It's just so obvious that it is a reference to Jesus being descended from David, from Judah. The genealogies in Matt 1 and Luke 3 confirm this. In fact the first verse of the NT talks about Jesus being the son of Abraham, the son of David (because important promises about their seed were made to them)
Apologists look for Jesus in toast and potatoes so looking for him in roots is no surprise. The fact is that many trees, shrubs, plants etc, propagate from their roots. Aspen, Bamboo, Tree of Heaven(some coincidence huh?) to name a VERY few. The roots grow outward, and a new tree/plant shoots up. It's a shame that Apologists spend so much time twisting the truth, instead of telling the truth. However, most of them are just as deceived as the rest of them.
What is written will be accomplished. Every jot and title but free will is free will. You're decisions are yours alone and are eternal whether you believe it and are obedient or not. As for me and my house we will serve the Lord. A righteous branch of David means David is the root.
I have to slightly disagree. I think it's less that Jesus is rooted in Jesse (which is true) but more that root simply refers to a descendent of Jesse. Jesse is the source, he is the trunk, or more accurately, the stump. The branches had been cut off the top, but there were still roots coming out of the stump (Jesse). One of these roots would end up being the Messiah. The root language refers to a surviving remnant. Isaiah 14:29-30 NKJV - “Do not rejoice, all you of Philistia, Because the rod that struck you is broken; For out of the serpent’s roots will come forth a viper, And its offspring will be a fiery flying serpent. The firstborn of the poor will feed, And the needy will lie down in safety; I will kill your roots with famine, And it will slay your remnant." We see here how the descendents of Philistia are called the roots. Roots simply refers to descendents because they come out from the tree. While it is true that nutrients and water go from the roots to the trunk and also the roots are what keep a tree grounded, and the Bible plays on both of these as metaphors, when speaking about families and offspring, roots only refers to descendents, not ancestors or a source.
Very well put. I’ve heard this same view given & explained. The most important thing to remember is the Bible establishes its own presupposition for Monotheism & Christology in the book of Genesis. So from that point we just need to search out the best interpretation that does not include a literal preexistence of Jesus. The passages Kel brings up here are one’s Biblical Unitarians disagree on. So it’s important not to pretend the explanation is obvious.
What they like to do is pick and choose which verse they like and which one to ignore....this is with all, everybody does it! If they don't like what is being said, they ignore it! We should use two to three witnesses to confirm scripture as in Matthew 18:16, 2 Corinthians 13:1 and Deuteronomy 19:15 kjv. This is how we verify scripture to be true!
I believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus through the virgin Mary. But does that miracle mean: 1, God introduced His seed (?) into the ovum. 2. God created a fetus in Mary and added her DNA. 3. Or God seeded the ovum with David's seed. If it is #3, then the adoptionist Christology (i.e. God adopted Jesus at his baptism (see 1 Chr 22:9-10) would make Jesus the Son of God (or Messiah). And with #3, Mary's questionable genealogy is irrelevant. It's not "lineage" per se that qualifies a contender to claim Messiahship, but Royal Lineage. In 2 Kings 11:1-3 the daughters of the King were not threatened by Athaliah because only males are Royal Seed (therefore Mary is excluded). Jesus' father would have to be a direct descendant of David's to be "Son of David". Don't get me wrong, I believe Jesus is the Messiah, but the NT genealogies are bogus in making that determination. I believe what Peter believed in Acts 2:30, that Jesus is the fruit of David's loins (not from someone else - see Rom 1:3 "Jesus the Messiah our lord was conceived of the sperm of David".
@@TheTrinityDelusion Which one sounds like *a conclusive revelation* and which one sounds like _a carnal-minded nothingburger?_
1. "I Jesus...I am rooted in David and I am a branch of the Davidic root..." 2. *"I JESUS...I am THE invisible GOD **_and_** his visible image, THE LAMB..."*
*REVELATION 22 (KJV)* [3] And there shall be no more curse: but THE throne *of GOD **_and_** of THE LAMB* shall be in it; and *HIS* servants shall serve *HIM:* [4] And they shall see *HIS* face; and *HIS* name shall be in their foreheads.
