- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Kerwin,
Do you believe that ALL of Jesse's descendants are also Jesus' descendants? Or does some of Jesse's descendants refuse to believe in Jesus as the Messiah?Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,02:05) Kerwin,
Do you believe that ALL of Jesse's descendants are also Jesus' descendants? Or does some of Jesse's descendants refuse to believe in Jesus as the Messiah?
LU,Some of Jessee's descendants are the children of the devil. They are the bitter roots of Jesse.
Kerwin,
The Hebrew word for root in Isa 11 that speaks of the roots of Jesse and later the root of Jesse in verse 10, is found in 33 verses in the OT. I will provide you with a link to this list and you tell me which verse uses the definition of 'root' that you are using, ok?Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 24 2013,21:21) Gene,
If I asked you to name your roots would you list the names of your children or the names of your parents?
Well done.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,09:23) Kerwin,
The Hebrew word for root in Isa 11 that speaks of the roots of Jesse and later the root of Jesse in verse 10, is found in 33 verses in the OT. I will provide you with a link to this list and you tell me which verse uses the definition of 'root' that you are using, ok?
LU,I am somewhat unsure of the detail of what you mean as I used root in more than one sense.
Malachi 4:1, Isaiah 14:30, Daniel 11:7, Isaiah 5:24, and probably more.
I believe Isaiah 5:24 is more along the line of spiritual sense than genealogical.
Kerwin,
I am asking you to use the word 'root' in 'root of Jesse,' from Isa 11, in the same way that Hebrew word used there for 'root' is used when you refer to Jesus as the 'root of Jesse.' I gave you a list of where that particular Hebrew word is used in the OT and asked if you could show me in any of those verses where the Hebrew word means what you are explaining it to mean when you say that Jesus is the 'root of Jesse.'I don't find your understanding applicable in any of those verses and so you are trying to make a definition from a modern dictionary be the definition of the Hebrew word used for 'root' but it doesn't fit…not applicable. Your understanding needs to comply with the intent of the Hebrew word. The intent of the Hebrew word does not need to comply with your understanding. Do you get that?
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,12:16) Kerwin,
I am asking you to use the word 'root' in 'root of Jesse,' from Isa 11, in the same way that Hebrew word used there for 'root' is used when you refer to Jesus as the 'root of Jesse.' I gave you a list of where that particular Hebrew word is used in the OT and asked if you could show me in any of those verses where the Hebrew word means what you are explaining it to mean when you say that Jesus is the 'root of Jesse.'I don't find your understanding applicable in any of those verses and so you are trying to make a definition from a modern dictionary be the definition of the Hebrew word used for 'root' but it doesn't fit…not applicable. Your understanding needs to comply with the intent of the Hebrew word. The intent of the Hebrew word does not need to comply with your understanding. Do you get that?
LU,Daniel 11:7
King James Version (KJV)7 But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail:
Daniel 11:7
New American Standard Bible (NASB)7 But one of the [a]descendants of her line will arise in his place, and he will come against their army and enter the fortress of the king of the North, and he will deal with them and display great strength.
Footnotes:Daniel 11:7 Lit branch of her roots
This is clearly a genealogical use of roots.
Yes, Kerwin, this is genealogical but it is talking about those who came before 'her' (Deborah), her ancestors. The 'root of her' does not include her as the 'root.' She is not an ancestor to the branch mentioned here, she is a sister to the branch apparently according to what Gill says. So even though the root is genealogical, it is not used as you use the root in 'the root of Jesse' as Jesse being the progenitor. Deborah is not a progenitor to the branch in this case.
See Gill:
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleBut out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate,…. Or, “out of a branch of her roots a shoot thereof shall stand or rise up” (x); by “her roots” are meant her ancestors, particularly Ptolemy Lagus; by “a branch” from thence, Ptolemy Philadelphus her father; and by the “shoot” out of that, or its plantation, as the Vulgate Latin version, is designed her brother, Ptolemy Euergetes; who succeeded her father in the kingdom, and stood firm in it; “upon his basis”
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,13:21) Yes, Kerwin, this is genealogical but it is talking about those who came before 'her' (Deborah), her ancestors. The 'root of her' does not include her as the 'root.' She is not an ancestor to the branch mentioned here, she is a sister to the branch apparently according to what Gill says. So even though the root is genealogical, it is not used as you use the root in 'the root of Jesse' as Jesse being the progenitor. Deborah is not a progenitor to the branch in this case. See Gill:
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleBut out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate,…. Or, “out of a branch of her roots a shoot thereof shall stand or rise up” (x); by “her roots” are meant her ancestors, particularly Ptolemy Lagus; by “a branch” from thence, Ptolemy Philadelphus her father; and by the “shoot” out of that, or its plantation, as the Vulgate Latin version, is designed her brother, Ptolemy Euergetes; who succeeded her father in the kingdom, and stood firm in it; “upon his basis”
LU,Out of Jesse's roots a Shoot, a Branch rose up.
