out of context...

[Guest idied2]

...and it therefore follows that because true Jews are actually Christians...then all G-ds promises to the Jewish people are really to the Christians

They are. the whole new testament says so.

41 They said to Him, "He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons."

42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: 'The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord's doing, And it is marvelous in our eyes'?

43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.

Ac 13:46

Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.

1Pe 2:7

Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, "The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone,"

In CHRIST JESUS :hug: :hug: :hug:

[nebula]

Hey, idied2 -

[Ovedya]

hey ya'll

first off, not really sure where this belongs, so if im wrong, mods get to work

anyway, it bothers me when scriptures are taken out of context, usually to back an opinion. was just wondering what you guys/gals thought. which scriptures do you see taken out of context either most often or maybe once or twice, but it was so bad that you had to mention it.

hopefully, we could learn a thing or two from others responses and change some of our previous thoughts on specific verses... this post will no doubt lead to other controversial issues, but i would like to at least start it w/ flat input.

in Christ

I see several. But the one I see most is "God does not change" (Mal. 3:6)

This one verse is used by believers to explain all kinds of things. But the Bible shows us that God does change. He changes His mind, and He has even changed His form (Aren't incarnation and resurrection both changes?).

God's statement in Mal. 3:6 in context is referring to God's covenant with the sons of Jacob (The children of Israel). With respect to God's covenant, His promise, He has not, nor ever will change. Also, with respect to God's holiness, righteousness, and all the qualities of His divinity, He cannot, nor will He ever change.

[dwinkjr]

...and it therefore follows that because true Jews are actually Christians...then all G-ds promises to the Jewish people are really to the Christians

They are. the whole new testament says so.

41 They said to Him, "He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons."

42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: 'The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord's doing, And it is marvelous in our eyes'?

43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.

Ac 13:46

Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.

1Pe 2:7

Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, "The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone,"

In CHRIST JESUS :hug: :hug: :hug:

The ones from whom the Kingdom was taken from was the corrupt Jewish leadership. The vineyard represents Israel. Jesus was talking to the "husbandmen," not the vineyard. The Kingdom of God was not taken from the Jews. That is just a irresponsible misinterpretation on your part.

You are butchering the Word of God with your replacement theology garbage.

Shiloh I am a little confused as to what you are saying here.

Are you saying that the Jews donot need Christ to enter the Kingdom of God?

Are you saying they can do it on there own accord and by there own traditions?

And here i always thought Christ came to die for all sins... and that no man shall unto the kingdom of God but through him... Are you saying Christ really meant no Gentile not really no man?

Somebody care to clarify what is being said here?

God Bless,

Dave

[Guest shiloh357]

...and it therefore follows that because true Jews are actually Christians...then all G-ds promises to the Jewish people are really to the Christians

They are. the whole new testament says so.

41 They said to Him, "He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons."

42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: 'The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord's doing, And it is marvelous in our eyes'?

43 "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.

Ac 13:46

Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, "It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.

1Pe 2:7

Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, "The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone,"

In CHRIST JESUS :hug: :hug: :hug:

The ones from whom the Kingdom was taken from was the corrupt Jewish leadership. The vineyard represents Israel. Jesus was talking to the "husbandmen," not the vineyard. The Kingdom of God was not taken from the Jews. That is just a irresponsible misinterpretation on your part.

You are butchering the Word of God with your replacement theology garbage.

Shiloh I am a little confused as to what you are saying here.

Are you saying that the Jews donot need Christ to enter the Kingdom of God?

Are you saying they can do it on there own accord and by there own traditions?

And here i always thought Christ came to die for all sins... and that no man shall unto the kingdom of God but through him... Are you saying Christ really meant no Gentile not really no man?

Somebody care to clarify what is being said here?

God Bless,

Dave

No dwink, that is not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is that everyone tries to down play the role of Jews in the plan of God. People have used the above Scripture about the vineyard to support the notion that the Jewish people no longer have a covenant with God, and that God has rejected them, which is not true, and is not what Jesus is saying in this parable. This parable has also been used to make the argument against Israel having a right to the Land that is theirs by Divine Right, by means of an eternal covenant with God. That is just flat wrong, and is a misuse of this parable.

Christians want to take what Jesus said the the PHARISEES and apply to all Jewish people, and that is just flat wrong. People assume that God has taken all of His promises to Israel and transferred them to the Church, and now the Church is "Israel." That is called replacement theology, and is nothing more than just gross heresy.