GOD and THE LAMB are not two separate persons ("they/them"), but one unipersonal, omnipotent, SELF-SACRIFICING Spirit. And HIS name is the name which is above EVERY name: *JESUS.*
Which sounds more like *love* and which sounds more like *_an abomination?_*
1. God created a human being and then commanded that human being to suffer and die an incomprehensibly horrifying death. 2. God "came down from heaven" _without leaving heaven,_ and manifested himself on earth in genuine human form, as _his own_ Son, so that he _himself_ could go to the cross for us, shed _his own_ blood for us, suffer and die _himself_ for us, and raise _himself_ from the dead, so that all who believe on _him_ (not "them") may live with _him_ (not "them") forever.
Unitarians, repent of your heresy and receive the gospel of *love,* the *_self-sacrificial_* *love,* of the Father, whose name is the name which is above _every_ name: *JESUS.*
For *GOD (the ROOT of David)* so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten *SON (the OFFSPRING of David),* that whosoever believeth in *HIM (JESUS, the root AND the offspring of David)* should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jesus is sending his messenger to say that.... that root is the Hebrews 9 testator to inaugurate the 2nd covenant with blood just as Jesus inaugurated the 1st with blood
Scripture doesn't say Jesus is "A" root of David, it says He is "THE" root of David. My God ascended up from the earth to heaven, and He will return the same way. Luke 24:51 KJV And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. Acts 1:11 NASB95 … "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven." Psalm 47:5 NASB95 *_God has ascended with a shout, The LORD, with the sound of a trumpet._* 1 Thessalonians 4:16 NASB95 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
Jesus had this same argument with His enemies:. "My Lord" means Jesus pre-existed David: Psalm 110:1 KJV The Lord said unto *_my Lord,_* Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
@@SSNBN777 "My Lord" means Jesus pre-existed David" No it doesn't. Read your Bible for crying out loud. Peter tells us Psalm 110:1 was fulfilled when God raised Jesus from the dead and seated him at His right hand.
Yep, Jesus became David’s Lord & Savior at the resurrection. David obviously died prior to this. That’s why like Abraham, he died in faith of this FUTURE event. Without Jesus’ death on the cross, David would have died in his sins, having never been atoned for
Is it possible that Matthew is recording the genealogy of Mary? "Husband" or "father" appear to be two choices...as the word means adult male. And in Luke the genealogy has the father of Joseph being "Heli". But then if you put any credence into the "Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew", it clearly says "the husband" from whom was born Jesus. And then why did God say to Jesus you are my son, TODAY I have begotten you? (heb 5:5). help? Is the virgin birth just another supernatural myth to support Jesus being pre-incarnate? Also it must have been well known that Jesus was born before wedlock because the Jews called him illegitimate.
I don't know how anyone can spin either genealogy of Jesus to make it Mary's family tree. Besides, tribal identity was the male line. See Acts 13:30-33 where Paul explains Psalm 2:7 was fulfilled when God raised Jesus from the dead. The man Jesus was a Son but he came to be dead. To live again, he needed to be begotten again. And that is why we can be begotten again in him.
@@TheTrinityDelusion So when Jesus referred to himself as "son of God" did he mean to identify himself as a Godly human opposed to a man serving "their father the devil"?? What you say makes sense to me.
@@letusgather...7820 The children of God are those led by the Spirit of God. It was the same for Jesus. We are sons/children insofar was we WALK by the Spirit, not what we are but what we DO. The resurrected Jesus already did that and he is now a son insofar as what he IS. He did the DOING and now he is a son in terms of his BEING. And we are being conformed into the same image if we walk as he walked. Now we are children insofar as what we DO, then we will be children of God in terms of what we ARE. Sons in a verb way now, sons in a noun way then. When we are resurrected we will be children of God in what we ARE - like Jesus is now.
I love the book of books that we call bible, I know it's the book of truths but not everything in that book is true. Virgin birth of Jesus isn't one of those truths. In the entire scriptures, to be a descendant of someone means nothing more than just that. Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, If a phrase (as was supposed) was added then Luke plainly says what he says, and if that phrase wasn't added then it means no one knew about the virgin birth. Either way, virgin birth is a myth that was put in the scriptures to support the "god-man" idea. Isaiah chapter 7 has nothing to do with Jesus and the context of that chapter proves it. Jesus was no different than any other human being, and if we live like he lived then we will be the same as he is now.
