- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Psalm 110
A Psalm of David.110:1 The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. 2 The Lord shall send out a rod of power for thee out of Sion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. 3 With thee is dominion in the day of thy power, in the splendours of thy saints: I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning. 4 The Lord sware, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec. 5 The Lord at thy right hand has dashed in pieces kings in the day of his wrath. 6 He shall judge among the nations, he shall fill up the number of corpses, he shall crush the heads of many on the earth. 7 He shall drink of the brook in the way; therefore shall he lift up the head.
found here: http://www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/Psalms/index.htm
I have also seen v. 3b as:
From the womb before the day-star, I begat TheeI think that places the begetting sometime before the naming of morning in Genesis 1:3, and before the sun existed which was day four of creation.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
What do you say 'day-star' is? Any thoughts?
Lu,
'Morning/Day Star' is the planet Venus which rises in the dawn and is only eclipsed by the greater light of the Sun.
The Romans thought the 'MorningStar' was a star because it was so bright in the dawn light, that they called it 'Lucifer', meaning 'Lightbringer'.
The atmostphere of Venus reflects so much of the Sun's light that it appears to be the source of a light itself. It is also called 'the most beautiful planet…next to the Earth'.
Because of the 'Psalms' verse 'Lucifer' is associated with the angel that became 'Satan'.
But we only do so through a desire to give him a 'pre-Satanic' name.
And there is nothing wrong with that if it helps to identify clearly, one person, or entity, from another.
God did not call Himself, 'I AM', until He was asked by Moses. And why would He. There was Only One who was God. But then mankind invented other 'gods' for himself. So, a distinction needed to be made between the 'One True God' and all other 'so-called gods'. Hence, God calls Himself by the greatest name there can ever be: “I AM”, for this describes one who 'Always Was, Always Is, and Always Will be', one who is 'All thing to All other things', from whom all other things are.Jesus is given the name, 'Morning Star' in Revelation because he is the lightbringer…the light of Life and Truth to mankind and that Morning Star will never be eclipsed by the Sun (God Almighty) but be one with it so there will be no darkness but light 'day and night'.
Now, what of 'Lucifer', the 'daystar', falling…?
Could it be that the angel who became Satan was meant to be 'that lightbringer' but sinned and his glory overshadowed by the light of God, the Sun.
Venus, made desolate.
Throughtout Scriptures we read of 'the first – born' sinning and being 'eclipsed' by another…another who is 'begotten' as 'firstborn' over the 'first – born'…
Thanks JA for your thoughts. I do not think that the 'day-star' is referring to satan in this passage. If satan was born of God instead of created of God then we would read that satan had the very nature of God. He bears the title of god but not the nature or God. Also, if the passage was about the Son 'eclipsing' another one born of God then it would say 'from the womb, after the day-star, I begat thee.' It doesn't say 'after' (or over for that matter) it says 'before.'
I do not believe that anyone with the very nature of God can become a liar.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 06 2010,02:12) I think that places the begetting sometime before the naming of morning in Genesis 1:3, and before the sun existed which was day four of creation.
Hi KathiSure if you believe the Father has a womb and that is what the prophetic psalm is saying.
No other major translation that I know renders the verse “I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning.“.
But even if this is an accurate translation, the Psalm is prophetic and has a two fold application, one it is speaking of David being begotten from his mothers womb and 2 it is prophetic of Jesus being begotten from Marys womb. John 1:1-14
I hope you had a good Holiday!
WJ
Hi Keith,
I buried my dad just over a week ago so my holiday was the first without him…I am celebrating his freedom though.
Regarding the verse “I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning,” there are many who place this begetting before the ages, even of the church fathers.Thanks for your input.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 06 2010,10:57) Hi Keith,
I buried my dad just over a week ago so my holiday was the first without him…I am celebrating his freedom though.
Regarding the verse “I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning,” there are many who place this begetting before the ages, even of the church fathers.Thanks for your input.
Hi KathiSorry about your loss. I didn't know.
I pray that the God of all comfort will be real with you and yours.
Blessings Keith
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 07 2010,01:55) Sure if you believe the Father has a womb and that is what the prophetic psalm is saying. Hi WJ,
You and Jack get so hung up on this stuff. I know you have to believe that anything is possible for the Father, for your God #2 said so in scripture. So you must spout this nonsense as a weak attempt to nullify the fact that Jesus was in fact begotten by his Father, just as you were begotten by yours.
This is the God who created wombs in all flesh and blood creatures. Do you think it impossible for Him to create a spirit womb for the one time use of bearing His Son? It could have been a supernova for all we know. The point is, your argument that God couldn't have brought his Son to birth because “He doesn't have female parts” is lame. God can do ANYTHING.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 07 2010,15:04) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 07 2010,01:55) Sure if you believe the Father has a womb and that is what the prophetic psalm is saying. Hi WJ,
You and Jack get so hung up on this stuff. I know you have to believe that anything is possible for the Father, for your God #2 said so in scripture. So you must spout this nonsense as a weak attempt to nullify the fact that Jesus was in fact begotten by his Father, just as you were begotten by yours.