Furthermore, while the Church is busy claiming all of the promises that God made to Israel, they continually reject God's Torah. They want the promises, but not the obedience that those promises were conditional upon. It just a bunch of theological gymnastics and some of the worst attempts at biblcial interpretation I have ever seen.

No one is saying that Jews are saved any different than anyone else. Obviously dwink, you were not reading VERY closely, or you would not be asking me such ridiculous questions!! How in the world could you take my words in that post and say that I was suggesting such a thing? You need to go back and read it better.

[AFaceInTheCrowd]

Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

That's my vote.  Many do not understand the use of the word judge within the NT Scriptures, which leads to total misunderstanding on sin itself.

Luke 12:57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?

1 Cor. 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

In His Love,

Suzanne

AMEN..The most misunderstood quote in my opinion

[AFaceInTheCrowd]

Genesis 9:24,And Noah awoke from his wine and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

While many explanations have been suggested for this phrase,it is best to take it to mean what it says.There is no indication of any gross violation.The phrase is not the same as in Leviticus 20:17,where it is parallel to another term used exclusively for sexual violations.The phrase indicates that this violation of privacy was merely the beginning of eventual sexual dagradation.....(nelson studies)

[dwinkjr]

The Kingdom of God was not taken from the Jews.

I was not accusing you of saying any of my earlier statements i was questioning what you meant by yours.

The Above quote from you is what concerned me. Maybe you mean kingdom of God differently then I do. But the bottom line is no man shall enter into the kingdom of God but through Christ. Whether hte jews have a right to land on this planet really doesn't concern me much. whether i have land on this planet doesn't concern me much either. What concerns me is my place in eternity and all Jews and Gentiles alike should be concerned about that.

By the way this is hte first i have heard the term "replacement theology" so that would be why i needed clarification on what you were saying. And after reading, rereading and rereading your post a third time it was still not clear on what you were stating as far as The Kingdom of God being taken from the jews, Furthermore i am still not sure what you meant.

God Bless,

Dave

[Guest LadyC]

hey ya'll

first off, not really sure where this belongs, so if im wrong, mods get to work

anyway, it bothers me when scriptures are taken out of context, usually to back an opinion. was just wondering what you guys/gals thought. which scriptures do you see taken out of context either most often or maybe once or twice, but it was so bad that you had to mention it.

hopefully, we could learn a thing or two from others responses and change some of our previous thoughts on specific verses... this post will no doubt lead to other controversial issues, but i would like to at least start it w/ flat input.

in Christ

i can't even begin to count the scriptures i see taken out of context for this purpose, and it drives me BONKERS! to understand the context of a passage, it needs to be compared first with the rest of that particular chapter(s), and secondly with the rest of the entire Bible, to be sure that the chapter(s) wasn't instructional to a specific person or group for a particular reason.

[Guest shiloh357]

The Kingdom of God was not taken from the Jews.

I was not accusing you of saying any of my earlier statements i was questioning what you meant by yours.

The Above quote from you is what concerned me. Maybe you mean kingdom of God differently then I do. But the bottom line is no man shall enter into the kingdom of God but through Christ. Whether hte jews have a right to land on this planet really doesn't concern me much. whether i have land on this planet doesn't concern me much either. What concerns me is my place in eternity and all Jews and Gentiles alike should be concerned about that.

By the way this is hte first i have heard the term "replacement theology" so that would be why i needed clarification on what you were saying. And after reading, rereading and rereading your post a third time it was still not clear on what you were stating as far as The Kingdom of God being taken from the jews, Furthermore i am still not sure what you meant.

God Bless,

Dave

Have you read the parable of the vineyard? The vineyard represents Israel. The wicked husbandmen represent the Pharissees and the corrupt Jewish leadership of the 1st century.

Jesus was saying that just as the vineyard was taken away from the wicked husbandmen likewise the right to be the spiritual leaders of the Jewish people was being taken from them.

Again, this parable has been twisted from its plain meaning into the idea that the Church has replaced the Jews as the Chosen People, and that God is no longer honoring His covenant with Israel. That is what I am against. It is called replacement theology, and is a grave heresy. I am not addressing how Jews are saved, because that should go without saying. I am addressing the issue of replacement theology that I detected in idied2's post.

Whether hte jews have a right to land on this planet really doesn't concern me much.

Well, it concerns God quite a bit, so much so that he has given to them by an eternal blood covenant with Abraham, and it is so important to him, that the integrity of His Name is at stake regarding it according to Ezekiel 36. Israel's right to the Land is based upon God's promise. If God didn't keep His promise to Abraham about the Land, we could not trust Him about the promise of salvation. So Israel's right to the So if Israel's right to the Land is important to God, it should be important to us.