Jews only: Psalms 110:4

[rosends]

Since he was told to make crowns and place on the head of Joshua the High Priest, (and it doesn't specify plural or singular) the assumption should be that both would be placed on his head. Especially since he is symbolic of the Branch (the Messiah) who will be both King and Priest. (Which is in line with many other scriptures)

I find it amazing that, even in the face of massive contrary evidence, you cling to misunderstanding and mistranslation. Not only will the messiah not occupy both roles. but your assumption is wrong in the text as a whole.

It has almost amazed me the lengths you guys will go to, to avoid having things mean what they mean in the majority of cases. No matter what evidence is presented to you, you find a way to try to nullify it. Doesn't the preponderance of evidence mean anything to you?

Doesn't the accuracy of the language and the understanding of the section as a whole mean anything? You have repeatedly ignored that the text explicitly refers to 2 people (shneihem). The words are all there but you pick and choose the ones you want to see. No matter what evidence for the meanings of words is presented to you, you still see things with your particular blinders on. It is a sight to behold.

v'hayah is commonly translated "and he will be" - yet in several posts you portrayed it as if that is not a common way to translate it. ("and it will be" - "and there will be" are just other possibilities) Your problem here is that if it is "and he will be", that would make the same one sitting on the throne also be a priest on his throne. (and you can't have that)

"v'hatah" means "and it was. I found one situation in which it can mean "and he will be" and presented it to you along with the other textual-semantic factors which allow it to be interpreted as such, factors missing from Zecharia. You don't like it. Go look at the second paragraph of the Sh'ma, first word, and tell me it is "commonly" "and he will be." It just isn't and your lack of knowledge of the Hebrew should caution you against making generalizations as you have.

In Zechariah 6:13 where it said and he will be a priest on his throne. Suddenly kis'o didn't mean his throne, it just means his chair. Even though you know the King would sit on a throne.

Not only doesn't it say "and he" but the word throne even in English has more than one meaning (#2 according to Merriam Webster is "royal power and dignity" so your insistence that it is a literal throne is wrong in 2 languages.

Then there is Ezekiel 21:26-27 where God told them to remove both the diadem and the crown. He said he would overturn it until he come whose right it is and I will give it to him. (Once again it doesn't say them, it says he and him.) It might be a different prophecy, but it is still more evidence of one individual who will have both crowns.

You are again missing words in your understanding. The "it" is mishpat. Only one of the crowns is that of mishpat, the one of king. So the singular person (He) is the king, not the priest, because a priest is not in the role of mishpat. That's what the text says. עַד־בֹּ֛א אֲשֶׁר־ל֥וֹ הַמִּשְׁפָּ֖ט וּנְתַתִּֽיו, until the coming of he to whom there is the mishpat and it shall be given to him.

Then in the discussion regarding Psalms 110:1-5

In which I have not been involved AFAIR.
1. The vast majority of times this intro means a Psalm was written by David. (Suddenly you guys don't really know for sure if Psalms 110:1-5 was written by David or form him.)[/quote]
It happens 7 times. I haven't studied those specifically but I also understand that shivim panim l'torah.

2. Who is the individual mentioned in Psalms 110:1? Neither David nor Abraham were Priests, and especially not forever.

The Radak answered this a long time ago. You should study it
זה המזמור פרשוהו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה על אברהם אבינו כשיצא להלחם עם הארבעה המלכים ופירושו אתה כהן לאל עליון כי היתה כהונה ראוי לצאת משם שהוא מלכי צדק, והוא כהן לאל עליון אלא לפי שהקדים בברכתו אברהם לאל לעיון נטל הקב"ה הכהונה ממנו ונתנה לאברהם, שנאמר אתה כהן לעלם על דברתי מלכי צדק על הדבר שדיבר מלכי צדק, והנכון לפי דרך הפשט לפרש המזמור על דוד שאמרו אחד מן המשוררים עליו, ולמ"ד לדוד פירושו בעבור כלמ"ד אמרי לי אחי הוא

3. Then since Psalms 110:4 said YHWH hath sworn and will not repent you are a priest forever after the order of Melchitzedek. Suddenly chohen doesn't mean priest in that verse, because that would cause you problems. Because even the very name Melchitzedec means King of righteousness. And in Genesis 14:18 Melchitzedec is said to be both King of Salem, and priest of the most high God. Which would make this individual mentioned in Psalms 110:1-4, both King and Priest. (And there is no way you want the Messiah to be both King and Priest)

2 problems -- the rule against being both wasn't around in Malkitzedek's time and the word "kohen" in biblical text often refers either to a tribal leader or a religious leader in another non-caste based system (Yitro, kohen midian, for example).

