Israel

[Jay Ross]

I have 40. I know what they say.

But do you know what they should be saying? That is the question that I have about your understanding of what God actually had recorded in this case of the Hebrew text.

Baloney! I've been reading the Bible for nearly 45 years!

That does not qualify you if you have not validated the contextual accuracy of the bibles that you have read.

I can claim that I have been reading the "bible" for 64 years but during those 64 years of reading the scriptures, it has only been in the last 20 or so years that God has had me verifying the various translations for their contextual accuracies.

IOW you wrote your own bible to please YOU!

That is your opinion because I have questioned your understanding of the Hebrew scriptures.

Your understanding is just as flawed as many other members, here on CB.

 

[Jack]

But do you know what they should be saying?

I KNOW what they say, and it isn't what you are saying.

That is the question that I have about your understanding of what God actually had recorded in this case of the Hebrew text.

That does not qualify you if you have not validated the contextual accuracy of the bibles that you have read.

You're the one trying to rewrite the Bible, not me.

I can claim that I have been reading the "bible" for 64 years but during those 64 years of reading the scriptures, it has only been in the last 20 or so years that God has had me verifying the various translations for their contextual accuracies.

IOW you are trying to rewrite the Bible because you don't like what God said!

That is your opinion because I have questioned your understanding of the Hebrew scriptures.

Are you a Hebrew expert? STOP trying to rewrite the Bible!

Your understanding is just as flawed as many other members, here on CB.

I clearly understand you're attacking the Christian Bible like Satan.

 

[quietthinker]

Contextually, Israel here has the meaning of the Descendants of Jacob in Amos 9:14 and God is intending to gather all of the descendants of Jacob to Himself from where they are living, scattered throughout the whole earth and plant them in His fertile field. The Parable of the Sower in three Gospels comes to mind for me to reinforce this understanding.

Israel cannot be a blessing to all of the people of the earth if they are only to be found in the Land of Canaan. The Israelites have to be rubbing shoulders with all of the different people groups of the earth scattered throughout the whole earth.

Technically the descriptor 'Israel" can have the understanding of "God's people," but in the case of Amos 9:14. Nor is the term "Israel" referring to "a certain ethnicity in a certain geographical location." That is construct of man and not God.

I'm of the understanding that 'children of Abraham' according to Paul includes Gentiles, ie not only those of a particular ethnicity.....and although Amos might have seen no further than his own ethnicity and subsequently wrote in that vein, Paul expands it to mean all God's people......as no doubt was intended by God....but Amos probably/ may have had limited expectations/ understanding

Jesus and John the Baptist qualified the term 'Israel' the same way; John saying God can make children of Abraham out of the very stones and Jesus calling the religious tight shorts, though they were ethnically Hebrew, sons of your Father the Devil.

 

[Jay Ross]

I clearly understand you're attacking the Christian Bible like Satan.

I am afraid that you do not understand that I am actually defending God's recorded words in both the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Yes, the translations do need correction because they are giving the wrong understanding to the people who are reading them.

Just because you have 40 translations that generally make the same types of statements does not mean that those translations do not have errors in them.

In the paraphrasing that I presented can you identify where I have not been contextually correct.

 

[Jay Ross]

I'm of the understanding that 'children of Abraham' according to Paul includes Gentiles, ie not only those of a particular ethnicity.....and although Amos might have seen no further than his own ethnicity and subsequently wrote in that vein, Paul expands it to mean all God's people......as no doubt was intended by God....but Amos probably/ may have had limited expectations/ understanding

Jesus and John the Baptist qualified the term 'Israel' the same way; John saying God can make children of Abraham out of the very stones and Jesus calling the religious tight shorts, though they were ethnically Hebrew, sons of your Father the Devil.

Taking any particular biblical passage out of its intended context is always fraught with problems. We cannot apply what Paul wrote many years after Amos was written about, as including those who are spiritually a descendant of Abraham, as you are forcing a very different understanding which is contrary to what Amos prophesied in the Book that he had written.

Your comments are trampling the fodder down and mudding the waters as well.

 

[quietthinker]

Taking any particular biblical passage out of its intended context is always fraught with problems. We cannot apply what Paul wrote many years after Amos was written about, as including those who are spiritually a descendant of Abraham, as you are forcing a very different understanding which is contrary to what Amos prophesied in the Book that he had written.

Your comments are trampling the fodder down and mudding the waters as well.

