Did King David exist?

Did King David exist?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 90.0%
  • No

    Votes: 1 10.0%

  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
  • Like
Reactions: PeaceByJesus
Upvote 0

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,398
606
✟12,231.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Awful example. Unless you believe the TaNaKh, too was a work of fabrication by goblins and grunkles.
Well, what I'm saying is that the Old Testament is not historical most of the time, "fabrication" is not the word I'd use, "legendary" and "mythical" are.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm sorry but I like academia and I like my religion. You think there's a sharp divide between scholars and religion because you make the divide, I don't.

It seems the two are in some conflict by some of your comments here. You were promoting kenosis theory, but when confronted you backed off and for good reason and I applaud you for such. Maybe kenosis was thrown around some discussion forum or at a cocktail party and you did not know the implications of what it meant. That's fine, it happens to all of us. But at times we need to take stock in core beliefs. I'm glad you do not embrace kenosis theory, as it denies Christ is fully God and fully man. It is a theory of the nature of Jesus Christ held by Oneness Pentecostals, to some extent Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs) and a few others.

The Catholic Church has entered an opinion or declaration on kenosis theory:

Pope Pius XII in 1951 wrote Sempiternus Rex Christus, in which he condemns a particular interpretation of Philippians in regards to the kenosis:

There is another enemy of the
faith of Chalcedon, widely diffused outside the fold of the Catholic religion. This is an opinion for which a rashly and falsely understood sentence of St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians (ii, 7), supplies a basis and a shape. This is called the kenotic doctrine, and according to it, they imagine that the divinity was taken away from the Word in Christ. It is a wicked invention, equally to be condemned with the Docetism opposed to it. It reduces the whole mystery of the Incarnation and Redemption to empty the bloodless imaginations. 'With the entire and perfect nature of man'--thus grandly St. Leo the Great--'He Who was true God was born, complete in his own nature, complete in ours' (Ep. xxviii, 3. PL. Liv, 763. Cf. Serm. xxiii, 2. PL. lvi, 201).[8] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenosis)

Due to some Church of Christ adherents embracing kenosis theory, ThD Gary Butner (also a Church of Christ member) refuted the heresy entering his church. His rebuttal follows:


The Kenosis of Jesus Christ
by Gary Butner, Th.D.


The Kenosis of Jesus Christ: Does Philippians 2:5-8 State Christ Emptied Himself of His Deity?
“Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.”Phil 2:5-8 NASB1995

What happened in the Incarnation of Christ? Did He empty Himself of deity and become a mere man who was previously God, man minus God, a man-God? Did He continue as both fully God and fully man, a God-man?
There are two basic views Bible scholars have of the Philippians passage. The first is the Kenotic Theory, and states that Christ emptied Himself of the relative attributes of Omnipotence[1], Omniscience[2], and Omnipresence[3], which only deity possesses. This view clearly denies the Biblical doctrine of the Immutability[4] of Christ as found in Hebrews 13:8.[5]

The Kenotic Theory was first scientifically formulated by Thomasius in Germany, [6](1860 to 1880) and later by theologians in England (1890 to 1910). Prior to that no recognized teacher in the first 1,800 years of church history, including those who were native speakers of Greek, thought that "emptied himself" in Philippians 2:7 meant the Son of God gave up some of his divine attributes.

The Philippians passage does not say that Christ "emptied himself of some powers" or "emptied himself of divine attributes" or anything like that. The words “of His deity” simply are not in the passage. The Kenotic Theory is based on an assumption regarding what “emptied” means and references, not upon what the Bible actually says.
Regarding verse 7, the UBS Handbook Series states, “The verb "to empty" has given rise to the so-called "kenotic" theory of incarnation. Undue theological exploitations have cast a heavy shadow on its meaning. It should be said at the outset that the verb must be understood metaphorically, not metaphysically. It says nothing about Christ stripping himself of his divine attributes as has sometimes been suggested.”

AND
”The verb ‘to empty’ is used elsewhere in the Pauline Epistles four times (Rom 4:14; 1 Cor. l:17; 9:15; 9:3), and in each instance it is used metaphorically in the sense of ‘to bring to nothing,’ ‘to make worthless,’ or ‘to empty of significance.’ (from the UBS Handbook Series. Copyright (c) 1961-1997, by United Bible Societies)
The second view is known as the Hypostatic Union, and states Christ continued in the Incarnation as fully God and became fully man.