4. Who is the "you" in Psalms 110:4 that will be a priest forever? And how will that individual be a priest forever? (no matter what you try to choose priest to mean)

first, rashi on this verse, ממך תצא הכהונה ומלכות להיות בניך יורשין את שם אבי אביך הכהונה והמלכות שנתנו לו
second rashi from Sam 2, כתרגומו ובני דוד רברבין הוו כלומר גדולים היו וממונים על כלם ובדברי הימים אומר הראשונים ליד המלך ובדברי רבותינו ז"ל תלמידי חכמים היו ולמה קראם כהנים מה כהן גדול נוטל חלק בראש אף תלמיד חכם נוטל חלק בראש

I hope these answer your questions. Your points were fine and interesting, but a bit simplistic and were dealt with over 1000 years ago.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I find it amazing that, even in the face of massive contrary evidence, you cling to misunderstanding and mistranslation. Not only will the messiah not occupy both roles. but your assumption is wrong in the text as a whole.

Doesn't the accuracy of the language and the understanding of the section as a whole mean anything? You have repeatedly ignored that the text explicitly refers to 2 people (shneihem). The words are all there but you pick and choose the ones you want to see. No matter what evidence for the meanings of words is presented to you, you still see things with your particular blinders on. It is a sight to behold.

"v'hatah" means "and it was. I found one situation in which it can mean "and he will be" and presented it to you along with the other textual-semantic factors which allow it to be interpreted as such, factors missing from Zecharia. You don't like it. Go look at the second paragraph of the Sh'ma, first word, and tell me it is "commonly" "and he will be." It just isn't and your lack of knowledge of the Hebrew should caution you against making generalizations as you have.

Not only doesn't it say "and he" but the word throne even in English has more than one meaning (#2 according to Merriam Webster is "royal power and dignity" so your insistence that it is a literal throne is wrong in 2 languages.

You are again missing words in your understanding. The "it" is mishpat. Only one of the crowns is that of mishpat, the one of king. So the singular person (He) is the king, not the priest, because a priest is not in the role of mishpat. That's what the text says. עַד־בֹּ֛א אֲשֶׁר־ל֥וֹ הַמִּשְׁפָּ֖ט וּנְתַתִּֽיו, until the coming of he to whom there is the mishpat and it shall be given to him.

We will just have to disagree. It is just your opinion that it is misunderstanding and mistranslation. Your points seem valid to you and mine seem valid to me. But the parts where you replied with a bunch of Hebrew by rashi or the Radak, don't provide me with an answer I would easily understand.

The new testament provides answers to many things, but since you wouldn't accept that I didn't introduce it into the discussion. Anyway I think we have probably both made all the points we can, using text we both will accept.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The Radak answered this a long time ago. You should study it
זה המזמור פרשוהו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה על אברהם אבינו כשיצא להלחם עם הארבעה המלכים ופירושו אתה כהן לאל עליון כי היתה כהונה ראוי לצאת משם שהוא מלכי צדק, והוא כהן לאל עליון אלא לפי שהקדים בברכתו אברהם לאל לעיון נטל הקב"ה הכהונה ממנו ונתנה לאברהם, שנאמר אתה כהן לעלם על דברתי מלכי צדק על הדבר שדיבר מלכי צדק, והנכון לפי דרך הפשט לפרש המזמור על דוד שאמרו אחד מן המשוררים עליו, ולמ"ד לדוד פירושו בעבור כלמ"ד אמרי לי אחי הוא

2 problems -- the rule against being both wasn't around in Malkitzedek's time and the word "kohen" in biblical text often refers either to a tribal leader or a religious leader in another non-caste based system (Yitro, kohen midian, for example).

first, rashi on this verse, ממך תצא הכהונה ומלכות להיות בניך יורשין את שם אבי אביך הכהונה והמלכות שנתנו לו
second rashi from Sam 2, כתרגומו ובני דוד רברבין הוו כלומר גדולים היו וממונים על כלם ובדברי הימים אומר הראשונים ליד המלך ובדברי רבותינו ז"ל תלמידי חכמים היו ולמה קראם כהנים מה כהן גדול נוטל חלק בראש אף תלמיד חכם נוטל חלק בראש

I hope these answer your questions. Your points were fine and interesting, but a bit simplistic and were dealt with over 1000 years ago.