This is the God who created wombs in all flesh and blood creatures. Do you think it impossible for Him to create a spirit womb for the one time use of bearing His Son? It could have been a supernova for all we know. The point is, your argument that God couldn't have brought his Son to birth because “He doesn't have female parts” is lame. God can do ANYTHING.
mike
In essence, God is both male and female or A-Sexual.A man has authority, a woman has influence.
God is source of both.
He takes the male sense and is called a father because he is head of authority.
but his personal intimate relationship with mankind can be characterized as female, due to his influence in our lives.
————In genesis it did say he made mankind in his own image…THEN SPLIT THEM.
so understanding that he is in essence both masculant and feminant.
The Devil, however, trying to imitate God in all things, perverses his holiness and introduces evil twisted concepts of God in the world, in such manners like hermophroditeness and transexuality.
——And yea Mike is right, God's way of birth could of been what we would consider, a supernova or big bang…
Remember the spirit is different than flesh and creation, the concepts are the same, but the manners of manifestation are totally different.
—–
example: You can stress and be worried, the spiritual afflication can be manifested as depression, the physical manifestation can be cancer.Both are the same affliction with the same attributes and outcome…one is spiritual and different in nature than the physical counterpart.
Wow, thanks guys for your kind words. I was writing about the last week with my dad in the “Prayer for Others” section and guess ya'll didn't see it there. I am doing a little better but I was a tearful, broken hearted mess for a while.
God comforts the broken hearted!
Love you guys…Anyway…back to the topic of when the Son was begotten.
Mike and Rokka,
I agree with you two and see no reason that God the Father couldn't have asexually reproduced His very own offspring from His womb, whatever that means to someone who is God. Perfect begets perfect…the difference, one is very Father and one is very Son. The Father is the source of the Son and not the other way around which is actually a huge difference but both are still perfect. It is interesting to contemplate.Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 06 2010,23:26) Hi LU,
At the Jordan.
That sonship we can follow him into.
Nick,
I disagree, we don't become a son the way that He did.Quote (Lightenup @ July 07 2010,15:55) Mike and Rokka,
I agree with you two and see no reason that God the Father couldn't have asexually reproduced His very own offspring from His womb, whatever that means to someone who is God. Perfect begets perfect…the difference, one is very Father and one is very Son. The Father is the source of the Son and not the other way around which is actually a huge difference but both are still perfect. It is interesting to contemplate.
I didn't read the first page when I first posted, but now that I did…Sorry for your loss!
I lost my big brother 6 months but I rejoice in his death because he was the greatest christian I know. So i know where he is.
I pray that you experience the same comfort I have in my loss, God indeed comforts all!
———
I further agree with you LU, The Father is the source of Jesus.
Jesus is the source of all things, but The Father indeed is the source of Jesus.
The way i understand it now, is that YHVH is the infinite source of all things.
The Word of God (Jesus) is God revealed to creation.
God can never fully reveal his totality to creation, it'd be impossible…but what he has revealed we behold in The Son.
God manifested in creation. The Son of YHVH.
This is how he's God, yet not actually YHVH (The Father) himself.
Anything we can possibly perceive to be God, we do so in The Son.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 07 2010,01:55) Quote (Lightenup @ July 06 2010,02:12) I think that places the begetting sometime before the naming of morning in Genesis 1:3, and before the sun existed which was day four of creation.
Hi KathiSure if you believe the Father has a womb and that is what the prophetic psalm is saying.
No other major translation that I know renders the verse “I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning.“.
But even if this is an accurate translation, the Psalm is prophetic and has a two fold application, one it is speaking of David being begotten from his mothers womb and 2 it is prophetic of Jesus being begotten from Marys womb. John 1:1-14
I hope you had a good Holiday!
WJ
Keith,You are correct. The Psalm is PROPHETIC and Kathi is really reaching on this one by trying to make a Psalm that starts out speaking of a future time to suddenly shift back to the “morning” of the original creation. The “morning” in the Psalm is the dawn of the new covenant age.
So if it is referring to Jesus being begotten it is saying that He was begotten at the dawn of the new covenant age (His exaltation) JUST LIKE THE NEW TESTAMENT PLAINLY SAYS!
Jack
LU………..Nick is not wrong , Like us Jesus had a Physical Berth and a Heavenly Berth, One took place when He was Born through the women Mary , the other was at the Jordan when he recieved the Holy Spirit and was then sent into the world to preach the Gospel of the kingdom of God. People try to make a big deal out of his earthly birth as a preexisting morphed being, which is simply a lie. God had before said through Isiah, what His appearance would be like.
Isa 53:1……> Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? 2> For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground;he has not form nor comeliness and when we shall see him there is no beauty that we should desire him. 3> He is despised and rejected of men; a (MAN) of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him: he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
God the Father Had to create His Genetic Code to match the description he gave of Him. But as Mike brought out that was not a problem for GOD to do , so why does everyone think it is such a big deal for God to do that. Adam and Eves creation was far greater then adding DNA to Mary and having her give birth to a Man Child. Jesus was (NOT) a preexistent Being , he was 100% Pure prophesied foreordained Human being in (EVERY) Way and was not a Son of GOD not more the ADAM was, UNTIL he was baptized at the JORDAN River, Nick is absolutely right on this. IMO
peace and Love to you and yours………………………gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
