Verses taken out of context

[HermanNeutics13]

What verses do you see taken out of context most often and most egregiously?
I often see "Judge not" used to shut up any criticism. Except that is not what it means. It means we subject ourselves to the same judgment.
Another big one is Romans 13. Many people use it as an excuse to unquestioningly obey any government law no matter how unjust. But we even see from early church history this is not at all how they applied that verse. They certainly never rolled over for the Romans.

 

[alsughasoughaiuyfygh]

.

 

[Aussie Pete]

What verses do you see taken out of context most often and most egregiously?
I often see "Judge not" used to shut up any criticism. Except that is not what it means. It means we subject ourselves to the same judgment.
Another big one is Romans 13. Many people use it as an excuse to unquestioningly obey any government law no matter how unjust. But we even see from early church history this is not at all how they applied that verse. They certainly never rolled over for the Romans.

Yes, but be careful. There is a difference between judging as in discerning, such as a coach or doctor or schoolteacher might do. Spiritual Christians can and should judge in that way. The kind of judgement as in a court of law is forbidden.

Christians obeyed the authorities right up until the point where their faith was directly attacked. Rebellion is at the core of every human being. God requires us to submit to authorities, pay taxes, show respect (even when you have none) and obey unless plainly told to do something wrong. Christians did not take up arms against the Romans. The Jews did and suffered the complete destruction of the nation as a result.

Most rebellious movements have turned out badly. The Russian revolution opened the door for a more repressive regime than it replaced, Libya is a basket case far worse than under Gaddafi, Iraq likewise, Hong Kong is more or less in a civil war, The "Arab Spring" has fizzled out, Syria has killed or displaced millions. And for what? Virtually zero gain for an immense amount of suffering.

 

[HermanNeutics13]

Whenever a sermon is promoting a political agenda, that's where the cherry picking will be at its worst.

I do agree mostly and sermons should nit be use to push political agendas. Although there are some issues that have become political that Christians should address but such things need not be addressed from political standpoints (issues related to marriage or Christian's place in the world come to mind, but in such cases we should not focus solely on the law but on the gospel as well).

 

[HermanNeutics13]

Yes, but be careful. There is a difference between judging as in discerning, such as a coach or doctor or schoolteacher might do. Spiritual Christians can and should judge in that way. The kind of judgement as in a court of law is forbidden.

Christians obeyed the authorities right up until the point where their faith was directly attacked. Rebellion is at the core of every human being. God requires us to submit to authorities, pay taxes, show respect (even when you have none) and obey unless plainly told to do something wrong. Christians did not take up arms against the Romans. The Jews did and suffered the complete destruction of the nation as a result.

Yes I am not talking rebellion and the early Christians opposed taking up arms against the Romans but they also opposed fighting in Rome's wars. Their refusal to do that often got them in trouble with Roman authorities.

Most rebellious movements have turned out badly. The Russian revolution opened the door for a more repressive regime than it replaced, Libya is a basket case far worse than under Gaddafi, Iraq likewise, Hong Kong is more or less in a civil war, The "Arab Spring" has fizzled out, Syria has killed or displaced millions. And for what? Virtually zero gain for an immense amount of suffering.

I would mostly agree, and I saw how taking out most of the corrupt leaders caused more problems in the end. Taking out Saddam opened the door for ISIS. But I will bring up a question, where do we get to the line of self defense? I think in the case of Hong Kong there is a bit of self defense going on there.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Yes I am not talking rebellion and the early Christians opposed taking up arms against the Romans but they also opposed fighting in Rome's wars. Their refusal to do that often got them in trouble with Roman authorities.

I would mostly agree, and I saw how taking out most of the corrupt leaders caused more problems in the end. Taking out Saddam opened the door for ISIS. But I will bring up a question, where do we get to the line of self defense? I think in the case of Hong Kong there is a bit of self defense going on there.

If the protests had not started, there would be no need for self defence. The world will not step in to help the protestors. They did not help the Chinese democracy movement. You can't fault the world's ability to be hypocritical. South Africa was crushed into giving away apartheid, (and look how that has turned out) while the US, especially, has funded the rise of China to be a threat to the US. The world's "conscience" is ruled by money, not right and wrong.

Self defence is a vexed issue. I am ex military and I was saved while in the RAN. The Lord had me stay for about 4-1/2 years after I was born again. I wanted out but for the wrong reasons. Should a Christian point a gun at another person, even in defence of the nation? My view is no. Can Christians defend themselves against a physical attack? I believe yes. Turning the other cheek does not mean let yourself be beaten up. I've had threats against me but the Lord gave me wisdom so that I talked my way out and defused the situation.

 

[HermanNeutics13]

Self defence is a vexed issue. I am ex military and I was saved while in the RAN. The Lord had me stay for about 4-1/2 years after I was born again. I wanted out but for the wrong reasons. Should a Christian point a gun at another person, even in defence of the nation? My view is no. Can Christians defend themselves against a physical attack? I believe yes. Turning the other cheek does not mean let yourself be beaten up. I've had threats against me but the Lord gave me wisdom so that I talked my way out and defused the situation.

I want to address this part of your quote as I think you bring up a lot that I have struggled with and it seems so many take for granted despite Christian history. As to your personal issue, I am not sure how it works in Australia but I believe in America you can file as a conscientious objector if you are in and have a change of heart. In any case, I believe it is a scenario where risking getting court martialed could be worth it and well in line with the true meaning of Romans 13. I think if more people studied history they would see that Christians were originally not fond of war at all, certainly prior to Constantine. I would ask though, are there certain aspects of war we should be involved in? You mention self defense and there are times that comes up in war even if all other aspects are unacceptable.

 

[Aussie Pete]

I want to address this part of your quote as I think you bring up a lot that I have struggled with and it seems so many take for granted despite Christian history. As to your personal issue, I am not sure how it works in Australia but I believe in America you can file as a conscientious objector if you are in and have a change of heart. In any case, I believe it is a scenario where risking getting court martialed could be worth it and well in line with the true meaning of Romans 13. I think if more people studied history they would see that Christians were originally not fond of war at all, certainly prior to Constantine. I would ask though, are there certain aspects of war we should be involved in? You mention self defense and there are times that comes up in war even if all other aspects are unacceptable.

I got out of the Navy 3-1/2 years early when the Lord showed me how to go about it. It's quite a story and I won't go into it now. My reasoning, given to me by the Lord, was the idea of "just" and "unjust" wars. If you are serving, you cannot pick and choose.

The question is a lot more than theoretical if you are a Christian in a Muslim country. For example, Indonesian Christians tend to live in villages with other Christians. From time to time, the Muslims get aggressive and attack the Christians violently. How do you respond in that situation? Mostly they run and hide. Should a Christian resort to violence in that situation? It's easy to say no when you are not under threat. I don't know. It's different, for example, if there is national service in time of war. You could request a role as a medic. I don't have a clear answer myself. What would Jesus do? Well, He healed the ear of a slave that Peter cut off.

 

[ewq1938]

What verses do you see taken out of context most often and most egregiously?

This is the most misused scripture in the bible because people think it's saying a scripture cannot be privately interpreted by someone but that is not what it actually is saying. It's saying the prophets did not invent the prophecies they wrote. It actually has nothing at all to do with someone interpreting scripture in a way that is private to them in difference to how most interpret it.


2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

The old English used doesn't bring forth very well what the Greek actually says:


2Pe 1:19 And in the written word of prophecy we have something more permanent; to which you do well to pay attention--as to a lamp shining in a dimly-lighted place--until day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
2Pe 1:20 But, above all, remember that no prophecy in Scripture will be found to have come from the prophet's own prompting;
2Pe 1:21 for never did any prophecy come by human will, but men sent by God spoke as they were impelled by the Holy Spirit.

Clarke:


2 Peter 1:20

Knowing this first - Considering this as a first principle, that no prophecy of the Scripture, whether that referred to above, or any other, is of any private interpretation - proceeds from the prophet’s own knowledge or invention, or was the offspring of calculation or conjecture. The word ep???s?? signifies also impetus, impulse; and probably this is the best sense here; not by the mere private impulse of his own mind.


Gill:


is of any private interpretation: not that this is levelled against the right of private judgment of Scripture; or to be understood as if a private believer had not a right of reading, searching, examining, and judging, and interpreting the Scriptures himself, by virtue of the unction which teacheth all things; and who, as a spiritual man, judgeth all things; otherwise, why are such commended as doing well, by taking heed to prophecy, in the preceding verse, and this given as a reason to encourage them to it? the words may be rendered, "of one's own interpretation"; that is, such as a natural man forms of himself, by the mere force of natural parts and wisdom, without the assistance of the Spirit of God; and which is done without comparing spiritual things with spiritual; and which is not agreeably to the Scripture, to the analogy of faith, and mind of Christ; though rather this phrase should be rendered, "no prophecy of the Scripture is of a man's own impulse", invention, or composition; is not human, but purely divine:


"no prophecy in Scripture will be found to have come from the prophet's own prompting" which obviously means true prophecy is not invented by the prophet but comes from God. This has nothing to do with how people interpret what scripture or scriptural prophecy means to them. This scripture is one of the most misused scriptures in the entire bible.