Fw: [b-hebrew] LORD
Yigal-Levin at utc.edu
Fri Feb 14 10:13:16 EST 2003
I'm not really sure what it is that you're arguing here.
At 09:44 AM 2/14/2003 EST, Polycarp66 at aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 2/14/2003 9:09:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>Yigal-Levin at utc.edu writes:
> Despite my Jewish reading, I am capable of assuming, as do many critical
> scholars, that the superscription "A psalm of David" may NOT be part of the
> original text of Ps. 110. I don't KONW who the original author is - and I
> only said that I assumed that "my lord: was a priest because of the
> refference to "a priest after the order of Melchizedek". But even if it was
> David, his calling a priest "my lord" would not bother me.
> However, presuming to read a trinitarian godhead into this context does.
> The use of this verse in Jesus' polemic with the Pharisees in Matt.
> 22:42-45/Mark 12:35-37/Luke 20:41-44 means nothing other than that "Mark"
> (or his source), writing the story some decades after Jesus, already
> assumed that Jesus was both "Lord" and "Son of David/Messiah/Christ".
> You will notice that the NT (I assume following the LXX) uses "Lord"
> (KURIOS) for both the "YHWH" and "Adoni" of the Hebrew. Assuming that
> "Mark" the Greek-speaking Gentile had no knowledge of the Hebrew, this
> could even make sense. But WE are trying to understand the Hebrew - let's
> do it without preconceptions.
> I would understand it to be an accession psalm in which the speaker
>(perhaps a priest as you say) sets forth the basis of the kingship as the
>elevation on the basis of YHWH's decree.
Dr. Yigal Levin
Dept. of Philosophy and Religion
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
615 McCallie Avenue
Chattanooga TN 37403-2598
More information about the b-hebrew