Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

God divorced Israel?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by icebear View Post
    for perspective, i thought. i don't know enough about HR to know when i'm treading too close to a line. so i hope my confusion over this isn't a real issue so far as i have been trying to mentally digest this thread
    We don't need Jewish law books; such as the Targum, (Mishnah · Gemara) (Midrash · Tosefta) Mishneh, Tur Shulchan, Aruch or Zohar ·they are wood, hay, and stubble compared with scripture.



    Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
    Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
    Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

    Comment


    • #32
      ah, so the perspective gained would actually be the reverse of the intent

      makes sense

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by icebear View Post
        ah, so the perspective gained would actually be the reverse of the intent

        makes sense
        The made up Jewish law books are based loosely on the OT and wrapped heavily into made up traditions of men and were crafted in a fashion so there is no room for Jesus, it's religious apostasy, similar to apostate churches today who have a new gospel such as universalism, annihilation, etc...



        Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
        Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
        Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by iSong6:3 View Post
          The bill of divorcement was in Jeremiah 3:6-10, but then just a bit later in Jeremiah 6:14

          14Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:



          Does the Frucht have an explanation for that?

          I think you meant Jer 3:14 not 6:14 . Anyway, not sure exactly where I stand on this, but I had a quick look on bible.org (great resource BTW) and found this article: http://bible.org/article/divorce-pro...ry#P760_307319. The author, when speaking about Jer 3:14, gave the following explanation (not sure if Frucht would use the same argument):


          "The Jeremiah 3:14 text, which also speaks of God as a husband to previously divorced Israel (3:8) is more difficult to translate than most Bibles reveal. The term the NIV renders “husband” (and the KJV renders “am married”) is actually the verb bâ’al. Though this word can be translated that way, it could also be translated less related to marriage, and more to politics, e.g., “have dominion.” Additionally, it is the preterite perfect, a form used of this verb only here and in Jeremiah 31:32. Such a form is not clear as to time. The dominion is completed action, but that dominion may or may not extend to the present. In Jeremiah 31, the presumption is that it does not. In Jeremiah 3 the translators have chosen to translate the exact same word as if the dominion does continue in the present. Should we take 31:32 as meaning that Israel broke the covenant while bound to the Lord (as they still are), or chapter 3 as meaning that God calls the apostate sons back to himself—reminding them that they initially went astray while he had legal rights over them (though that dominion is now technically removed by the divorce writ of the same chapter)? As for the grammar itself, we can only be sure that dominion once existed.

          Recall, too, that in neither case (31 nor 3) are we assured that the “dominion” in view is connected with the marital metaphor. After all, the Israelites had a son-slave relationship to the Lord before they even ratified the Mosaic covenant—that covenant bearing the weight of the marital metaphor. Could it be that the Ba’-a-li and related words have predominately political rather than marital overtones in the Prophets? For example, in Hosea 2:16, where the noun form is used, the context before and after strongly implies that marriage does not exist when Israel calls God its master. In 1:9 God says Israel is not his people. In 2:19 he tells Israel that he will betroth them in some future day. Ba’-a-li rests chronologically between these passages. Thus, subsequent to the divorce, Israel is not considered the marriage partner of God, but merely a runaway slave. They revert back to the position of Israel before Sinai—a people redeemed out of Egypt with a strong arm."

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by james46888 View Post
            I think you meant Jer 3:14 not 6:14 . Anyway, not sure exactly where I stand on this, but I had a quick look on bible.org (great resource BTW) and found this article: http://bible.org/article/divorce-pro...ry#P760_307319. The author, when speaking about Jer 3:14, gave the following explanation (not sure if Frucht would use the same argument):


            "The Jeremiah 3:14 text, which also speaks of God as a husband to previously divorced Israel (3:8) is more difficult to translate than most Bibles reveal. The term the NIV renders “husband” (and the KJV renders “am married”) is actually the verb bâ’al. Though this word can be translated that way, it could also be translated less related to marriage, and more to politics, e.g., “have dominion.” Additionally, it is the preterite perfect, a form used of this verb only here and in Jeremiah 31:32. Such a form is not clear as to time. The dominion is completed action, but that dominion may or may not extend to the present. In Jeremiah 31, the presumption is that it does not. In Jeremiah 3 the translators have chosen to translate the exact same word as if the dominion does continue in the present. Should we take 31:32 as meaning that Israel broke the covenant while bound to the Lord (as they still are), or chapter 3 as meaning that God calls the apostate sons back to himself—reminding them that they initially went astray while he had legal rights over them (though that dominion is now technically removed by the divorce writ of the same chapter)? As for the grammar itself, we can only be sure that dominion once existed.

