Lizbeth
Well-Known Member
We always need ears to hear what the Spirit is saying when we read scripture.Did David sit on the throne of David?
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
We always need ears to hear what the Spirit is saying when we read scripture.Did David sit on the throne of David?
he is not sitting on david's throne thoughShiloh (David's son...the Son of Man) did already come in the first century, and became the King of Israel and will be forever, as the Lord promised David.
amen, we also need to be open.. always willing to admit, we may be wrong..We always need ears to hear what the Spirit is saying when we read scripture.
I cited Scripture showing that Gentiles are included.Think about it again. I cited the definition of remnant, hoping you would understand that when the Bible talks about a remnant, it is talking about a fraction of the Hebrews. By definition Gentiles are not included in the remnant.
But if one should make up definitions along the way, then any teaching is possible.
Isaiah 66:19 proves that they are.There is absolutely no indication that these 144,000 are missionaries.
Your interpretation of Jeremiah 50:4-5, is a denial of the New Testament teachings, of Jesus being the one and only Way to Salvation.I don't see how my interpretation of Jeremiah 50:4-5 is in error. Rather than reinterpreting Israel in terms of the Christian church, just interpret Israel as the God fearing Hebrews.
I think my interpretation fits the text better.
Actually the Jews killed Him.Shiloh (David's son...the Son of Man) did already come in the first century, and became the King of Israel and will be forever, as the Lord promised David.
I cited Scripture showing that Gentiles are included.
What is your Scripture, not your own definition, showing that Gentiles are not included?
You have the wrong Zion and wrong Jerusalem in mind. You, and many others here, are very ignorant about New Testament scripture and that is why you have so many false beliefs. I have to wonder if you, and some others here, have even ever read this:If I understand you correctly, yes. The Bible seems to suggest that Jesus will rule from Zion, from Jerusalem, and his rule will extend to the entire earth. Presumably, he will entrust that task to his followers, who will live among the nations and guide them.
That is the way that He sits on the throne of David. It's not a literal throne. Peter said that Jesus was raised to the throne of David by way of being raised from the dead.Did Jesus sit on the throne of David? I think he was raised to the right hand of the father right?
You obviously don't listen to Peter. Or is Acts 2:29-36 not in your Bible?That of course is not true, and is simply a doctrinal tradition from men, and not from God's Word. The throne of David has always been, still is, and always will be, an earthly throne. Just because you listen to men instead of God's written Word about it is why you don't understand that David's throne is still on earth today, waiting for Christ's coming to inherit it, as written.
The throne of David was removed from Jerusalem because of Judah's rebellion against God in the time of Jeremiah the prophet. And king Zedekiah's son heirs were all killed by the king of Babylon, but not Zedekiah's daughters, which Jeremiah was guardian over.
God has never been done with the people of Israel. There have been many people of Israel saved in the past 2,000 years or so. There were 3,000 Israelites saved on the day of Pentecost alone.I never said otherwise. this is not about who is saved and who is not saved. it has to do with the question is God done with the nation of Israel.
He doesn't. What makes you think that? Scripture clearly teaches otherwise.lol. Then why does God differentiate saved jews and saved gentiles?
God has never been done with the people of Israel. There have been many people of Israel saved in the past 2,000 years or so. There were 3,000 Israelites saved on the day of Pentecost alone.
Scripture teaches that God wants all people to repent and to be saved. Has that ever not been true? People make the mistake of thinking that the Israelites in Paul's day, besides the remnant who were saved (Romans 11:5), were cut off because of unbelief and condemned forever at that point. But, that is not the case. They still had the opportunity to be saved after being cut off. That is why in Romans 11:14 that Paul said he had hoped to help save some of them. If they were cut off and had no hope of salvation after being cut off, then what Paul said about them in Romans 11:14 wouldn't make any sense.
God has never postponed salvation for the people of Israel. That is what many, like you, are missing. They have all had the opportunity to be saved for the past 2,000 years. But, what God wanted to happen is for the Gentiles to provoke the Israelites to jealousy after the Israelites had first provoked the Gentiles to jealousy. That was His plan. But, postponing salvation for the people of Israel was never His plan.
Genesis 17:12; Exodus 12:48-49; Leviticus 19:34; Leviticus 24:22Romans 11
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Many here are willfully ignorant of what Romans 9:6-8 teaches. They would rather cling to their false pet doctrine than accept what Paul taught there and adjust their doctrine accordingly.Paul has expressly explained who "all Israel" is in Romans 9:6-8.
It is not the racialized malinterpretation of modernist apostate df.
Thanks, Jeff. Some people here are making God out to be a respecter of persons (showing favoritism because of ethnicity or nationality) and making it as if for the past 2,000 years He has contradicted His own character by not wanting all Israelites to repent and be saved. What these people need to think about is if their interpretation of one passage, such as how they interpret Romans 11, causes them to contradict other scripture, then they need to start over and interpret it in such a way that doesn't contradict other scripture. But, this doesn't seem to be of any concern to them.Very well put. Its called amazing grace.
Acts 17
30 So having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now proclaiming to mankind that all people everywhere are to repent, 31 because He has set a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all people by raising Him from the dead.”
32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to scoff, but others said, “We shall hear from you again concerning this.”
The idea that anyone here is promoting replacement theology is false. No one is saying that anyone is being replaced. Instead, Gentile believers are joined together with Israelite believers. Who is replaced? No one.Replacement theology is false as is works based gospel..
This really illustrates the problem with your (and others) view. You are pitting Israelites against Gentiles. But, Romans 11 talks about Israelite and Gentile believers being grafted in together. Why do you not say anything about that? Instead, all you want to talk about is Israel.Romans 11 is all about they vs you
They are isreal
You are gentile
I don't know which scripture you're referencing. David's heir Solomon did rule from the Temple in Jerusalem, if you're talking about what God said about Solomon..?he is not sitting on david's throne though
David wanted to make the lord a house in jerusalem. God made a covenant that his heir would rule from that house in jerusalem.
Christ is in heaven. not in jerusalem.
Yes indeed. ;) And on that note if we're expecting the prophecy about David's fallen tabernacle being restored to involve Jesus ruling in the future from an earthly Temple....then we would be wrong....since David only ever had a tabernacle for worship, not a Temple....once again refer you to 2 Sam 7. (A temple wasn't God's idea to start with, and David never built a Temple, his son Solomon did.)amen, we also need to be open.. always willing to admit, we may be wrong..
He will build a house.I don't know which scripture you're referencing. David's heir Solomon did rule from the Temple in Jerusalem, if you're talking about what God said about Solomon..?
Scripture I was referencing was the 2 Samuel 7 passages where God promised David a kingdom that would never end....this is a Messianic prophecy of Jesus and His kingdom:
2Sa 7:12-17
And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
It is through Christ that David's throne and kingdom would be established forever.....Christ the Son of God and Son of Man having come from David's loins. The house that Jesus is building is the church essentially....He dwells in the temple of the church and in our tabernacle/vessel of the individual believer by His Spirit. This prophecy is not talking about a Temple in earthly Jerusalem.