PDA

View Full Version : Discussion Descendants of David



Macnerd
Feb 22nd 2015, 06:41 PM
The Old Testament states that a descendant of David will always rule over Israel. Is the current ruler, Netanyahu(SP?), a descendant of David? If he isn't, when did it stop?

episkopos
Feb 22nd 2015, 08:23 PM
The Old Testament states that a descendant of David will always rule over Israel. Is the current ruler, Netanyahu(SP?), a descendant of David? If he isn't, when did it stop?

The descendant of David is Jesus. And the reigning is not over a temporal state that happens to be called Israel. It is a kingdom of God kind of ruling.

BTW Welcome here! :)

jayne
Feb 22nd 2015, 08:24 PM
Hi, Macnerd....

This statement is found in 1 Kings 9 and is repeated in 2 Chronicles 7.

It comes with a caveat, however. God is speaking to King Solomon and giving him a choice: [a] live in obedience to God and walk uprightly and I will give you the promise I made your father that there will always be descendant ruling on Israel's throne ...... [b] OR you can turn from following God and worship other gods and I will make Israel a joke among the nations and an example of calamity.

I think you and I both know what happened.

The descendant of David that is on the "Throne" today is Jesus.

As far as any Prime Minister of Israel - past or current - being a descendant of David - it is impossible to know.

Fenris
Feb 22nd 2015, 09:57 PM
The Old Testament states that a descendant of David will always rule over Israel. Is the current ruler, Netanyahu(SP?), a descendant of David?Actually, yes he is.


If he isn't, when did it stop?586 BC, when the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and exiled the Jews.


As far as any Prime Minister of Israel - past or current - being a descendant of David - it is impossible to know.
Actually there's thousands of people alive today who are descendants of king David.

jayne
Feb 22nd 2015, 10:19 PM
Actually there's thousands of people alive today who are descendants of king David.

Of that, I am sure. But how does one know?

Fenris
Feb 22nd 2015, 10:28 PM
Of that, I am sure. But how does one know?

They can trace their lineage back to medieval rabbis who could trace their lineage back to king David.

petrobb
Feb 22nd 2015, 10:58 PM
They can trace their lineage back to medieval rabbis who could trace their lineage back to king David.

I'm sorry but that is simply not true. There are very few who can genuinely trace their ancestry back to medieval Rabbis with any degree of authenticity. The records were lost. Many after Jesus claimed to be descended from David. It became a hobby. But it was without proof. The claims of such people are based on a hope and a prayer

Fenris
Feb 22nd 2015, 11:15 PM
I'm sorry but that is simply not true.
Ah. Another expert on Judaism. I know where to come should I have any questions. :thumbsup:

Old man
Feb 23rd 2015, 01:27 AM
They can trace their lineage back to medieval rabbis who could trace their lineage back to king David.

Are any of these traced to the royal line or simply David's non ruling children?

Fenris
Feb 23rd 2015, 01:38 AM
Are any of these traced to the royal line or simply David's non ruling children?

So far as I know, only the royal line. The other people wouldn't be "interesting" enough to follow I guess.

petrobb
Feb 23rd 2015, 09:18 PM
Ah. Another expert on Judaism. I know where to come should I have any questions. :thumbsup:

I will always be happy to help you out. It is often the outsider who sees things as they really are :bounce:

keck553
Feb 23rd 2015, 11:07 PM
Actually there's thousands of people alive today who are descendants of king David.

Probably more like 6 figures - considering Solomon also had many wives.

keck553
Feb 23rd 2015, 11:09 PM
It is often the outsider who sees things as they really are :bounce:

Remember that the next time the Freedom From Religion Foundation dictates to you how to be a Christian. :B

Fenris
Feb 24th 2015, 12:41 AM
I will always be happy to help you out. It is often the outsider who sees things as they really are :bounce:

I'm the outsider here. I suppose that makes me the expert on Christianity.

petrobb
Feb 25th 2015, 09:55 AM
I'm the outsider here. I suppose that makes me the expert on Christianity.

