 |
|  godisnowhere Registered Member
 Date Joined Nov 2003 Total Posts : 3 | Posted 11/5/2003 8:48 AM (GMT -6) |   | I know that the debate continues and it is my purpose to add a little kindling to the fire.
Would anyone here be willing to read what I wrote about the open view debate? I would very much appreciate any comments you might have.
www.godisnowhere.org/Articles/Openness%20debate4.0.pdf (Updated Nov 5. 2003)
On a side note: I believe that one of the problems with understanding the openview is not understanding dispensationalism.
Daniel
| | Back to Top | | |
  |  godisnowhere Registered Member
 Date Joined Nov 2003 Total Posts : 3 | Posted 11/5/2003 3:12 PM (GMT -6) |   | Recently my focus has been on 1 Sam 13:13 and Gen 49:10.
It is a curious pair of scriptures. | | Back to Top | | |
 |  Laika Registered Member

Date Joined Mar 2003 Total Posts : 2433 | Posted 11/5/2003 6:14 PM (GMT -6) |   | quote: Originally posted by godisnowhere
Recently my focus has been on 1 Sam 13:13 and Gen 49:10.
It is a curious pair of scriptures.
Interesting. Jacob prophesized that the scepter would not pass from Judah. Which scepter? The earthly king that the Hebrews didn't have then and hadn't demanded yet? Or the scepter of the rule represented by Jesus?
Then Saul (of the tribe of Benjamin) loses the kingship to David (of the tribe of Judah). But even if Saul had passed kingship down through his line (of the tribe of Benjamin), would it matter that Jesus came through the lineage of Judah? Or would He have come through the line of Benjamin? Weren't Judah and Benjamin the only tribes left by the time Jesus came, the others having intermarried so much they were not distinct anymore (Samaritans)?
quote:
The twelve sons of Jacob and their descendants became the twelve tribes of Israel and were given the Torah during the days of Moses. Ten tribes rebelled during the days of Jehoshaphat and went to Samaria, separating themselves from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. Judah was the dominant tribe so that those who remained in Jerusalem and the surrounding area were called Judeans. They were subsequently known as Jews. The ten separated tribes were subjugated by the Assyrians, assimilated, and some of them taken captive. The Judeans, because of their unfaithfulness, were invaded and besieged, and many of them were taken captive into Babylon, but they returned after 70 years. At the time of Yeshua, the ten tribes were known as the Samaritans, and they had their own place of worship on Mount Gerizim. They were excluded from the Temple worship in Jerusalem, except for small minorities from some of the tribes who renounced the Samaritan worship and joined themselves to the Judeans.
So what were you thinking about those two scriptures?
 inside you the time moves and she don't fade the ghost in you she don't fade | | Back to Top | | |
 |  godisnowhere Registered Member
 Date Joined Nov 2003 Total Posts : 3 | Posted 11/6/2003 7:05 AM (GMT -6) |   | While attempting to do research on various open view positions I ran across this from Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties.
quote: Q: In 1 Sam 13:13, how was Saul rejected from his dynasty reigning for all time, since the throne was prophesied to Judah in Gen 49:10? A: While God can make conditional promises to people, God did not even make a conditional promise to Saul here. God informed Saul of what he lost by his disobedience. Genesis 49:10 shows that Saul’s disobedience was not a surprise to God. God had already planned on Saul freely choosing to disobey, and the later choice of David.
Gen 49:10 The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the lawmaker from between his feet, until Shiloh come, and the obedience of the peoples to him.
See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.173, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.204-206, and When Critics Ask p.160 for more info.
Obviously the answer above is not answer at all. The word for eternal, "ad olawm" in Hebrew is the same for the eternity of the covenantal promise of Gen 17:7.
How this is an acceptable answer I cannot understand. In addition, if the Lord was not truly offering the Kingdom to a member of the tribe of Benjamin, then the use of "olawm" is meaningless. So the scepter does not have to represent "Kingdom" but rather the law. In addition, even if Saul had been faithful I assume events could have unfolded somewhat differently so that David would be King after Saul except this time because of obedience instead of willfull failure.
quote: Q: In 1 Sam 13:14, how could David be a man after God’s own heart, since David later committed some very serious sins? A: Today’s Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.54 answers this well. "David’s lies, wars, and adulteries are recorded with as much accuracy as his piety and his triumphs. He was a man after God’s own heart, not because he never sinned, but because, having sinned, he repented.
I also noticed this next response to vs 14 in Today’s Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties which I believe is an interesting statement and one that reflects the truth of human and divine repentance. However, did God know before David sinned that he would indeed repent? Perhaps it is similiar to my own son Daniel. His heart is one of tenderness and he is a young man that desires a close relationship. He has an attitude towards God and repentance.
Daniel | | Back to Top | | |
 | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:42 PM (GMT -6) There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads. In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3 dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|