Psalm 110, the Divinity of Christ With Hebrew!

sandy whitelinger · Mar 30, 2006

I asked if in verse 5 is the author talking to/about King David. You answered:

jewscout said:
yes because, it seems to me, 2 different characters are talking
Verse 1, G-d
Verse 5, the author

I find thid interesting on this point and this is purely speculation on my part and not based on tradition or scriptural interpretation. It's just something that makes me go hmmmm!

If it is accepted that the psalm refers to David (and I might do that but not limit it just to David) then in verse one he was told to sit at the right hand of G-d and until G-d made David's enemies his footstool.

It would seem that David would have a problem with obedience because by verse 5 David was no longer sitting but fighting and had relegated G-d to helping David by fighting at Davids' right hand.

How is it that David had assumed the position that G-d held in verse 1? It seems that David has relegated G-d to being his co-pilot.

sushannah · Mar 30, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
I asked if in verse 5 is the author talking to/about King David. You answered:

I find thid interesting on this point and this is purely speculation on my part and not based on tradition or scriptural interpretation. It's just something that makes me go hmmmm!

If it is accepted that the psalm refers to David (and I might do that but not limit it just to David) then in verse one he was told to sit at the right hand of G-d and until G-d made David's enemies his footstool.

It would seem that David would have a problem with obedience because by verse 5 David was no longer sitting but fighting and had relegated G-d to helping David by fighting at Davids' right hand.

How is it that David had assumed the position that G-d held in verse 1? It seems that David has relegated G-d to being his co-pilot.

I hate to tell you this, but....G-d does not have arms or hands. Sitting at the right hand of G-d must therefore be a figure of speech. In verse 5, G-d at David's right hand is also a figure of speech. It means something like this - you draw close to G-d, then G-d in turn, will draw close to you.

jewscout · Mar 31, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
I asked if in verse 5 is the author talking to/about King David. You answered:

I find thid interesting on this point and this is purely speculation on my part and not based on tradition or scriptural interpretation. It's just something that makes me go hmmmm!

If it is accepted that the psalm refers to David (and I might do that but not limit it just to David) then in verse one he was told to sit at the right hand of G-d and until G-d made David's enemies his footstool.

It would seem that David would have a problem with obedience because by verse 5 David was no longer sitting but fighting and had relegated G-d to helping David by fighting at Davids' right hand.

How is it that David had assumed the position that G-d held in verse 1? It seems that David has relegated G-d to being his co-pilot.

ok first, David isn't relegating G-d to anything.
as sushannah pointed out, Judaism holds that G-d has not physical form, there for a term like "sitting at the right hand" is metaphorical.

and as i have tried to point out
verse 1 is basically saying that if David stays close to HaShem (the metaphor of "sitting at the right hand" implies this) that HaShem will cause David's foes to be defeated (hence the metaphor of the footstool).
and then in Verse 5 the author is saying that HaShem is with David in battle because he is a tzaddik, a righteous man of G-d.

David is not relagating G-d to anything, it's simply the same words being used metaphorically in different ways.

sandy whitelinger · Jul 14, 2006

sushannah said:
I hate to tell you this, but....G-d does not have arms or hands. Sitting at the right hand of G-d must therefore be a figure of speech. In verse 5, G-d at David's right hand is also a figure of speech. It means something like this - you draw close to G-d, then G-d in turn, will draw close to you.

Is this your own interpretation? There are numerous references to the anatomy of God. That you choose not to believe that He has them must be your personal belief. Or maybe you beleive He only has a backside as that is what Moses saw of Him on Mt Sinai.

jewscout · Jul 14, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
Is this your own interpretation? There are numerous references to the anatomy of God. That you choose not to believe that He has them must be your personal belief. Or maybe you beleive He only has a backside as that is what Moses saw of Him on Mt Sinai.

the incoporeality of G-d is a basic tenant of Judaism

sandy whitelinger · Jul 14, 2006

jewscout said:
the incoporeality of G-d is a basic tenant of Judaism

That doesn't discount that God has hands just that you don't understand them.

jewscout · Jul 14, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
That doesn't discount that God has hands just that you don't understand them.

they are hands...how can i not understand hands????????:sarcastic

either He has them or He doesn't. Either He's incoporeal or He's not...

sandy whitelinger · Jul 14, 2006

jewscout said:
they are hands...how can i not understand hands????????:sarcastic

either He has them or He doesn't. Either He's incoporeal or He's not...

I see, now you understand everything about God. Damn I'm jealous

jewscout · Jul 14, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
I see, now you understand everything about God. Damn I'm jealous

u tell me i don't understand His hands...explain them to me then...

do they look like mine? or that of a Chimp? maybe like the paw of a cat or a dog??

u know...actually maybe this should be in a new thread as this is completely off topic

sandy whitelinger · Jul 15, 2006

jewscout said:
u tell me i don't understand His hands...explain them to me then...

do they look like mine? or that of a Chimp? maybe like the paw of a cat or a dog??

u know...actually maybe this should be in a new thread as this is completely off topic

They look like this:

His hands are those things His fingers are attached to.

Ody · Jul 15, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
His hands are those things His fingers are attached to.