It probably enables you to see the folly of some of the views expressed because you are not tied to internal ways of thinking :)

I don't claim to be an expert on modern Judaism, but I can claim a good knowledge of ancient Judaism gained from experts.

petrobb
Feb 25th 2015, 10:03 AM
Remember that the next time the Freedom From Religion Foundation dictates to you how to be a Christian. :B

But I did not dictate to Ferris how to be a Jew. So your statement is undiscerning and unfair.

However, I do recognise that the freedom from religion foundation may often see certain things about Christian history and attitudes that Christians fail to see themselves because they can't see the wood for the trees :monkeyd:

Fenris
Feb 25th 2015, 10:52 PM
I don't claim to be an expert on modern Judaism, but I can claim a good knowledge of ancient Judaism gained from experts.
Why, because you read the few lines where Jesus rebukes the Pharisees? And now you know everything there is to know about Judaism?

petrobb
Feb 26th 2015, 11:26 AM
Why, because you read the few lines where Jesus rebukes the Pharisees? And now you know everything there is to know about Judaism?

No because I studied Judaism at university and read the works of experts on the subject who did know what they were talking about.

keck553
Feb 26th 2015, 02:39 PM
No because I studied Judaism at university and read the works of experts on the subject who did know what they were talking about.

Which university and what was the program name?

Old man
Feb 26th 2015, 03:16 PM
I have a question not about the descendants of David but his ancestors and since this thread is about David’s family I figured I’d ask it here.

Obed is the son of Boaz and Ruth (we are going through the book of Ruth in the BSF group I am part of) and Boaz is acting in the roll of a “kinsman redeemer” to raise up a male child to continue the name of the dead relative. So Obed was raised to obtain Elimelech’s (along with his dead sons Mahlon and Chilion) inheritance. Is this correct?

If Obed was to obtain Elimelech’s inheritance did he also obtain Boaz’s inheritance as well? When David grew up was he living on Elimelech’s family land or on Boaz’s? Yet the genealogy is traced through Boaz although for good reason (it traces blood line not inheritance lines). I don’t understand the dynamics of this does anyone have a reasonable (maybe even an unreasonable) answer to this? :hmm:

I’ll have another question about some other ancestors after this.

petrobb
Feb 26th 2015, 09:49 PM
I have a question not about the descendants of David but his ancestors and since this thread is about David’s family I figured I’d ask it here.

Obed is the son of Boaz and Ruth (we are going through the book of Ruth in the BSF group I am part of) and Boaz is acting in the roll of a “kinsman redeemer” to raise up a male child to continue the name of the dead relative. So Obed was raised to obtain Elimelech’s (along with his dead sons Mahlon and Chilion) inheritance. Is this correct?

yes, he would also be the male responsible for looking after Naomi out of his inheritance once he was old enough.


If Obed was to obtain Elimelech’s inheritance did he also obtain Boaz’s inheritance as well?


As the first born he would receive the firstborn's inheritance as well


When David grew up was he living on Elimelech’s family land or on Boaz’s? Yet the genealogy is traced through Boaz although for good reason (it traces blood line not inheritance lines). I don’t understand the dynamics of this does anyone have a reasonable (maybe even an unreasonable) answer to this? :hmm:


As the 'son' of Boaz and Ruth he would presumably be living on Boaz' inheritance. He was officially of the line of Boaz.

Fenris
Feb 26th 2015, 11:25 PM
I have a question not about the descendants of David but his ancestors and since this thread is about David’s family I figured I’d ask it here.

Obed is the son of Boaz and Ruth (we are going through the book of Ruth in the BSF group I am part of) and Boaz is acting in the roll of a “kinsman redeemer” to raise up a male child to continue the name of the dead relative. So Obed was raised to obtain Elimelech’s (along with his dead sons Mahlon and Chilion) inheritance. Is this correct?