The Hypostatic Union is and has been the orthodox view received by Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestant New Testament scholars throughout the ages, and later by those in the Restoration Movement. This is confirmed in the creeds and writings of the early church fathers. While the churches of Christ and Christian Churches do not accept human creeds as having the authority of Scripture, the majority of Restoration scholars do accept the creedal statements as faithfully reflecting the Bible.

In contrast to the Kenotic view, the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus most certainly claimed to be God while on earth. (cf. John 3:13; 5:18; 10:33; 17:5). “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” John 8:58 Here Jesus declared Himself to be Yahweh, i.e., the God of the Old Testament. I AM, is one of the names of God, and also states Christ is present in eternity outside of time. It was recognized by the Jews as a title of deity (see Ex. 3:14; cf. Isa. 44:6; 47:8). The high priest's reaction to Jesus' use of the title, in Mark 14:61-63, suggests that he considered Jesus' utterance of it as being a blasphemous claim to deity.

Explicit statements of the NT indicate that Jesus retained his divine nature and attributes (Matt.1:23; 11:27; Mark 1:1; John 3:13 AV; 14:9; Rom. 1:4). Examples of Jesus manifesting divine attributes include: omniscience (John 4:16-19; 2:24,25; 6:64; Luke 5:4-6), omnipresence (Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13), and omnipotence (Luke 4:39; 8:54-55; Matt. 8:26,27).

"To say that Jesus surrendered even one divine attribute is to say that Jesus is less than God, and therefore not God at all! See, if God is deprived of even one attribute, then He is not fully deity. Of course, references to His deity abound in Scripture (John 1:1; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Col. 2:9; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 1:8). And by the way, this is not only affirmed by the Bible, it's clearly affirmed by the creeds." Hank Hannagraf, CRI Perspective CP1207

Critical to a correct understanding of the kenosis passage is a proper exegesis of verse 6. “Who, although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God], did not think this equality with God was a thing to be eagerly grasped or retained,” The Amplified Bible
The Greek has two words for form, morphē and schēma. Paul connects the stronger morphē with theou (God) in verse 6. Morphē is the essential form, which never alters; schēma is the outward form which changes. Some versions translate schēma as fashion. The essential morphē of a human being is humanity and this never changes; but his schēma is continually changing. A baby, a child, a boy, a youth, a man of middle age, an old man always have the morphē of humanity, but the outward schēma changes all the time.[7] The essential morphē of Christ’s deity never changed. Likewise, Hebrews 13:8 (NIV) states, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.” These confirm the doctrine of the immutability of God, and makes a literal emptying inconceivable.

The schēma of Jesus’ humanity did change starting at the Incarnation, at His birth, later as He grew physically, at the crucifixion, and finally when he received His glorified body at the resurrection.

One cannot be 25%, 50%, or even 99.9% God. To be anything less than all that God has declared Himself to be, is to not be God. In John 5:18, “Jesus said to them, ‘My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.” For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.” NIV The Greek word for “equal” defines things that are exactly the same in size, quantity, quality, character, and number. (Bauer’s lexicon) In every sense, Jesus is equal to God and constantly claimed to be so during His earthly ministry (cf. John 5:18; 10:33, 38; 14:9; 20:28; Heb. 1:1–3).

The text does describe what Jesus did in this "emptying": he did not do it by divesting himself of any of his attributes but rather by " taking the very form (morphē) of a servant," that is, coming to live as a man, and "being found in human form (schēma), he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross (Phil. 2:8). Thus, the context itself interprets this "emptying" as equivalent to "humbling himself" and taking on a lowly status and position. Thus, the NIV, instead of translating the phrase, “He emptied himself," translates it, "but made himself nothing" (Phil. 2:7 NIV). The emptying includes change of role and status, not essential attributes or nature.

Rather than asserting the right to enjoy a glorious visage (i.e., as in the transfiguration), Jesus rather knew that the objective of the Father called for his humbling. And that, indeed, for us to be able to interact with him, the humbling would be needed. It was for US that Jesus took on this schēma.