Ever here a philosopher known as Moshe ben Maimon?

jewscout · Jul 15, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
They look like this:

His hands are those things His fingers are attached to.

sooooooo G-d looks like Charlie Daniels??
that's funny i thought He said He could be compared to nothing...i just compared Him to something....

Guess he ain't G-d then...

Deut 13:1 · Jul 16, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
Start in Matthew with this statement from chapter 22 from Jesus:

[42] Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David.
[43] He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
[44] The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
[45] If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
[46] And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

This establishes that David was speaking of the coming Christ as his seed.

Psalm 110:1 from which Jesus refers to in His question says this:

"The LORD said unto my Lord........"

The first "LORD" refers to Y hovah. The Hebrew word used for the second Lord is 'adown whis is used to refer to God at least 25 times in the Old Testament. There was some debate in my last post on this subject as to whether this actually refered to God or to a human title of master or lord. Look a little further.

Verse 1 goes on to instruct 'adown to "Sit thou at my right hand..." Go to verse 5 of the same Psalm, "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath." This is the same Lord ('adown) sitting at the right hand of Y hovah from verse 1. Interestingly the word used for Lord here is 'Adonay which according to Strong's Concordance is a proper noun used exclusively for God.

Christ, the son of David, God. From the Old Testament. From the Hebrew.

Wow, you get a 10 for creativity. I'm assuming you use the NASB as your fun filled source of mistranslations (since the link you provide 2-3 posts down is broken).

The correct translation of adoni is master. The two words adoni and the other word are different. You can check it yourself. For example, in Genesis 24:36, 54, etc. the very same word is there and translated completly different. Now why would your group of estound biblical translaters translate the same word differently? Are they guessing? Are they using a randomizer program?

My theory on this is that it started when Jesus allegedly told the Pharisees off, as reported by Mathew. And for the next 2,000 years, Christians have been using this verse as one of the reasons to belive in Jesus.

So really, what we have here is circular logic. Why do Christians believe in Jesus? Well, in part because of that verse. And why do you interpret the verse the way you do? Well, because you believe in Jesus in the first place, as you say.

Ok, fine. If that's how you reason through things, it's a free country.

Now if you truly care (which I doubt), I suggest you open up to Nedarim 32b and then attempt to tell me with a straight face that the passage in question is about mr. j.

Deut 13:1 · Jul 16, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
This doesn't seem to me to escape the fact that the same Hebrew word used in verse 1 is used for God at least 25 times in the Old Testament or that a word for Lord in verse 5 is exclusively used for God and refers back to the Lord seated at the right hand in verse 1.

They're two different words. You do understand that in Hebrew, vowel's go under the letter. Think of it like this. You're saying the words fat and fit have the same meanings because you choose to ignore the vowel difference between the two words.

The first "Lord" in the sentence is properly capitalized because it uses the four-letter Hebrew name for G-d, the Yud kay vav kay. We would pronounce that in prayer as "Adonai," which means Lord and only applies to G-d. The second "Lord" is improperly capitalized because the Hebrew word used at that point is "adoni" which means "my lord" and only refers to a human.

From here.

Deut 13:1 · Jul 16, 2006

angellous_evangellous said:
By whose standards? I'm not a KJV loonie, but it is a very important accomplishment in the English language. While it's not final, it is authoritative.

The KJV is garbage. They blatently mistranslate and create their own hebrew-word's to get their point across. You want proof? Look at Psalm 22:16

Ki'ari anyone with a 3rd gade hebrew education knows that ki, the prefix means like or as and an ari is a lion. How do they translate? They come up with peirced.

Deut 13:1 · Jul 16, 2006

alexander garcia said:
Hi, In asking jewscout do you believe that there was a person about 2000 years ago exicuted by the Romans in Jerusalem?

I believe there were a lot of people executed by the romans in Jerusalem, so the answer is yes.

sandy whitelinger · Jul 17, 2006

jewscout said:
sooooooo G-d looks like Charlie Daniels?

:slap: Hush your mouth...........Charlie Daniels would never wear a pink shirt!

sandy whitelinger · Jul 17, 2006

Deut 13:1 said:
They're two different words. You do understand that in Hebrew, vowel's go under the letter. Think of it like this. You're saying the words fat and fit have the same meanings because you choose to ignore the vowel difference between the two words.

The Hebrew Bible I've looked at shows no difference. Do you by any chance know of an on-line source that would have these correct vowel markings?

Jayhawker Soule · Jul 17, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
The Hebrew Bible I've looked at shows no difference.

Which Hebrew 'Bible' might that be?

Deut 13:1 · Jul 18, 2006

sandy whitelinger said:
The Hebrew Bible I've looked at shows no difference. Do you by any chance know of an on-line source that would have these correct vowel markings?

Do you mean your english version of our Hebrew Bible????

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/i/t/t26b0.htm

Psalm 110, the Divinity of Christ With Hebrew!

Veteran Member

Member

Religious Zionist

Veteran Member

Religious Zionist

Veteran Member

Religious Zionist

Veteran Member

Religious Zionist

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Religious Zionist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

-- untitled --

Well-Known Member