Isn't Jesus a member of Jesse' line?
Isn't is he a descendant of Jesse?
Isn't David included among his roots.
A root is one that has children and a branch is a child. Many branches are also roots in a family tree.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,13:21) Yes, Kerwin, this is genealogical but it is talking about those who came before 'her' (Deborah), her ancestors. The 'root of her' does not include her as the 'root.' She is not an ancestor to the branch mentioned here, she is a sister to the branch apparently according to what Gill says. So even though the root is genealogical, it is not used as you use the root in 'the root of Jesse' as Jesse being the progenitor. Deborah is not a progenitor to the branch in this case. See Gill:
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleBut out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate,…. Or, “out of a branch of her roots a shoot thereof shall stand or rise up” (x); by “her roots” are meant her ancestors, particularly Ptolemy Lagus; by “a branch” from thence, Ptolemy Philadelphus her father; and by the “shoot” out of that, or its plantation, as the Vulgate Latin version, is designed her brother, Ptolemy Euergetes; who succeeded her father in the kingdom, and stood firm in it; “upon his basis”
LU,You object to calling Jesse' house Jesse.
Isaiah 27:6
King James Version (KJV)6 He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit.
Isn't it Israel who takes root?
Isn't is the house of Israel that blossoms and buds?
Isn't it the branches of Israel that fill the world with fruit?Hosea 14:5
King James Version (KJV)5 I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon.
Isn't the roots cast forth by Israel?
Isn't Jesus a root that is cast forth by Israel?Isn't Israel the progenitor of Israel in both these cases.
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 27 2013,03:18) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,13:21) Yes, Kerwin, this is genealogical but it is talking about those who came before 'her' (Deborah), her ancestors. The 'root of her' does not include her as the 'root.' She is not an ancestor to the branch mentioned here, she is a sister to the branch apparently according to what Gill says. So even though the root is genealogical, it is not used as you use the root in 'the root of Jesse' as Jesse being the progenitor. Deborah is not a progenitor to the branch in this case. See Gill:
Gill's Exposition of the Entire BibleBut out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate,…. Or, “out of a branch of her roots a shoot thereof shall stand or rise up” (x); by “her roots” are meant her ancestors, particularly Ptolemy Lagus; by “a branch” from thence, Ptolemy Philadelphus her father; and by the “shoot” out of that, or its plantation, as the Vulgate Latin version, is designed her brother, Ptolemy Euergetes; who succeeded her father in the kingdom, and stood firm in it; “upon his basis”
LU,You object to calling Jesse' house Jesse.
Isaiah 27:6
King James Version (KJV)6 He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit.
Isn't it Israel who takes root?
Isn't is the house of Israel that blossoms and buds?
Isn't it the branches of Israel that fill the world with fruit?Hosea 14:5
King James Version (KJV)5 I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon.
Isn't the roots cast forth by Israel?
Isn't Jesus a root that cast forth by Israel?Isn't Israel the progenitor of Israel in both these cases.
Kerwin………….Right on brother , the words ROOT AND OFFSPRING! AND BRANCHES are all linage related. Jesus came “from” the roots of Jesse and he is an offshoot of his linage , as written simple and clearly.But these Trinitarians and Preexistences have to try to make something clear , cloudy, and murk up the water in order to support their “MYSTERY” religions they preach. They want to break down any tie to Jesus being a pure human being with any human roots, or ties as far as that goes. They are false teacher who can't except any simple truth. IMO
Peace and love to you and your brother…………………..gene
Kathi,
I feel for you on this one, because I've been there many times before with Kerwin. He will simply not give up. It is easy for anyone to see that he is unable to find the actual ROOT of anyone in the Bible who didn't come BEFORE the ones he was the root OF. “A branch OF her roots” is not the same as her saying, “I AM the root of so and so”……… and Kerwin knows this. He will not be able to find the comparison scripture you are asking for – one that is in line with Jesus saying he IS the Root of David. But he will surely keep you busy for months trying to AVOID that actual point you are trying to make. Good luck to you!
GENE, why are you even commenting on this thread again without answering the question Kathi asked you?
Please answer that question. You have already acknowledged that when Paul said the love of money was the ROOT of all kinds of evil, Paul meant that the love of money came BEFORE that “all kinds of evil”. That shows us that you DO understand this “root” concept, and are only pretending not to understand it because of Rev 22:16.
And once you HONESTLY answer that simple question Kathi asked you, we will have more proof that you DO understand the concept of a “root” coming BEFORE the things he is the root OF. (Perhaps that is why you ignored the question?)