The problem isn't that Jesus is born of a virgin. The problem is the speculations which people place on it. Going well beyond what is written to fit their narratives. Just like denying the the virgin conception to fit your narrative.
So what did Mary mean when she said to the angel who told her she was going to bear a son, how can this be since I have not had known a man? It wouldn't change my faith at all if it were true that Jesus was not born of a virgin...I'd rather have truth than comfort.
@Eli Mason Just be careful with this, because Jesus only became the second Adam when he was resurrected and made immortal. It is incorrect to say Jesus was 'the second Adam' in the days of his walking upon the Earth.
@@bardowesselius4121 You are right, not everything but enough of what they teach is wrong. For example, virgin birth, sinful nature, predestination, omnipresence of God, once saved always saved, that hell is a place of fire and so on. You have to check these things for yourself.
Thank you the clarification of who the scriptures said Jesus was. The root of David indeed.
It's just so obvious that it is a reference to Jesus being descended from David, from Judah. The genealogies in Matt 1 and Luke 3 confirm this. In fact the first verse of the NT talks about Jesus being the son of Abraham, the son of David (because important promises about their seed were made to them)
Apologists look for Jesus in toast and potatoes so looking for him in roots is no surprise. The fact is that many trees, shrubs, plants etc, propagate from their roots. Aspen, Bamboo, Tree of Heaven(some coincidence huh?) to name a VERY few. The roots grow outward, and a new tree/plant shoots up. It's a shame that Apologists spend so much time twisting the truth, instead of telling the truth. However, most of them are just as deceived as the rest of them.
Nice, sweet and to the point. Praise God. Peace
What is written will be accomplished. Every jot and title but free will is free will. You're decisions are yours alone and are eternal whether you believe it and are obedient or not. As for me and my house we will serve the Lord. A righteous branch of David means David is the root.
❤❤❤❤❤
Amen brother!! ❤🔥🙏💪💯
Amen
Thank you!
100%!!!
I have to slightly disagree. I think it's less that Jesus is rooted in Jesse (which is true) but more that root simply refers to a descendent of Jesse. Jesse is the source, he is the trunk, or more accurately, the stump. The branches had been cut off the top, but there were still roots coming out of the stump (Jesse). One of these roots would end up being the Messiah. The root language refers to a surviving remnant.
Isaiah 14:29-30 NKJV - “Do not rejoice, all you of Philistia,
Because the rod that struck you is broken;
For out of the serpent’s roots will come forth a viper,
And its offspring will be a fiery flying serpent. The firstborn of the poor will feed,
And the needy will lie down in safety;
I will kill your roots with famine,
And it will slay your remnant."
We see here how the descendents of Philistia are called the roots. Roots simply refers to descendents because they come out from the tree. While it is true that nutrients and water go from the roots to the trunk and also the roots are what keep a tree grounded, and the Bible plays on both of these as metaphors, when speaking about families and offspring, roots only refers to descendents, not ancestors or a source.
Very well put. I’ve heard this same view given & explained. The most important thing to remember is the Bible establishes its own presupposition for Monotheism & Christology in the book of Genesis. So from that point we just need to search out the best interpretation that does not include a literal preexistence of Jesus. The passages Kel brings up here are one’s Biblical Unitarians disagree on. So it’s important not to pretend the explanation is obvious.
It's absolutely ridiculous. "Jesus is the source AND the offspring". I've heard this so many times. I'm never going back to Trinity World.
Jesus is YHWH (Romans 10:13; cf. Joel 2:32)
Brax. Check-out my comment pertaining to your teaching on FAMILYBIBLEAPOLOGETICS.....
What they like to do is pick and choose which verse they like and which one to ignore....this is with all, everybody does it! If they don't like what is being said, they ignore it! We should use two to three witnesses to confirm scripture as in Matthew 18:16, 2 Corinthians 13:1 and Deuteronomy 19:15 kjv. This is how we verify scripture to be true!
נצר. A
Is a new branch which grows from the root of a plant not from a seed.
(Parthenogenesis?)
Seems like there is this root that constantly want to make Jesus anything other than a man.
I believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus through the virgin Mary. But does that miracle mean: 1, God introduced His seed (?) into the ovum. 2. God created a fetus in Mary and added her DNA. 3. Or God seeded the ovum with David's seed. If it is #3, then the adoptionist Christology (i.e. God adopted Jesus at his baptism (see 1 Chr 22:9-10) would make Jesus the Son of God (or Messiah). And with #3, Mary's questionable genealogy is irrelevant.
It's not "lineage" per se that qualifies a contender to claim Messiahship, but Royal Lineage. In 2 Kings 11:1-3 the daughters of the King were not threatened by Athaliah because only males are Royal Seed (therefore Mary is excluded). Jesus' father would have to be a direct descendant of David's to be "Son of David". Don't get me wrong, I believe Jesus is the Messiah, but the NT genealogies are bogus in making that determination. I believe what Peter believed in Acts 2:30, that Jesus is the fruit of David's loins (not from someone else - see Rom 1:3 "Jesus the Messiah our lord was conceived of the sperm of David".
So there you have it. Jesus being "the root of David" means that Jesus descended from David.
But of course, Jesus being "the _offspring_ of David" _also_ means that Jesus descended from David.
Here then, the Unitarian Jesus' *conclusive **_revelation_** about himself...:*
_"I JESUS.......I am the DESCENDANT aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand the DESCENDANT of David...!!!"_ (Rev.22:16, Unitarian Standard Nonsense Version)
The Unitarian "Jesus" is a fool.
The fool is you my friend. It means he is rooted in David his ancestor and he is a branch of the Davidic root.
@@TheTrinityDelusion
Which one sounds like *a conclusive revelation* and which one sounds like _a carnal-minded nothingburger?_
1. "I Jesus...I am rooted in David and I am a branch of the Davidic root..."
2. *"I JESUS...I am THE invisible GOD **_and_** his visible image, THE LAMB..."*
*REVELATION 22 (KJV)*
[3] And there shall be no more curse: but THE throne *of GOD **_and_** of THE LAMB* shall be in it; and *HIS* servants shall serve *HIM:*
[4] And they shall see *HIS* face; and *HIS* name shall be in their foreheads.
GOD and THE LAMB are not two separate persons ("they/them"), but one unipersonal, omnipotent, SELF-SACRIFICING Spirit. And HIS name is the name which is above EVERY name: *JESUS.*
@@euston2216 typical religious reasoning. You are doing exactly what you accuse us of. Speaking about 'carnally minded'..
@@euston2216 You worship a lamb as God...remind me how worshipping a calf turned out for the Israelites.
Which sounds more like *love* and which sounds more like *_an abomination?_*
1. God created a human being and then commanded that human being to suffer and die an incomprehensibly horrifying death.
2. God "came down from heaven" _without leaving heaven,_ and manifested himself on earth in genuine human form, as _his own_ Son, so that he _himself_ could go to the cross for us, shed _his own_ blood for us, suffer and die _himself_ for us, and raise _himself_ from the dead, so that all who believe on _him_ (not "them") may live with _him_ (not "them") forever.
Unitarians, repent of your heresy and receive the gospel of *love,* the *_self-sacrificial_* *love,* of the Father, whose name is the name which is above _every_ name: *JESUS.*
For *GOD (the ROOT of David)*
so loved the world, that he gave
his only begotten *SON (the OFFSPRING of David),*
that whosoever believeth
in *HIM (JESUS, the root AND the offspring of David)*
should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jesus is sending his messenger to say that.... that root is the Hebrews 9 testator to inaugurate the 2nd covenant with blood just as Jesus inaugurated the 1st with blood
I never read these passages as having anything to do with Jesus being the "source" of Jesse or David.
You'd be surprised at the things people will do in Trinity world.
JUST-LIKE MICAH5:2. The SOURCE of Jesus is GOD.
Scripture doesn't say Jesus is "A" root of David, it says He is "THE" root of David.
My God ascended up from the earth to heaven, and He will return the same way.
Luke 24:51 KJV
And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
Acts 1:11 NASB95
… "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven."
Psalm 47:5 NASB95
*_God has ascended with a shout, The LORD, with the sound of a trumpet._*
1 Thessalonians 4:16 NASB95
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
Jesus had this same argument with His enemies:. "My Lord" means Jesus pre-existed David:
Psalm 110:1 KJV
The Lord said unto *_my Lord,_* Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
David had many sons yet Scripture calls Jesus THE son of David. Now what?