I think the point was that the person's family line did not die out. I don't think inheritance was the main idea. I'm also not seeing the significance, is this leading somewhere...?


No because I studied Judaism at university and read the works of experts on the subject who did know what they were talking about.

What university? What experts?

petrobb
Feb 27th 2015, 02:06 PM
What university? What experts?

King's College - London University

Men such as Jeremias, Vermes G Driver Welch etc

Old man
Feb 27th 2015, 06:39 PM
I think the point was that the person's family line did not die out. I don't think inheritance was the main idea. I'm also not seeing the significance, is this leading somewhere...?

No there is no real significance that I know of ... I was just curious. Inquiring minds want to know ..... at least mine does. It was part of how God instructed them to deal with lineages and inheritances and I just didn't understand this particular dynamic of it. Since David is prominent and the story of Ruth ends with David being mentioned I saw an interesting example of this particular law being exemplified. I saw a chance to perhaps satisfy this question in my mind.

It may not be a mind shattering deeply spiritualized example of the deep hidden mysteries of "GGGGGGOOOOOOODDDDDDD" that so many seem obsessed with finding but it was how He choose to work within and through His people toward one another (so I guess there is some significance to it after all) and that's good enough for me to have reason to find out more about it as long as I don't blow it out of proportion.

Fenris
Feb 27th 2015, 10:09 PM
King's College - London University

Men such as Jeremias, Vermes G Driver Welch etc

I see. Well, I read rabbi Leo Baeck's critique of Christianity. I guess that makes me an expert.

petrobb
Feb 28th 2015, 12:00 AM
I see. Well, I read rabbi Leo Baeck's critique of Christianity. I guess that makes me an expert.

I think you need to go wider and deeper than one man :) But I never claimed to be an expert, only to have learned from comparing experts.

Incidentally as I am sure you know, Vermes is a Jew

Fenris
Mar 1st 2015, 01:02 AM
Incidentally as I am sure you know, Vermes is a Jew
Really, I thought he was baptized at age 7. Or are you talking about a different guy?

petrobb
Mar 1st 2015, 02:18 PM
Really, I thought he was baptized at age 7. Or are you talking about a different guy?

i suspect you are thinking of a different Vermes. i am referring to Geza Vermes, reader in Jewish studies at Oxford University. A book cover refers to him as 'a brilliant Jewish scholar' which would be most misleading if he was a Christian scholar. He was in fact the editor of the Journal of Jewish Studies.

Christinme
Mar 1st 2015, 02:23 PM
i suspect you are thinking of a different Vermes. i am referring to Geza Vermes, reader in Jewish studies at Oxford University. The book cover refers to him as 'a brilliant Jewish scholar' which would be most misleading if he was a Christian scholar. He was in fact the editor of the Journal of Jewish Studies.I think you need to do some research petrobb ...

petrobb
Mar 1st 2015, 02:34 PM
I think you need to do some research petrobb ...

or perhaps you do? :)


Vermes remained a priest until 1957, when marriage required his resignation and, having also renounced Catholicism, he returned to his roots and became a non-practising Jew. Eventually, however, he became a member of the Liberal Jewish Synagogue in London and a member of the academic committee of Leo Baeck College, though he declared himself to be uninterested in “organised religion of any description”.

Christinme
Mar 1st 2015, 02:52 PM
or perhaps you do? :)


Vermes remained a priest until 1957, when marriage required his resignation and, having also renounced Catholicism, he returned to his roots and became a non-practising Jew. Eventually, however, he became a member of the Liberal Jewish Synagogue in London and a member of the academic committee of Leo Baeck College, though he declared himself to be uninterested in “organised religion of any description”.He was baptized at 7 (which is true) as Fenris SAID ... and then you said it seems to be a different person (which isn't the TRUTH) ... so then you tell me I need to do some research ... I already did research ... he was baptized at 7 as Fenris said and he is the same guy you were speaking about, Geza Vermes ... really petrobb, why should I research? What did I say that was untrue?

petrobb
Mar 1st 2015, 03:00 PM
He was baptized at 7 (which is True) as Fenris SAID ... and then you said it must be a different person (which isn't the TRUTH) ... really petrobb.

well at that stage i had not been interested in Vermes background so i was not aware that he had spent some time as a catholic. if you look at what i said i was making a suggestion not being dogmatic.

now, however, i know that he was a Jew when he wrote the literature i referred to.