Before we call it quits on this, I would like you to explain in English your answers to a few of my questions from post #81

Below are the questions. I would like to know what your answer was.

Who is the individual mentioned in Psalms 110:1? Neither David or Abraham were Priests forever.

Who is the "you" in Psalms 110:4 that will be a priest forever? And how will that individual be a priest forever? (no matter what meaning/word you choose for chohen)

 

[rosends]

Who is the individual mentioned in Psalms 110:1? Neither David or Abraham were Priests forever.

Who is the "you" in Psalms 110:4 that will be a priest forever? And how will that individual be a priest forever? (no matter what meaning/word you choose for chohen)

The simplest summary of an answer is 1000 years old:
" you are a priest forever because of the speech of Malchizedek: From you will emerge the priesthood and the kingship that your children will inherit from Shem your progenitor, the priesthood and the kingship, which were given to him. דִבְרָתִי מלכי-צדק. The “yud” is superfluous, like (Lam. 1: 1): “the city that was once so populous (רבתי).” Because of the speech of Malchizedek, because of the command of Malchizedek. You are a priest, Heb. כהן. The word כהן bears the connotation of priesthood and rulership, as (II Sam. 8:18): “and David’s sons were chief officers.” "

Your insistence that the verse is pointing to a singular person and naming him to be a priest forever is not what the verse means. Rashi quotes the tradition that the verse speaks of the events in Genesis 14 and verse 4 is a promise to Abraham.

 

[ProveYourFaith]

Isn't this passage in Psalms 110:4 referring to the Messiah, as being the one who would be a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek?

And the Messiah (the righteous Branch) is also to be the king who will sit on the throne of David.
As per verses such as Psalms 110: 2, and Jeremiah 33:14-18 (which mentions never lacking a man as king, nor a man in the priests position) , Jeremiah 23:5-6 , Zechariah 6:12-13 (the Branch will be both king and priest)

So ultimately my question is:

Since the king is to be a descendant of David, of the tribe of Judah, while the priesthood is limited to someone of the tribe of Levi. How can the Messiah be both king and priest, as the scripture lets us know he will be? (Unless you believe there was a change in the law.)

David also was the same type of priest.
(Mat 12:4) How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
David could eat the bread without being punished because he was high priest. the men with him were able to the same because they were under David's command making them priests. I believe when one is Anointed to be King it also extends to every function even priest.
(Rev 1:6) And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
They are made both King and Priest this is not that one would be either or but both.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

David also was the same type of priest.
(Mat 12:4) How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
David could eat the bread without being punished because he was high priest. the men with him were able to the same because they were under David's command making them priests. I believe when one is Anointed to be King it also extends to every function even priest.
(Rev 1:6) And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
They are made both King and Priest this is not that one would be either or but both.

1. Under the law it was required for a priest to be a Levite. Since David lived under the law, and was from the tribe of Judah, how could he have been a priest?

2. If David was a high priest as you say, then it would not have been unlawful for him to have eaten the shewbread to begin with.

3. Everyone can't be a king (ruler) over the same kingdom or it loses it's meaning and significance. I think Revelation 1:6 is probably more accurately rendered with "and hath made us a kingdom of priests". Under the new covenant there was a change in the law, and the priesthood. The Messiah became the King and High Priest, and his people are a kingdom of priests.

 

[ProveYourFaith]

1. Under the law it was required for a priest to be a Levite. Since David lived under the law, and was from the tribe of Judah, how could he have been a priest?

2. If David was a high priest as you say, then it would not have been unlawful for him to have eaten the shewbread to begin with.

3. Everyone can't be a king (ruler) over the same kingdom or it loses it's meaning and significance. I think Revelation 1:6 is probably more accurately rendered with "and hath made us a kingdom of priests". Under the new covenant there was a change in the law, and the priesthood. The Messiah became the King and High Priest, and his people are a kingdom of priests.