@@SSNBN777 "My Lord" means Jesus pre-existed David"
No it doesn't. Read your Bible for crying out loud. Peter tells us Psalm 110:1 was fulfilled when God raised Jesus from the dead and seated him at His right hand.
Yep, Jesus became David’s Lord & Savior at the resurrection. David obviously died prior to this. That’s why like Abraham, he died in faith of this FUTURE event. Without Jesus’ death on the cross, David would have died in his sins, having never been atoned for
Is it possible that Matthew is recording the genealogy of Mary? "Husband" or "father" appear to be two choices...as the word means adult male. And in Luke the genealogy has the father of Joseph being "Heli". But then if you put any credence into the "Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew", it clearly says "the husband" from whom was born Jesus. And then why did God say to Jesus you are my son, TODAY I have begotten you? (heb 5:5). help? Is the virgin birth just another supernatural myth to support Jesus being pre-incarnate? Also it must have been well known that Jesus was born before wedlock because the Jews called him illegitimate.
I don't know how anyone can spin either genealogy of Jesus to make it Mary's family tree. Besides, tribal identity was the male line. See Acts 13:30-33 where Paul explains Psalm 2:7 was fulfilled when God raised Jesus from the dead. The man Jesus was a Son but he came to be dead. To live again, he needed to be begotten again. And that is why we can be begotten again in him.
@@TheTrinityDelusion So when Jesus referred to himself as "son of God" did he mean to identify himself as a Godly human opposed to a man serving "their father the devil"?? What you say makes sense to me.
@@letusgather...7820 The children of God are those led by the Spirit of God. It was the same for Jesus. We are sons/children insofar was we WALK by the Spirit, not what we are but what we DO. The resurrected Jesus already did that and he is now a son insofar as what he IS. He did the DOING and now he is a son in terms of his BEING. And we are being conformed into the same image if we walk as he walked. Now we are children insofar as what we DO, then we will be children of God in terms of what we ARE. Sons in a verb way now, sons in a noun way then. When we are resurrected we will be children of God in what we ARE - like Jesus is now.
@@TheTrinityDelusion that's the first time I've heard it explained that way. Hmmm great point. Thankful for you
I love the book of books that we call bible, I know it's the book of truths but not everything in that book is true. Virgin birth of Jesus isn't one of those truths.
In the entire scriptures, to be a descendant of someone means nothing more than just that.
Luke 3:23
And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
If a phrase (as was supposed) was added then Luke plainly says what he says, and if that phrase wasn't added then it means no one knew about the virgin birth. Either way, virgin birth is a myth that was put in the scriptures to support the "god-man" idea.
Isaiah chapter 7 has nothing to do with Jesus and the context of that chapter proves it.
Jesus was no different than any other human being, and if we live like he lived then we will be the same as he is now.
The problem isn't that Jesus is born of a virgin. The problem is the speculations which people place on it. Going well beyond what is written to fit their narratives. Just like denying the the virgin conception to fit your narrative.
@@joseph906
I don't have a narrative, that narrative already exists, it's just a matter of seeing it for what it is.
Well, that is your narrative, regardless of how you frame it. But you can keep your narrative if it pleases you.
So what did Mary mean when she said to the angel who told her she was going to bear a son, how can this be since I have not had known a man? It wouldn't change my faith at all if it were true that Jesus was not born of a virgin...I'd rather have truth than comfort.
Alex....Isaiah 7:14 kjv.
jesus is adam
@Eli Mason Just be careful with this, because Jesus only became the second Adam when he was resurrected and made immortal. It is incorrect to say Jesus was 'the second Adam' in the days of his walking upon the Earth.
Yeshua could not sin....Adam sinned.
@Eli Mason Yeshua could not sin...Adam sinned.
@Eli Mason nope
@Eli Mason i did not say that....
And people still believe in a virgin birth from the Roman Empire Bible.
The virgin birth is in the oldest Greek manuscripts, so you are wrong.
Not everything the catholic church teaches is wrong.
@@bardowesselius4121
You are right, not everything but enough of what they teach is wrong. For example, virgin birth, sinful nature, predestination, omnipresence of God, once saved always saved, that hell is a place of fire and so on. You have to check these things for yourself.