Vermes remained a priest until 1957, when marriage required his resignation and, having also renounced Catholicism, he returned to his roots and became a non-practising Jew. Eventually, however, he became a member of the Liberal Jewish Synagogue in London and a member of the academic committee of Leo Baeck College, though he declared himself to be uninterested in “organised religion of any description”.

this makes it quite clear that when he wrote the literature i referred to he was a practising Jew. So my statements were perfectly correct. really christinme you should think before you write and your attitude belies your name.

Christinme
Mar 1st 2015, 03:16 PM
well at that stage i had not been interested in Vermes background so i was not aware that he had spent some time as a catholic. if you look at what i said i was making a suggestion not being dogmatic. now, however, i know that he was a Jew when he wrote the literature i referred to.

Vermes remained a priest until 1957, when marriage required his resignation and, having also renounced Catholicism, he returned to his roots and became a non-practising Jew. Eventually, however, he became a member of the Liberal Jewish Synagogue in London and a member of the academic committee of Leo Baeck College, though he declared himself to be uninterested in “organised religion of any description”.

this makes it quite clear that when he wrote the literature i referred to he was a practising Jew. So my statements were perfectly correct. really christinme you should think before you write.Reread my edited post ... I did change "must be a different person" to "seems to be a different person" before even reading your post because I realized I was overstating that.

Your statement that indicated that Fenris was probably speaking of someone else is not and never will be perfectly correct. Remember that is what made me tell you to do some research ... and instead of saying oh yea now I see he was baptized at 7 and see his background you try to make it out like I'm the one who needs to do research.

Fenris
Mar 1st 2015, 08:09 PM
i suspect you are thinking of a different Vermes. i am referring to Geza Vermes, reader in Jewish studies at Oxford University
Now see, this is exactly the stuff I'm talking about. Vermes was baptized at age 7 and ordained as a Catholic priest. How am I talking about a different guy? You're being very disingenuous as Christinme points out. I'll use my time here to have discussions with people who actually want to share ideas, not carry out shenanigans like this.

Old man
Mar 2nd 2015, 02:44 PM
My next question regarding Boaz and Ruth.

Nashon was Boaz’s grandfather and the leader of the tribe of Judah as they were designated their marching or camping assignments around the tabernacle in the wilderness. He was also the one who died in the wilderness along with the rest of that generation that came out of Egypt. I assume this because he was old enough to be considered the leader of the tribe of Judah so soon after leaving Egypt. His son Salmon was the one who entered Canaan with Joshua. He is also married Rahab and through her had Boaz.

So often I here that this story takes place during the time of the judges (I don’t doubt that because scripture plainly says it) and that the famine was a judgment from God, but when during the time of the judges did this occur? I assume because he was Salmon’s son it was very early on. Was Joshua considered the first judge of Israel? Is it possible that this story (Ruth) took place late in Joshua’s life very soon after the inheritances were split up between the tribes? Or perhaps during the years that followed until the last of the elders who know Joshua died? Israel didn’t start rebelling against God until after the elders who had witnessed all the God did through Joshua died. I assume they didn’t die until years after Joshua died. So was the famine Elimelech and Naomi were experiencing due to judgment from God or simply a naturally occurring regional one? If this story took place after Israel started rebelling (after all the elders who knew Joshua died) then Boaz may have been of considerable age when Ruth came along. How old were they (probably no way of know .... just curious)? :hmm:

I hope this is clearer than mud. :blush: