Comments on: Genesis 17:8 and the Two State Solution http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 15:09:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Frank http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2573 Frank Wed, 25 Feb 2009 03:04:36 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2573 Why thank you for your insightful comment. Our world is full of diverse opinions. I will take yours into consideration. Why thank you for your insightful comment. Our world is full of diverse opinions. I will take yours into consideration.

]]> By: Jew http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2572 Jew Wed, 25 Feb 2009 02:52:10 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2572 Read numbers 33 it says drive them out. Drive out those Palestinians. Exodus ch 34 it says don't make any peace deals Deut ch 20 the Arabs must accept tribute and servitude. Deut ch 17 no foreign brethren can rule the land ie. Arabs Your a fool to think Jesud is some g-d. Just read Isaiah ch 2 and ch 11. Has the Temple mount been corrected. No because Jesud isn't G-d and the arabs still have control over it. Read numbers 33 it says drive them out. Drive out those Palestinians.

Exodus ch 34 it says don’t make any peace deals

Deut ch 20 the Arabs must accept tribute and servitude.

Deut ch 17 no foreign brethren can rule the land ie. Arabs

Your a fool to think Jesud is some g-d. Just read Isaiah ch 2 and ch 11. Has the Temple mount been corrected. No because Jesud isn’t G-d and the arabs still have control over it.

]]> By: Frank http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2565 Frank Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:28:31 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2565 Hi Jew, thanks for your comment. I have read it, but I don't know if you completely understood what I was saying. I understand that the nature of the promise had an element of exclusivity that carried down through Isaac, Jacob and their descendants. I am also well aware of the boundaries mentioned in the Bible (which differed through the various land promises)... my point was something else. Thank you for visiting. :) Hi Jew, thanks for your comment. I have read it, but I don’t know if you completely understood what I was saying. I understand that the nature of the promise had an element of exclusivity that carried down through Isaac, Jacob and their descendants. I am also well aware of the boundaries mentioned in the Bible (which differed through the various land promises)… my point was something else.

Thank you for visiting. :)

]]> By: Jew http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2563 Jew Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:32:07 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2563 You Idiot the area of Israel is defined in Numbers chapter 34. Have you even read the bible. What a moron. You Idiot the area of Israel is defined in Numbers chapter 34. Have you even read the bible. What a moron.

]]> By: Jew http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2562 Jew Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:30:04 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2562 You Idiot; you forgot to read the end of chapter 17 in Genesis where G-d excludes Ishmael from the land promise. You also forgot he excludes esav. You Idiot; you forgot to read the end of chapter 17 in Genesis where G-d excludes Ishmael from the land promise. You also forgot he excludes esav.

]]> By: david http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2484 david Sun, 08 Feb 2009 08:04:14 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2484 What? No mention of Economic Supersessionism or Partial Preterism Frank? Darn, just when I thought I saw a chink in your armour. What?

No mention of Economic Supersessionism or Partial Preterism Frank?

Darn, just when I thought I saw a chink in your armour.

]]> By: Frank http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2483 Frank Sun, 08 Feb 2009 07:26:24 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2483 oh, and I wholeheartedly endorse this: <blockquote>we cannot see the whole picture, we just get glimpses of it, but I believe with my whole heart that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, and is therefore worth studying carefully.</blockquote> That should inspire nothing but humility as we discuss these things. oh, and I wholeheartedly endorse this:

we cannot see the whole picture, we just get glimpses of it, but I believe with my whole heart that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, and is therefore worth studying carefully.

That should inspire nothing but humility as we discuss these things.

]]> By: Frank http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2482 Frank Sun, 08 Feb 2009 07:17:33 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2482 I'd just like to add... just in case anyone reading this thinks that people like Peter (and others here) and myself are in complete disagreement, that I affirm the picture of a grafting in of Gentiles to the tree (representing the community already there - believing Israel). I in no way affirm replacement theology - the idea that the Church has replaced Israel. Where we may disagree is simply on the outworking of this and its implications for the community of believers (both Jew and Gentile following Christ). Any disagreement is predominantly focused on the place of Old Testament promises, covenants, types, symbols etc since the entrance of Christ into the story of redemption and how these relate to the current community of believers (both Jew and Gentile). The picture of some being grafted in is a beautifully gracious one in my mind and it affirms all that God had done up until that point. The foundation of his Kingdom community had been set and it was true and good. Since Christ, that community has grown and flourished and it's inclusiveness is a thing of beauty. In no way do I affirm an idea of replacement that disregards the roots of the tree and says they serve no purpose. The picture of the tree is an awesome one that offers much to any such discussion. ...just thought I better throw that in there since I had a few spare minutes :D I’d just like to add… just in case anyone reading this thinks that people like Peter (and others here) and myself are in complete disagreement, that I affirm the picture of a grafting in of Gentiles to the tree (representing the community already there – believing Israel). I in no way affirm replacement theology – the idea that the Church has replaced Israel.

Where we may disagree is simply on the outworking of this and its implications for the community of believers (both Jew and Gentile following Christ). Any disagreement is predominantly focused on the place of Old Testament promises, covenants, types, symbols etc since the entrance of Christ into the story of redemption and how these relate to the current community of believers (both Jew and Gentile).

The picture of some being grafted in is a beautifully gracious one in my mind and it affirms all that God had done up until that point. The foundation of his Kingdom community had been set and it was true and good. Since Christ, that community has grown and flourished and it’s inclusiveness is a thing of beauty.

In no way do I affirm an idea of replacement that disregards the roots of the tree and says they serve no purpose.

The picture of the tree is an awesome one that offers much to any such discussion.

…just thought I better throw that in there since I had a few spare minutes :D

]]> By: Peter http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2481 Peter Sun, 08 Feb 2009 03:59:13 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2481 I wish you well in your search. A comment I would make is that we cannot see the whole picture, we just get glimpses of it, but I believe with my whole heart that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, and is therefore worth studying carefully. I wish you well in your search.

A comment I would make is that we cannot see the whole picture, we just get glimpses of it, but I believe with my whole heart that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, and is therefore worth studying carefully.

]]> By: Flendolyn http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/2009/02/genesis-178-and-the-two-state-solution/comment-page-1/#comment-2480 Flendolyn Sun, 08 Feb 2009 02:23:51 +0000 http://www.humanitarianchronicle.com/?p=597#comment-2480 That comment probably stems from the fact that I'm just beginning to read up on this, think it through, enter into discussions. So my understandings are limited at this stage. I guess I'm thinking that the reason they were chosen was to point towards God in their time (meaning OT time), and then Jesus came, who was a complete picture of what they themselves were supposed to be, a representative of God. So now we have Him, is there still a separate role for the Jewish community? But I think I'm steering the conversation away from the original post, so this may not be the place to get into it. Have appreciated your comments, definately food for thought. F. That comment probably stems from the fact that I’m just beginning to read up on this, think it through, enter into discussions. So my understandings are limited at this stage. I guess I’m thinking that the reason they were chosen was to point towards God in their time (meaning OT time), and then Jesus came, who was a complete picture of what they themselves were supposed to be, a representative of God.
So now we have Him, is there still a separate role for the Jewish community?
But I think I’m steering the conversation away from the original post, so this may not be the place to get into it.
Have appreciated your comments, definately food for thought.
F.

]]>