Obviously, a man who was God (man-God), and one who is both fully God and fully man (God-man) at the same time are two different beings. Furthermore, the Kenotic Jesus does not speak with the same authority to his followers as the Christ of the Bible. One is fallible and voices his ideas and opinion, whereas the Christ of the Bible speaks to His followers with absolute certainty.

Edit: source
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3104583/posts?page=67#67

(verbal consent given by ThD Gary Butner to reproduce)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,398
606
✟12,231.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
That's not true.

There are presently 5,686 Greek manuscripts in existence today for the New Testament. In addition, there are over 19,000 copies in the Syriac, Latin, Coptic, and Aramaic languages. The total supporting New Testament manuscript base is over 24,000.

https://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

http://www.provethebible.net/T2-Integ/B-0801.htm#84
Sure, there's a lot of copies of the NT. I actually find the plurality of them really very fascinating. I find it intriguing how copies can be grouped into families and how these families differ from one another expressing the deep beliefs and practices of very local groups in very different contexts. This is actually one of my preferred way to look at the bible, it's called Wirkungsgeschichte or reception history. In short, it analyses the history of the text not what parts of it are historical.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,667
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,773.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It doesn't matter whether Jesus considered David to be historical. That's not how ancient history is done. We don't use a first century text to ascertain the historicity of a 1st millennium BCE figure. That's like using Facebook to discuss the historicity of the Crusades.
It's stuff like this, Aelred, that I'm happy to admit:

The Bible says it, that settles it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeaceByJesus
Upvote 0

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,398
606
✟12,231.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
It seems the two are in some conflict by some of your comments here. You were promoting kenosis theory, but when confronted you backed off and for good reason and I applaud you for such.
I wasn't promoting what you suggest "kenotic theory" is. As I said I don't think that God's essence is omniscience, I think it's an attribute. God's essence is made present in Jesus Christ.

Also, since I don't think "Jesus took David to be historical" to be a good argument I won't respond to it.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pretty words that belie what I've already heard from you previously in this thread.

The Bible is a basic book of truths, yet academia wishes to dissect it into pieces in order to insert themselves, in their own arrogance between God and those who read the Bible for what it is. I think God would not miss a chance to make such people out as fools for daring to intervene in his works.

Indeed:

2 Timothy 3:

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
 
Upvote 0

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,398
606
✟12,231.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
The Bible says it, that settles it.
Well, OK. As far as I'm concerned the Bible says a lot of things, really very interesting things, things that I find come from a continuum of very alien ancient cultures which I want to understand better and which have informed most of contemporary culture and religion. My approach to the liturgical Bible is really very different, in the context of liturgy the Bible is the Sacred Word of God which calls the faithful to religion.
 
Upvote 0

AHH who-stole-my-name

in accordance with Christ
Jul 29, 2011
4,217
1,627
✟20,317.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
If you're still looking for a church, I think I can find an Independent Fundamental Baptist church in your area. :)
Thank you , but I'm too much out on the road to be an active member in any church right now. I fill myself with the ministering s of Pastor Osteen on XM radi and I'm going to start using The bible Hub to get in the reading I need. i do have to become stronger in my faith and will appreciate any guidance that you can help me with, if I get off on a wrong tangent. I have asked this of several people and I would appreciate a verse to go along with and guidance, so I can fully understand everything. Thank you and have a blessed day.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,667
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,773.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well, OK. As far as I'm concerned the Bible says a lot of things, really very interesting things, things that I find come from a continuum of very alien ancient cultures which I want to understand better and which have informed most of contemporary culture and religion. My approach to the liturgical Bible is really very different, in the context of liturgy the Bible is the Sacred Word of God which calls the faithful to religion.
They may be "alien" to you, but those writers are my brothers and sisters in Christ.

QV my custom title.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,667
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,773.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Thank you , but I'm too much out on the road to be an active member in any church right now. I fill myself with the ministering s of Pastor Osteen on XM radi and I'm going to start using The bible Hub to get in the reading I need. i do have to become stronger in my faith and will appreciate any guidance that you can help me with, if I get off on a wrong tangent. I have asked this of several people and I would appreciate a verse to go along with and guidance, so I can fully understand everything. Thank you and have a blessed day.
God bless you, my brother!
 
