"A Sword Thy Own Soul Shall Pierce"

  • Thread starter Thread starter teeboy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

teeboy

Guest
Question 1:

Do you believe or disbelieve the below proposition.

Proposition:
Mary and Joseph were of the Tribe of Judah. I believe they were both descended from King David (Nathan, son of David on Mary’s side and Solomon son of David on Joseph’s side). After David’s sin with Bethsheba, God cursed the House of David by promising David that the sword would never leave his house; shortly after the curse, we read about David’s son trying to kill his father.

We all play a part in the death of Jesus. A certain faction of Jews at the time of Jesus played a very special part. Even Jews of the House of David played a part in the death of Jesus. This aforementioned House played a very special role in the conspiracy against Jesus.

Question 2:
If you agree with this proposition, can you render your belief as to who specifically of the House of David were key co-conspirators against Jesus (regardless of their national allegiance, citizenship, or religion)?
 
Let me correct the statement to the effect that God cursed the House of David with the sword. I should have typed that the House of David cursed itself.
 
I would answer that humanity from its beginning to end shares equally in Our Lord’s Passion. It cannot be pinned on any one person or group of persons.
 
John 1:11 states that he came to his own but his own did not accept him. It means his own people, the Jews, of course. It may be that his tribe didn’t support him as they might have for a few reasons: They may have feared challenging Herod for the throne. After all, he had the support of Rome and of the Roman army. Even when the crowds called for Jesus to be crowned king Jesus refused, but not out of fear of Herod, of course, but because he didn’t come to be crowned king but to be the servant of God and the propitiation for our sins.

The other reason I can see is that his tribe simply didn’t see him as the Messiah. After all, they were awaiting another David, who would win back their kingdom with the sword. Jesus’ talk of peace and forgiveness simply didn’t fit with their ideas of who the Messiah would be. And Our Lord went out of his way to make it clear his kingdom was not an earthly one, but a heavenly one. He said as much to Pilate. I don’t see evidence in Scripture that the House of David conpired against Jesus as much as they simply didn’t have faith in him and his gospel.

The words you quoted in your title were spoken to Mary not to the whole House of David. I think you are overextending comparisons. Simeon meant that Mary would know great sorrow due to being the Mother of the Messiah, not that her family would conspire against her Son. The sword curse was fulfilled in Jesus’ crucifixion, though, in which both Jews and Gentiles took an equal part. Both condemned him and both had a hand in his death. Therefore, we are all cursed with the sword of death, but Christ’s redemptive death has removed that curse for all who are baptized into his death and resurrection. 🙂
 
Della said:
John 1:11 states that he came to his own but his own did not accept him. It means his own people, the Jews, of course. It may be that his tribe didn’t support him as they might have for a few reasons: They may have feared challenging Herod for the throne. After all, he had the support of Rome and of the Roman army. Even when the crowds called for Jesus to be crowned king Jesus refused, but not out of fear of Herod, of course, but because he didn’t come to be crowned king but to be the servant of God and the propitiation for our sins.

The other reason I can see is that his tribe simply didn’t see him as the Messiah. After all, they were awaiting another David, who would win back their kingdom with the sword. Jesus’ talk of peace and forgiveness simply didn’t fit with their ideas of who the Messiah would be. And Our Lord went out of his way to make it clear his kingdom was not an earthly one, but a heavenly one. He said as much to Pilate. I don’t see evidence in Scripture that the House of David conpired against Jesus as much as they simply didn’t have faith in him and his gospel.

The words you quoted in your title were spoken to Mary not to the whole House of David. I think you are overextending comparisons. Simeon meant that Mary would know great sorrow due to being the Mother of the Messiah, not that her family would conspire against her Son. The sword curse was fulfilled in Jesus’ crucifixion, though, in which both Jews and Gentiles took an equal part. Both condemned him and both had a hand in his death. Therefore, we are all cursed with the sword of death, but Christ’s redemptive death has removed that curse for all who are baptized into his death and resurrection. 🙂
Click to expand...
I agree.

Well said.
 
DaveBj said:
I agree.

Well said.
Click to expand...
Yes. I mostly agree too. But Simeon was a prophet and may have meant nothing when he spoke the words to Mary, as it was God speaking through Simeon.

I am still looking for any evidence of key perpetration from the House of David.
 
teeboy said:
Yes. I mostly agree too. But Simeon was a prophet and may have meant nothing when he spoke the words to Mary, as it was God speaking through Simeon.
Click to expand...
God does not use people like puppets with no minds of their own. They were Simeon’s words expressed as he did because of the person he was, but it was God’s intention he was speaking. So, it is fine to say that Simeon meant what God meant–that Mary would know deep sorrow because she is the Mother of the Messiah.
I am still looking for any evidence of key perpetration from the House of David.
Click to expand...
If you find any, let us know. 😉
 
Della said:
God does not use people like puppets with no minds of their own. They were Simeon’s words expressed as he did because of the person he was, but it was God’s intention he was speaking. So, it is fine to say that Simeon meant what God meant–that Mary would know deep sorrow because she is the Mother of the Messiah.

If you find any, let us know. 😉
Click to expand...
That reads like an order.
 