I think Jesus, Paul and John clarify the Old Testament Prophets. They are not opposed to the prophets at all. They are shining light onto and into misunderstandings OT folk had. It is because of lack of clarity or should I say, faulty paradigms of the writers of the OT that clarification was required.

Here is one example; Isaiah tells us that God is the responsible agent for both good and evil. (Isaiah 45:7) He gets this from Deuteronomy 32: 39-42) However, according to the book of Hebrews, Jesus is God's clearest representation of himself (Hebrews 1:1-3) and according to 1 John 1:5, God is light and in him is no darkness at all. Do we still conclude that Jesus is responsible for evil as per Isaiah's view?

I assume Amos also had his limitations in understanding God's character and intentions. The question is, which authority do we use to determine the correct view of God and his intentions? I would say the NT authors.

Taking these things into consideration I don't think I'm trampling anything let alone muddying the waters.

One can and will only conclude that trampling and muddying is my exercise if one dismisses the authority of both Jesus, Paul and John as well as other NT authors......and insists that OT writers had a flawless paradigm.
All this to shore up a faulty/ limiting view.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Can you tell me how you could possibly get that from my post?

Sure - your last sentence "whether we want a temple built or not does not matter....

 

[Carl Emerson]

The two witnesses have already spoken. Jesus told the Israel of His day that because the reject Moses, they will reject Him. That still applies. The 2 witnesses are the old and new testaments... the law and the prophets.

nations will look at their dead bodies for three and a half days, and will not permit their dead bodies to be laid in a tomb. 10 And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and celebrate; and they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.

11 But after the three and a half days, the breath of life from God came into them, and they stood on their feet; and great fear fell upon those who were watching them.

Sounds like people to me...

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What the translators missed were the metaphors hidden in plain sight in Amos 9:13-15. This is how I believe these verses should be paraphrased: -

Amos 9:13-15: -​

13 "Behold, the days are coming," says the Lord,​

"When the ploughman shall overtake the reaper,​

And the treader of grapes him who sows seed;​

The mountain {i.e. the religion based on Christ} shall drip with sweet wine,​

And all the hills {i.e. the other religious practices} shall melt and disappear. ​

14 I will bring back the captives of My people Israel;​

They shall repair the devasted and desolated places and inhabit them;​

They shall plant vineyards and drink wine from them;​

They shall also make gardens and eat fruit from them. ​

15 I will plant them in my fertile field,​

And no longer shall they be pulled up​

From the fertile field I have given them,"​

Says the Lord your God.​

This paraphrase presents a very different picture to the one above and is in keeping with other prophetic passages where God promised to Gather Israel once more to Himself and plant them in His fertile soil.

The traditional translations have a focus on Israel returning to the Land without the emphasis of Israel turning back to God with all of their hearts and only worshipping Him.

When we project a literal understanding of God's prophetic words our focus is on our desires and not on God's desire for the hearts of the people to be on Him.

We need to look much more closely at the context of what God is doing and not on what is the focus of our hearts for material possessions.

I think if we look at prophecy as a whole and not just take a few of them alone. we see all of this is caused by Israel repenting. Even Romans 11 speaks of Israel being saved when the redeemer comes back and restores them. Lev 26 makes repentance a demand, Only after they repent will God remember the land

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Metaphorically? lol

Israel is Home to stay!

Amos 9:15
15 I will plant them in their land, And no longer shall they be pulled up From the land I have given them," Says the LORD your God.

They are there while still in sin only because prophecy must still be fulfilled.

You can;t have a temple if they are nto in the land
The future prince can not commit the abomination of desolation if they are not in the land.
etc etc..

But they are still in sin, Enemies concerning the gospel. but beloved concerning the election. They are still blinded in part. the time of the gentile is not yet over.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

...and is not the descriptor 'Israel', meant to be understood as God's people.....as opposed to a certain ethnicity in a certain geographical location?

No

 

[quietthinker]

No

Then you miss or dismiss Pauls message and emphasis.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Sure - your last sentence "whether we want a temple built or not does not matter....

well, even if I took that sentence out of context. It in no way shape or form says what you claimed

It is just a fact.

1. the temple WILL be rebuilt
2. The future prince will commit an abomination of desolation
3. When the people see this abomination standing in the holy place. they are told to run, because then their will be great tribulation.

