Originally posted by vivifyYou know that the nation of Israel ceased to be a national entity until recently - 1948.
de·stroy
dəˈstroi/
verb
verb: destroy; 3rd person present: destroys; past tense: destroyed; past participle: destroyed; gerund or present participle: destroying
[b]put an end to the existence of (something) by damaging or attacking it.
"the room had been destroyed by fire"
defeat (someone) utterly.
"the Tigers destroyed the Padres in five games"
s ...[text shortened]... th, eliminate, eradicate, liquidate, finish off, erase; [/b]
When did this happen to Israel?[/b]
Would you not say that in the intervening time (since ancient Israel) that Israel had been undone or destroyed?
Originally posted by vivifyDidn't the Romans burn it down?
de·stroy
dəˈstroi/
verb
verb: destroy; 3rd person present: destroys; past tense: destroyed; past participle: destroyed; gerund or present participle: destroying
[b]put an end to the existence of (something) by damaging or attacking it.
"the room had been destroyed by fire"
defeat (someone) utterly.
"the Tigers destroyed the Padres in five games"
s ...[text shortened]... th, eliminate, eradicate, liquidate, finish off, erase; [/b]
When did this happen to Israel?[/b]
Originally posted by checkbaiterGod's use of "destroy" was genocidal in nature. He didn't just want to wreck where they lived, he wanted to exterminate all Jews. Moses knew this, which is why he said in Exodus 32:12:
Didn't the Romans burn it down?
"Why should the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth'?"
Originally posted by sonshipOkay;
A "brilliant contradiction" between [b]John and Romans ?
We'll see.
My promise - If I agree (and I might) I will admit it. That is between John the Gospel and Romans for now.
But if I don't agree, you're going to have to sit up and pay attention to WHY, examining these two books, I see no contradiction.
Don't tell me then "Well, it doesn't interest me anyway!"[/b]
'Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.' (Romans 13)
'My kingdom is not of this world.' (John 18:36).
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeThat is an easy one and there is no contradiction. While this world order is in existence Christians are to submit to the worldly kings and authorities. The Kingdom of God which is yet to come will replace all of these earthly kingdoms.
Okay;
'Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.' (Romans 13)
'My kingdom is not of this world.' (John 18:36).
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukePlease notice that as Jesus was before the worldly governor Pontius Pilate, He was respectful and even submissive. There was not a hint of insubordination in His attitude when He said -
Okay;
'Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.' (Romans 13)
'My kingdom is not of this world.' (John 18:36).
"My kingdom is not of this world." .
It was His respectful understanding of Pilate's awkward situation that prompted the governor to want to let Jesus go. Please observe the attitude of the Son of God.
" Pilate therefore entered again into the praetorium and called for Jesus. And he said to Him, You are the King of Jews ? (v.33) Jesus answered, Are you saying this of yourself, or did others tell you about Me? (v.34) Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Your own nation and its chief priests have delivered You to me. What have you done? (v.35) Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My attendents would be struggling so that I would not be delivered to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not from here." (v.36)
Jesus does not say that Pilate and the Romans have no kingdom and no government. Rather He refers to a higher kingdom of God and His government of eternal truth -
"Pilate said therefore to Him, So then You are a king? Jesus answered, You say that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I would testify to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears My voice.
Pilate said to Him, What is truth ? (vs. 37-38)
There is no suggestion of anything but respectful submission to human government in Jesus' behavior. There is no clamor or political revolt. Jesus tells the human governor that the priest of God who have turned Jesus over to the Roman official is more guilty than the Roman official.
" The Jews answered him, We have a law, and according to that law He ought to die because He made Himself the Son of God. When Pilate therefore heard this word, he became frightened the more, and he entered into the praetorium again and said to Jesus, Where are You from ? But Jesus gave him no answer. Therefore Pilate said to Him, You do not speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to release You and I have authority to crucify You ?
Jesus answered him, You would have no authority against Me if it were not given to you from above; for this reason, he who has delivered Me to you has the greater sin. From then on, Pilate sought to release Him, but the Jews cried out, saying, If you release this man, you are nor a friend of Caesar, every one who makes himself a king opposes Caesar. (John 19:8-9)
Some observations:
1.) The Roman governor found "no fault in Him". There was no revolution against Rome's authority. There was only a respectful and submissive attitude in Jesus.
2.) Pilate was even AFRAID because he was being crowded by the mob to execute a perfectly innocent man in relationship to Roman government.
3.) Jesus did not deny He was a King, the King of the Jews and of the kingdom of God.
4.) Jesus did not answer Pilate probably because, He knew Pilate's own conscience was informing the governor of all he needed to know.
5.) Jesus confirmed that Pilate was endowed with authority from God the Higher One who has ordained human government. God did so from the time after the anarchy and flood of Noah's age. (Genesis 9:6) .
6.) Jesus said - " ... he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin." puts MORE burden of responsibility for sinning upon the chief priests who are suppose to also be part of God's kingdom.
I think therefore that Paul's instructions about Christian attitude towards civil authorities (Romans 13) and Jesus' words and behavior before the Roman governor correspond to each other.
Originally posted by vivifyGod never stated he wanted to destroy "all" Jews. He always reserved a "remnant". Otherwise the Christ child would never have been born.
God's use of "destroy" was genocidal in nature. He didn't just want to wreck where they lived, he wanted to exterminate all Jews. Moses knew this, which is why he said in Exodus 32:12:
"Why should the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth'?"
You also must distinguish between Israel, Judah, etc. when reading Jews.
Originally posted by checkbaiterIt's worth noting that the Egyptians also had their propaganda machine going when they said that. It was to their advantage to have the Hebrews doubting their God.
God never stated he wanted to destroy "all" Jews. He always reserved a "remnant". Otherwise the Christ child would never have been born.
You also must distinguish between Israel, Judah, etc. when reading Jews.
Originally posted by SuzianneIt was however, Satan, who wanted to exterminate all Jews and stop the lineage of Christ. Satan was full aware of the prophecy of Genesis 3:15.
It's worth noting that the Egyptians also had their propaganda machine going when they said that. It was to their advantage to have the Hebrews doubting their God.
God's use of "destroy" was genocidal in nature. He didn't just want to wreck where they lived, he wanted to exterminate all Jews. Moses knew this, which is why he said in Exodus 32:12:
"Why should the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth'?"
This is what Moses says the Egyptians might say, if God does not forgive the Israelites.
IE. "The exodus was only that God could take them to the desert and kill the whole lot of them."
They would have a totally wrong idea of the purpose of God's liberation of Israel. Moses uses this in his intercession for the nation.