Upvote 0

AHH who-stole-my-name

in accordance with Christ
Jul 29, 2011
4,217
1,627
✟20,317.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Indeed:

2 Timothy 3:

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Thank you for this. I appreciate it and I'd like to add one that I think is appropriate to the discussing here.

Matthew 6:24 - No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

Aelred of Rievaulx

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2015
1,398
606
✟12,231.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
They may be "alien" to you, but those writers are my brothers and sisters in Christ.

QV my custom title.
Mine too. I trace my religion through to the ancient Middle Eastern temple religions, their rituals, myths, calendars and rites.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The bible is a collection of books. If you think it's truth you'd want to dissect it. If you don't like expert opinions then don't listen to them, they don't listen to you so fair enough. Me, I'm going to keep listening to the experts.

Also, you know that you're being anti-intellectual right? Some fundamentalists take offence to this notion but you know that it's precisely what you are doing right now, right?

Rejecting false intellectuals is not being anti-intellectual. That is an atheist argument. You gave, in the past, a list of scholars (none of which were theologians) which hail from leftist academia. They are not theologians, yet you ascribe to their views of religion and theology. Most of which adhere to the 19th century German skeptic scholars from the Tübingen school. They were refuted back then but it seems liberal academia in alliance with atheist scholars keep their works alive in the 21st century.

You have stated that the TaNaKh is myth and legend. Is that a comprehensive view or are their parts that are literally true? What about the NT? In your view what portions of the NT are divinely inspired and which ones not? What does your canon look like?

You have also stated the 'second coming of Christ can been seen in the Eucharist.' What infallible document do you base your belief in transubstantiation?

You of course are entitled to believe in what you wish to believe. As well you should not take offense when someone challenges you based on the truth of Sacred Scriptures. Not only on Sacred Scriptures but the writings of the Early Church Fathers, your own Church teachings, and leading theologians in the 20th and 21st Century.

So far your claims have been assertions based on some un-sourced 'expert opinions.'
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,667
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,773.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Mine too. I trace my religion through to the ancient Middle Eastern temple religions, their rituals, myths, calendars and rites.
Speaking of temples.

Who built [what was called] Solomons' Temple?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't believe in the term expert when it comes to religious truths. It is people who give themselves that title and not God. Being an expert only means that they have thought out what they assume as being the entirety of the evidence in front of them and I'd ask you to read the Book of Job before declaring the extent of any such knowledge.

It doesn't matter to me if other human beings don't listen to me. I am not accountable for their actions and will not answer to God for them, but I will speak my mind when others try to insert doubt into the Christian community only to give themselves a pat on their backs for assuming they have knowledge when all they have is doubt.

As far as being anti intellectual it is you who are calling your stance intellectual. God created intellect and knows the limitations humans have in this matter. I have met a few intellectuals who can't see the forest for the trees so please don't taught intelligence as if it alone is something beneficial to anyone.

Intelligence without wisdom is like a gun without a sight. It simply sounds loud when it goes off, but do we want a sound machine or sound judgements that will take us to where we wish to be.

That was deep and from the soul.

Grace and Peace.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you're still looking for a church, I think I can find an Independent Fundamental Baptist church in your area. :)

If you do, write him a letter. They will be getting a very thoughtful and wise man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

AHH who-stole-my-name

in accordance with Christ
Jul 29, 2011
4,217
1,627
✟20,317.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
That was deep and from the soul.

Grace and Peace.
Thank you my friend. it came from that which was given me to use in such occasions. The words are his!. Praise God in the highest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I wasn't promoting what you suggest "kenotic theory" is. As I said I don't think that God's essence is omniscience, I think it's an attribute. God's essence is made present in Jesus Christ.

Also, since I don't think "Jesus took David to be historical" to be a good argument I won't respond to it.

While on earth was Jesus Christ YHWH manifest in the flesh? Did all the fullness of Deity reside bodily in Christ Jesus?

If so why did He not have knowledge of his personal relationship with David centuries prior? Jesus stated: "Before Abraham was I am."

Do you not believe Jesus Christ was speaking truth when He clearly attributed David to the Psalm written about the Christ?
 
Upvote 0