            Recall, too, that in neither case (31 nor 3) are we assured that the “dominion” in view is connected with the marital metaphor. After all, the Israelites had a son-slave relationship to the Lord before they even ratified the Mosaic covenant—that covenant bearing the weight of the marital metaphor. Could it be that the Ba’-a-li and related words have predominately political rather than marital overtones in the Prophets? For example, in Hosea 2:16, where the noun form is used, the context before and after strongly implies that marriage does not exist when Israel calls God its master. In 1:9 God says Israel is not his people. In 2:19 he tells Israel that he will betroth them in some future day. Ba’-a-li rests chronologically between these passages. Thus, subsequent to the divorce, Israel is not considered the marriage partner of God, but merely a runaway slave. They revert back to the position of Israel before Sinai—a people redeemed out of Egypt with a strong arm."
            Yes, God removed His dominion over Israel when He ripped the Temple curtain, was His dominion restored in 1948? Could be, but definitely restored after the rapture, and His dominion will be over the faithful remnant, many Jews are still being killed today and many during the tribulation period. The nation of Israel will survive and Jesus will be king over it after His second coming. That's the real Dominionism , not the false dominionism being taught today.



            Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
            Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
            Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

            Comment


            • #36
              Maybe I'm splitting hairs but perhaps a better description of God's relationship with Israel is that they are presently estranged or separated rather than actually divorced.

              I greatly dislike the concept of God "marrying" and then subsequently "divorcing" anyone. Malachi says that God hates divorce and even though Jesus stated that divorce became permissible under certain circumstances "because of the hardness of your hearts", this is presumably what He allowed in order to specifically protect the emotional or psychological well-being of genuine victims in an adulterous marriage. Then that person is free to move on and remarry (in the case of adultery).

              These considerations don't apply to God so I don't see what the purpose would be behind any move on His part to "divorce" Israel....especially since He has the advantage of foreknowledge and knows that the estrangement, even though a long one, is temporary.
              sigpic Hey, Dad......ARE WE THERE YET?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Buzzardhut View Post
                But why look? We have scripture Romans 11:1-5 2nd Peter 3:9 God separated from the nation of Israel but not the remnant of Israel.

                God has now given birth to Israel again (1948) to use her again as a stumbling stone to other nations that God is in control, not the other nations.

                A faithful remnant of Israel will be saved at Jesus' second coming.
                First, let me say I agree 100% with looking at scripture to get a better idea of Gods relationship with Israel.

                But let me also say this, God himself says a "bill of divorce," Jeremiah 3:6-10. I believe understanding what that bill entails gives a great PERSPECTIVE of Gods relationship with Israel.

                If you look at half the GET section I pasted it clearly says that if one party doesn't adhere to the Get, it can be considered null and void.

                Obviously that describes the current status of the Jews; they still continue out a relationship with God, even though He served them papers!

                No offence, but I see people COPY AND PASTE things on here all the time that's not the "word of God," (ask a bible teacher) and its put in great perspective. Why would you shoot down Jewish customs, derived from OT scriptures, that puts things in great perspective?

                Comment


                • #38
                  WOW Great Post! I have learned a lot! You guys and Girls are Great in your thoughtful answers!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Praying View Post
                    This is so very true. Thank you for posting this response, - it is one I have found few truly understand.

                    I agree, Praying. Probably because most who divorce just want to get on with their lives and don't want to reconcile and remarry their former spouse.


                    Back to topic...

                    Originally posted by iSong6:3 View Post
                    Okay, cutting to the chase: I believe God didn't divorce the whole people, He left the relationship open for the sake of the remnant (faithful/believers) and for the sake of His Name.
                    I agree that God didn't divorce Israel. He separated from her.

                    Originally posted by Buzzardhut View Post
                    But why look? We have scripture Romans 11:1-5 2nd Peter 3:9 God separated from the nation of Israel but not the remnant of Israel.

                    God has now given birth to Israel again (1948) to use her again as a stumbling stone to other nations that God is in control, not the other nations.