I think you’d have a lot more luck looking at how the remaining members of the House of David who survived Jesus ended up sharing his sufferings, in part. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History is very good on this. Jesus’ cousin James was one of the first and most notable martyrs, for instance.

But that wasn’t a curse; it was a blessing - the crown on James’ righteous life.

Basically the only reason anybody from the House of David survived was that they’d pretty much all become Christian, and could honestly tell the Romans that Jesus was already their king and that his kingdom was the Kingdom of Heaven, so they had no plans at all for taking over Israel or the Roman Empire. So since the Romans were busy persecuting Jews for the Revolt, and hadn’t gotten into persecuting Christians yet, they were let go.
 
Mintaka said:
I think you’d have a lot more luck looking at how the remaining members of the House of David who survived Jesus ended up sharing his sufferings, in part. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History is very good on this. Jesus’ cousin James was one of the first and most notable martyrs, for instance.

But that wasn’t a curse; it was a blessing - the crown on James’ righteous life.

Basically the only reason anybody from the House of David survived was that they’d pretty much all become Christian, and could honestly tell the Romans that Jesus was already their king and that his kingdom was the Kingdom of Heaven, so they had no plans at all for taking over Israel or the Roman Empire. So since the Romans were busy persecuting Jews for the Revolt, and hadn’t gotten into persecuting Christians yet, they were let go.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your informative narrative with a historical context. I’ll take your word for it. And yes, a martyr does recieve a blessing or privilege; I believe it is called an Aurea (spelling may be off).
 
Della said:
Order? Hardly. A challenge, yes, but not an order. If you want to waste your time, that’s up to you. 🤷
Click to expand...
Thank you for your comment about Jesus fulfilling the knowledge given to David about the sword not leaving his house. I view this in light of the promise made to David regarding his throne prior to his sin. However, I believe we are still just touching the surface; the details are still a mystery.
 
teeboy said:
Question 1:

Do you believe or disbelieve the below proposition.

Proposition:
Mary and Joseph were of the Tribe of Judah. I believe they were both descended from King David (Nathan, son of David on Mary’s side and Solomon son of David on Joseph’s side). After David’s sin with Bethsheba, God cursed the House of David by promising David that the sword would never leave his house; shortly after the curse, we read about David’s son trying to kill his father.

We all play a part in the death of Jesus. A certain faction of Jews at the time of Jesus played a very special part. Even Jews of the House of David played a part in the death of Jesus. This aforementioned House played a very special role in the conspiracy against Jesus.

Question 2:
If you agree with this proposition, can you render your belief as to who specifically of the House of David were key co-conspirators against Jesus (regardless of their national allegiance, citizenship, or religion)?
Click to expand...
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 35. And thy own soul a sword shall pierce. These words, which figuratively express the grief of the blessed Virgin mother, when present at the death of her Son, are to be taken by way of a parenthesis. — That out of many hearts thoughts may be revealed, and these are to be joined with what went before; to wit, that child shall be a sign of contradiction, set unto the fall and resurrection of many, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed and disclosed; when some shall believe, and others remain in their obstinacy. (Witham) — Ven. Bede, and many others, understand this of the sharp sorrow, which wounded the soul of the blessed Virgin Mary, at the time of Christ’s passion. (Barradius) — Carthusianus [Denis the Carthusian?] and Jansenius explain this passage as follows: Behold, this child is placed for a sign that shall be contradicted, which as a sword of most poignant grief will pierce thy soul, O Virgin! But Christ shall be contradicted, that the thoughts of the Jews may be revealed from many hearts, and it may appear who among them are good, and who are wicked and hypocrites. (Barradius)
 
thistle said:
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 35. And thy own soul a sword shall pierce. These words, which figuratively express the grief of the blessed Virgin mother, when present at the death of her Son, are to be taken by way of a parenthesis. — That out of many hearts thoughts may be revealed, and these are to be joined with what went before; to wit, that child shall be a sign of contradiction, set unto the fall and resurrection of many, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed and disclosed; when some shall believe, and others remain in their obstinacy. (Witham) — Ven. Bede, and many others, understand this of the sharp sorrow, which wounded the soul of the blessed Virgin Mary, at the time of Christ’s passion. (Barradius) — Carthusianus [Denis the Carthusian?] and Jansenius explain this passage as follows: Behold, this child is placed for a sign that shall be contradicted, which as a sword of most poignant grief will pierce thy soul, O Virgin! But Christ shall be contradicted, that the thoughts of the Jews may be revealed from many hearts, and it may appear who among them are good, and who are wicked and hypocrites. (Barradius)
Click to expand...
So, it is safe to say that the sword means more than just fighting within a family?
 
teeboy said:
So, it is safe to say that the sword means more than just fighting within a family?
Click to expand...
A sword can mean many things in scripture. It can mean the Holy Spirit as in when Christ said He came to bring the sword (of Truth). It can mean suffering as in Mary’s heart being pierced. It can mean justice, it can mean vengeance as in the sword of Pharao, it can mean…well… a plain ole’ sword, it can mean combinations of things and many others not listed. Everything has to do with the context.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top