but I will say its Torah.

Well, maybe the analogy to strength is the issue. It is true that the lion is strong, but I think when making a metaphor for strength, the Bible would have chosen an ox. I think the metaphor of a lion refers to its being the king of the jungle. At one point, David was a "small king". He was anointed king by Samuel but didn't have ruler-ship. Eventually he "grew up" and attained that.

Good grief I can't believe I said that! Yes it did go to all twelve. However does rule actually go to Judah? I don't see that happening in evidence. Each tribe gets its own land and has its own elders. King Saul is the first of the listed kings, and his father is from Benjamin not Judah. It is throwing me off the scent.

It is David who's promised that kingship will always be retained by his line.

In general I have trouble making sense of it. What makes you so sure this is about a person? Judah is a whole tribe, so why would the rulers staff pass from a whole tribe to an individual? Besides I can't completely discount the kings. They are anointed by priests, and that is supposed to make them rulers I think.

I hear what you are saying. but from another perspective, an entire tribe can't rule. So it means kingship will always be retained within that tribe. Kings need to come from Judah's tribe, they are the default rulers. Any king from outside the tribe needs a special dispensation to allow it.

 

[Tumah]

But the Scripture uses the name "David" to refer to the Messiah...that is what I meant by "the expected David who was to come."

And Scriptures uses "Israel" or "Jacob" to refer to the Children of Israel. It just means, his lineage.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I am not doing any missionary work...like I have repeatedly said, I AM NOT A MEMBER OF ANY RELIGION.

Can I ask what gave you the impression that I am doing "missionary work."

Nor did I "bait" anyone; that is something that you are imagining...I just asked a general question in the GENERAL section for DISCUSSING the Abrahamic religions. I had no intent to "bait" anyone.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Well, maybe the analogy to strength is the issue. It is true that the lion is strong, but I think when making a metaphor for strength, the Bible would have chosen an ox. I think the metaphor of a lion refers to its being the king of the jungle. At one point, David was a "small king". He was anointed king by Samuel but didn't have ruler-ship. Eventually he "grew up" and attained that.


It is David who's promised that kingship will always be retained by his line.


I hear what you are saying. but from another perspective, an entire tribe can't rule. So it means kingship will always be retained within that tribe. Kings need to come from Judah's tribe, they are the default rulers. Any king from outside the tribe needs a special dispensation to allow it.

I am going to let it rest there, so New Chapter can have their thread in peace without too much cross talk.

 

[NewChapter]

And Scriptures uses "Israel" or "Jacob" to refer to the Children of Israel. It just means, his lineage.

I see...can I ask, where if anywhere does the Scripture say "the Children of David" if you want to make a true comparison. I know it mentions the Messiah being one of David's descendants but where does it say, "the Children of David?"

 

[Tumah]

I see...can I ask, where if anywhere does the Scripture say "the Children of David" if you want to make a true comparison. I know it mentions the Messiah being one of David's descendants but where does it say, "the Children of David?"

You already answered the question. Its one of David's descendants, not all his children.