                    A faithful remnant of Israel will be saved at Jesus' second coming.
                    You might even say the birth of Israel was legal because there was never a divorce.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by jonshaff View Post
                      No offence, but I see people COPY AND PASTE things on here all the time that's not the "word of God," (ask a bible teacher) and its put in great perspective. Why would you shoot down Jewish customs, derived from OT scriptures, that puts things in great perspective?
                      I haven't copy/pasted anything in here; many Jewish customs begin with scripture but end with twisting in favoritism towards Judaism. Matthew 16:6 “Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

                      Not all Bible teachers are in agreement and not all popular bible teachers are good apples.



                      Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
                      Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
                      Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Buzzardhut View Post
                        I haven't copy/pasted anything in here; many Jewish customs begin with scripture but end with twisting in favoritism towards Judaism. Matthew 16:6 “Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

                        Not all Bible teachers are in agreement and not all popular bible teachers are good apples.
                        I'm not going to thread jack, but come on Buzz...this clearly puts the so-called-divorce in great perspective, on the fact they're not divorced at all...God says himself BILL OF DIVORCE. Who wrote that bill Buzz? Jews inspired by God?

                        And by the way I was talking about the famously copy and pasted Jack Kelley's ask a bible teacher.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Jeremiah 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a BILL OF DIVORCE; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

                          Why would we not educate ourselves on exactly what God means by a bill of divorce? We aren't ignorant of any of the Jewish feasts as they pertain to prophecy and things of that nature.

                          I believe this passage has a lot more meaning if you divide this Bill and put it in perspective of God's relationship with Israel, then and in the future.

                          God specifically says Bill of divorce and if you read about it you understand that just because he served them a bill of divorce, it doesn't mean they are ACTUALLY DIVORCED. Which negates Fru's idea that God and Israel were divorced to begin with, which was absurd for him to say, IMHO.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by jonshaff View Post
                            But let me also say this, God himself says a "bill of divorce," Jeremiah 3:6-10. I believe understanding what that bill entails gives a great PERSPECTIVE of Gods relationship with Israel.
                            What do you do with verse 14 regarding the divorce?

                            Originally posted by jonshaff View Post
                            Why would you shoot down Jewish customs, derived from OT scriptures
                            For the uninitiated, the writings can lead to hebrew roots beliefs. We don't want to be the ones who start people down a path that we know is a trap. And quite honestly, I wouldn't recommend anyone looking into the writings of the Rabbi's unless they are mature already in sound doctrine, which would include soteriology and eschatology. This subject is a good example. We know and understand the relationship between God and Israel today, for sure in terms of what the Lord did, is doing, and what will happen to her. However one views God's decree of divorce, it must fold in the rest of her history, Messiah, Jacob's trouble and the return of Christ to establish Jerusalem and bring back the house of David. These things don't add up to a divorce as we know it. Even though Israel was unfaithful, God is faithful, and He demonstrates it when we read all the way through the Revelation. I've had to deal with this in my own life, hebrew roots teachings are very deceptive, and they rely heavily on customs, ones in which we were never given, yet you'll find yourself returning to in practice, even though they are not for you.
                            Don't panic! Just be Rapture Ready.

                            Joel 3:2

                            I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will put them on trial for what they did to my inheritance, my people Israel, because they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by HeIsEnough View Post
                              What do you do with verse 14 regarding the divorce?



                              For the uninitiated, the writings can lead to hebrew roots beliefs. We don't want to be the ones who start people down a path that we know is a trap. This subject is a good example. We know and understand the relationship between God and Israel today, for sure in terms of what the Lord did, is doing, and what will happen to her. However one views God's decree of divorce, it must fold in the rest of her history, Messiah, Jacob's trouble and the return of Christ to establish Jerusalem and bring back the house of David. These things don't add up to a divorce as we know it. Even though Israel was unfaithful, God is faithful, and He demonstrates it when we read all the way through the Revelation. And quite honestly, I wouldn't recommend anyone looking into the writings of the Rabbi's unless they are mature already in sound doctrine, which would include soteriology and eschatology. I've had to deal with this in my own life, hebrew roots teachings are very deceptive, and they rely heavily on customs.
                              Please reread my posts.

                              I clearly said they ARE NOT DIVORCED. And it is absurd to think they are.

                              Please see post #44

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                We were both writing at the same time, Jon, no reason to shout. I see it now and that particular point wasn't really a problem for me, it was the other part about customs which is a concern.
                                Don't panic! Just be Rapture Ready.

                                Joel 3:2

                                I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will put them on trial for what they did to my inheritance, my people Israel, because they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X