There is no command to not eat the shewbread just that there is always shewbread present. It would need to be changed out continually. The priests received everything that was offered to the temple. There is also no command that only a Levi would be a priest only that he took Levi for himself.

 

[Rival]

There is no command to not eat the shewbread just that there is always shewbread present.

Only priests were entitled to eat it.

There is also no command that only a Levi would be a priest only that he took Levi for himself.

Only a direct descendent of Aaron could be a priest. As Aaron was a Levite, only Levites may be priests.

Numbers 18:1-7
The L-rd said to Aaron: You and your sons and your ancestral house with you shall bear responsibility for offences connected with the sanctuary, while you and your sons alone shall bear responsibility for offences connected with the priesthood.
So bring with you also your brothers of the tribe of Levi, your ancestral tribe, in order that they may be joined to you, and serve you while you and your sons with you are in front of the tent of the covenant.They shall perform duties for you and for the whole tent. But they must not approach either the utensils of the sanctuary or the altar, otherwise both they and you will die. They are attached to you in order to perform the duties of the tent of meeting, for all the service of the tent; no outsider shall approach you.
You yourselves shall perform the duties of the sanctuary and the duties of the altar, so that wrath may never again come upon the Israelites. It is I who now take your brother Levites from among the Israelites; they are now yours as a gift, dedicated to the L-rd, to perform the service of the tent of meeting. But you and your sons with you shall diligently perform your priestly duties in all that concerns the altar and the area behind the curtain. I give your priesthood as a gift; any outsider who approaches shall be put to death.

When the land was divided between the tribes, the Levites were not allotted a portion as they were to be present in every portion.

 

[ProveYourFaith]

Only priests were entitled to eat it.


Only a direct descendent of Aaron could be a priest. As Aaron was a Levite, only Levites may be priests.

Numbers 18:1-7
The L-rd said to Aaron: You and your sons and your ancestral house with you shall bear responsibility for offences connected with the sanctuary, while you and your sons alone shall bear responsibility for offences connected with the priesthood.
So bring with you also your brothers of the tribe of Levi, your ancestral tribe, in order that they may be joined to you, and serve you while you and your sons with you are in front of the tent of the covenant.They shall perform duties for you and for the whole tent. But they must not approach either the utensils of the sanctuary or the altar, otherwise both they and you will die. They are attached to you in order to perform the duties of the tent of meeting, for all the service of the tent; no outsider shall approach you.
You yourselves shall perform the duties of the sanctuary and the duties of the altar, so that wrath may never again come upon the Israelites. It is I who now take your brother Levites from among the Israelites; they are now yours as a gift, dedicated to the L-rd, to perform the service of the tent of meeting. But you and your sons with you shall diligently perform your priestly duties in all that concerns the altar and the area behind the curtain. I give your priesthood as a gift; any outsider who approaches shall be put to death.

When the land was divided between the tribes, the Levites were not allotted a portion as they were to be present in every portion.

You yourselves shall perform the duties of the sanctuary and the duties of the altar,
All of this is regarding the Temple or Tabernacle duties. David did go in and David did eat. He didn't sacrifice or light lamps but he did eat. When Abraham paid tithes to the priest of Salam the Melchizedek order was established.

(Gen 14:18) And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
(Gen 14:19) And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
(Gen 14:20) And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.

 

[Rival]

All of this is regarding the Temple or Tabernacle duties. David did go in and David did eat.

Yes, and this was significant because he wasn't supposed to. This is why it was told us in the first place.

(Gen 14:18) And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
(Gen 14:19) And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
(Gen 14:20) And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.

All of this happened pre-Torah, not to mention Melchitzedek made an error and blessed Avraham before G-d, which is why it passed from Melchitzedek to Avraham's lineage, i.e, the Jews to be priests to the nations. That is, others from non-Jewish lands will seek the truth from Jews. This isn't talking about Temple Kohanim.

(Psa 76:2) In Salem also is his tabernacle, and his dwelling place in Zion.

This is talking about G-d.

 

[ProveYourFaith]

Is this thread Jews only? I’m sorry I didn’t see that if so. How do I know if the thred is exclusionary. I don’t want to break the rules. When I received the notice of Rivals response to me it said the thred was Jews only. I don’t see any heading pointing that out. I see it now I’m sorry I broke rule I will leave the thred.