The bible does not tell us how or when it will be built. only that it will

so it does not matter. if we want the temple rebuilt or not. What we think does not matter. IT WILL BE REBUILT

or do you think we can stop God by making sure it is not rebuilt (lets turn it another way)

 

[Eternally Grateful]

nations will look at their dead bodies for three and a half days, and will not permit their dead bodies to be laid in a tomb. 10 And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and celebrate; and they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.

11 But after the three and a half days, the breath of life from God came into them, and they stood on their feet; and great fear fell upon those who were watching them.

Sounds like people to me...

Yes they are

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Then you miss or dismiss Pauls message and emphasis.

No

I just take it in context.

Your trying to twist pauls words.

yes paul speaks of spiritual Israel in romans 9 (actually I think he says there is no jew or gentile someplace)

But in rom 11. he speaks again of national Israel

 

[quietthinker]

1. the temple WILL be rebuilt
2. The future prince will commit an abomination of desolation
3. When the people see this abomination standing in the holy place. they are told to run, because then their will be great tribulation.

speculation and misinterpretation.

 

[Jay Ross]

I think Jesus, Paul and John clarify the Old Testament Prophets. They are not opposed to the prophets at all. They are shining light onto and into misunderstandings OT folk had. It is because of lack of clarity or should I say, faulty paradigms of the writers of the OT that clarification was required.

Here is one example; Isaiah tells us that God is the responsible agent for both good and evil. (Isaiah 45:7) He gets this from Deuteronomy 32: 39-42) However, according to the book of Hebrews, Jesus is God's clearest representation of himself (Hebrews 1:1-3) and according to 1 John 1:5, God is light and in him is no darkness at all. Do we still conclude that Jesus is responsible for evil as per Isaiah's view?

I assume Amos also had his limitations in understanding God's character and intentions. The question is, which authority do we use to determine the correct view of God and his intentions? I would say the NT authors.

Taking these things into consideration I don't think I'm trampling anything let alone muddying the waters.

One can and will only conclude that trampling and muddying is my exercise if one dismisses the authority of both Jesus, Paul and John as well as other NT authors......and insists that OT writers had a flawless paradigm.
All this to shore up a faulty/ limiting view.

Sorry QT, but you are trying to put words in my mouth as if I have dismissed the authority of Jesus, Paul and John as well as other NT authors and insisted that the OT writers had a flawless paradigm.

What Amos was pointing to, was a time in our near future, when Israel will become a Kingdom of priests, a Holy Nation and God's possession among the nations such that the Israelites in our near future until the end of the seventh age will be a blessing to all of the peoples of the earth as they demonstrate and show that God wants all people to inhabit His fertile fields/soil.

The OT passage from Amos 9 which I paraphrased above is consistent with what is presented in the NT.

You need better arguments to support your apology rebuttal.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

speculation and misinterpretation.

Prophetic fact.

Listen to the word of God man.

God said it will happen. it will

or God is a liar

 

[Jack]

I am afraid that you do not understand that I am actually defending God's recorded words in both the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Yes, the translations do need correction because they are giving the wrong understanding to the people who are reading them.

Just because you have 40 translations that generally make the same types of statements does not mean that those translations do not have errors in them.

I do indeed and they all say you're wrong. Most are online. You should read them instead of attacking them.

In the paraphrasing that I presented can you identify where I have not been contextually correct.

You're playing Word games:

"Amos 9:13-15: -
13 "Behold, the days are coming," says the Lord,
"When the ploughman shall overtake the reaper,
And the treader of grapes him who sows seed;
The mountain {i.e. the religion based on Christ} shall drip with sweet wine,
And all the hills {i.e. the other religious practices} shall melt and disappear.
14 I will bring back the captives of My people Israel;
They shall repair the devasted and desolated places and inhabit them;
They shall plant vineyards and drink wine from them;
They shall also make gardens and eat fruit from them.
15 I will plant them in my fertile field,
And no longer shall they be pulled up
From the fertile field I have given them,"

And that's YOUR personal translation.

 

[Jack]

They are there while still in sin only because prophecy must still be fulfilled.

How do you know they are still in sin? You don't. Do YOU ever sin?

You can;t have a temple if they are nto in the land
The future prince can not commit the abomination of desolation if they are not in the land.
etc etc..

But they are still in sin, Enemies concerning the gospel. but beloved concerning the election. They are still blinded in part. the time of the gentile is not yet over.

Were you ever "in sin"?

Ezekiel 36:24-29
24 For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land.

And He is!

25 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.

Did God do that for YOU?

27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.
28 Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God.
29 I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses. I will call for the grain and multiply it, and bring no famine upon you.