If your life is not in jeopardy for what you
believe, you’re probably on the wrong side!
“Indeed, all who want
to live a godly life united with the Messiah Yeshua will be persecuted.” (2Tim 3:12)
It is what you actually believe that determines how you walk out your faith,
“but avoid stupid controversies, genealogies,
quarrels and fights about the Torah; because they are worthless and
futile.” (Titus 3:9)
Like this page? Share it.
Others:
Please Note: Nothing on this website should be taken as anti-Church. I am not anti-anything or anyone. I am only pro-Torah, pro-Truth, and pro-Grace. Sometimes the Truth upsets our long-held beliefs. Why isn’t my theology consistent throughout this website?
[Explanations of rabbinic citations are HERE]
Developing a
Systematic Messianic Theology
“The purpose of careful theological formulations is not to put barriers in the way of people who are seeking salvation, but to define clearly the truths upon which genuine [Biblical] faith rests, so that people will not be misled by false doctrines.” [Bowman]
The Davidic Covenant
Adapted in part from
http://doctrine.org/covenants-of-israel/
accessed 30 August 2016. Used with permission.[1]
In the Davidic Covenant (2Sam 7:4-29 cf. 2Sam. 23:5; 2Chron 21:7; Ps 89:3-4; Ps 89:19-37; Isa 9:6-7; Jer 33:19-26; Luke 1:31-33), God promised to establish the throne of David forever. It too was a sovereignly established covenant and amplified the “seed” aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant. The land of Israel (promised in the Abrahamic covenant) is also mentioned in 2Sam 7:10 in which God promised to “plant” Israel permanently in the land (cf. Jer 24:6; Jer. 32:36-41; Amos 9:15).
The Davidic Covenant was intimated in Jacob’s blessings of his son before his death. David was not identified but his tribe was. Jacob recognized that rulership came from Judah. The text reads:
8“Y’hudah, your brothers will acknowledge you, your hand will be on the neck of your enemies, your father’s sons will bow down before you. 9Y’hudah is a lion’s cub; my son, you stand over the prey. He crouches down and stretches like a lion; like a lioness, who dares to provoke him? 10The scepter will not pass from Y’hudah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his legs, until He comes to whom [obedience] belongs; and it is He whom the peoples will obey. 11Tying His donkey to the vine, His donkey’s colt to the choice grapevine, He washes His clothes in wine, His robes in the blood of grapes. 12His eyes will be darker than wine, His teeth whiter than milk. (Gen 49:8-12).
HaShem promised to preserve David’s throne forever. The king of Israel had to be a firstborn from the bloodline of David. There was a problem, however. God had a “blood curse” on Coniah or Jeconiah, one of the kings in David’s line because of his wickedness (Jer 22:24-30 cf. 2Kings 24:5-15). Yosef, Miryam’s husband, was from this Solomonic line. If Yeshua had been the biological offspring of Yosef, he would not have been qualified for kingship since God had cursed this line. How did God solve this problem? David had another son, Nathan. This line ended in Eli (Luke 3:23). Eli had no sons. He had three daughters. One was named Miryam. Could daughters have inheritance rights? The answer is not normally. But, Miryam was eligible due to a case brought by the daughters of Tz'lof'chad to Moshe. In this case, Moshe allowed the daughters inheritance rights if there were no sons and the daughter married within her tribe (Num 26:33; Num. 27:1-11; Num. 36:2-12; Josh 17:3-6; 1Chron 7:15). Miryam, as it happened, fit the requirements perfectly. She was a daughter, had no brothers, and married Yosef, a man from the same tribe as she – the tribe of Y'hudah. Yosef legally adopted Yeshua, which meant He had the royal right of the firstborn. Miryam, because of her uncursed bloodline gave Yeshua the legal blood right to the throne. The virgin birth of Yeshua was essential to the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant for Yeshua himself will fulfill the promise of the covenant as he reigns as king upon the earth (Zech 14.9).
1. From that website: “©2002 Don Samdahl. Anyone is free to reproduce this material and distribute it, but it may not be sold.” Much in the original article was based on anti-Semitic Replacement Theology and other gross errors of Church interpretation, but much of it was solid and the outline was too good to not be of very good use. There is much in the original article that I personally disagree with, and I have commented on significant disagreements. [BACK]
|
ANXIOUSLY WATCHING FOR MASHIACH’S RETURN,
SPEEDILY AND IN OUR DAY. MARANA, TA!