Anyway, I was prompted by Kathi's question to ask one of my own:
Gene and Kerwin, in Alex Haley's best selling novel “Roots”, did the author research his ANCESTORS? Or his DESCENDANTS? Which of these two did he refer to as his “ROOTS”?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 29 2013,08:57) Kathi, I feel for you on this one, because I've been there many times before with Kerwin. He will simply not give up. It is easy for anyone to see that he is unable to find the actual ROOT of anyone in the Bible who didn't come BEFORE the ones he was the root OF. “A branch OF her roots” is not the same as her saying, “I AM the root of so and so”……… and Kerwin knows this. He will not be able to find the comparison scripture you are asking for – one that is in line with Jesus saying he IS the Root of David. But he will surely keep you busy for months trying to AVOID that actual point you are trying to make. Good luck to you!
GENE, why are you even commenting on this thread again without answering the question Kathi asked you?
Please answer that question. You have already acknowledged that when Paul said the love of money was the ROOT of all kinds of evil, Paul meant that the love of money came BEFORE that “all kinds of evil”. That shows us that you DO understand this “root” concept, and are only pretending not to understand it because of Rev 22:16.
And once you HONESTLY answer that simple question Kathi asked you, we will have more proof that you DO understand the concept of a “root” coming BEFORE the things he is the root OF. (Perhaps that is why you ignored the question?)
Anyway, I was prompted by Kathi's question to ask one of my own:
Gene and Kerwin, in Alex Haley's best selling novel “Roots”, did the author research his ANCESTORS? Or his DESCENDANTS? Which of these two did he refer to as his “ROOTS”?
Mike,Who are Jesus' children?
Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 29 2013,12:51) K Does Christ as children
Scriptures says he as brothers ,right
T,Hebrews 2:13
King James Version (KJV)13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 29 2013,00:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 29 2013,08:57)
Gene and Kerwin, in Alex Haley's best selling novel “Roots”, did the author research his ANCESTORS? Or his DESCENDANTS? Which of these two did he refer to as his “ROOTS”?
Mike,Who are Jesus' children?
Jesus doesn't have any LITERAL children of his own. He is METAPHORICALLY our “everlasting father” in the sense that he protects us like a father figure. (Is 9:6) It is similar to Job saying he was a “father” to the poor, or Paul saying he was a “father” to his disciples.Could you now answer MY questions?
1. Was Paul saying the love of money, as the “ROOT”, came BEFORE all kinds of evil? YES or NO?
2. In Alex Haley's best selling novel “Roots”, did the author research his ANCESTORS? Or his DESCENDANTS? Which of these two did he refer to as his “ROOTS”?
Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 30 2013,11:12) Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 29 2013,12:51) K Does Christ as children
Scriptures says he as brothers ,right
T,Hebrews 2:13
King James Version (KJV)13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.
KHeb 2:11 Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.
Heb 2:12 He says,
“I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises.”
Heb 2:13 And again,
“I will put my trust in him.”And again he says,
“Here am I, and the children God has given me.”
Heb 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—what it means because we know that Brothers and children are allegorical names for the real message ,right
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 30 2013,22:33) Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 29 2013,00:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 29 2013,08:57)
Gene and Kerwin, in Alex Haley's best selling novel “Roots”, did the author research his ANCESTORS? Or his DESCENDANTS? Which of these two did he refer to as his “ROOTS”?
Mike,Who are Jesus' children?
Jesus doesn't have any LITERAL children of his own. He is METAPHORICALLY our “everlasting father” in the sense that he protects us like a father figure. (Is 9:6) It is similar to Job saying he was a “father” to the poor, or Paul saying he was a “father” to his disciples.Could you now answer MY questions?
1. Was Paul saying the love of money, as the “ROOT”, came BEFORE all kinds of evil? YES or NO?
2. In Alex Haley's best selling novel “Roots”, did the author research his ANCESTORS? Or his DESCENDANTS? Which of these two did he refer to as his “ROOTS”?
Mike,To me your questions are taking side tracts that divert from a true understanding.
A person can only be both a branch and a root in a family tree.
Sin can act in the same way with one sin leading to others.
Still considering Jesus is a human being and not a sin the question becomes how does Scripture declare Jesus is a root of Jesse.
Scripture teaches us that he has no children of the flesh. His children are of the spirit as they do the works of the Son.
John 8:39
King James Version (KJV)39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 30 2013,23:09) Quote (kerwin @ Mar. 30 2013,11:12) Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 29 2013,12:51) K Does Christ as children
Scriptures says he as brothers ,right
T,Hebrews 2:13
King James Version (KJV)13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.
KHeb 2:11 Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.
Heb 2:12 He says,
“I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises.”
Heb 2:13 And again,
“I will put my trust in him.”And again he says,
“Here am I, and the children God has given me.”
Heb 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—what it means because we know that Brothers and children are allegorical names for the real message ,right
T,John 8:39
King James Version (KJV)39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
Jesus' children are his because they do the works he does. The are his brothers because they, like him, do the works of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
