misquoted verse(s)
-
Just an impulsive thought, maybe it have been in my heart for a while...
Lets see where this will lead, if the mods thinks it bad idea, please close
Thanks
Very often we see people put a verse here, quote some scripture there, here in this forum, or even over the pulpit sometime.
Just thought that maybe through this sharing, we can all learn together.
format of sharing
1) the often misquoted verse(s)
2) the misses, ie the mistakes (the circumstances/context...etc under which it is misused/misquoted)
3) the reason for saying the verse is misquoted
4) what it should have been (the correct context/understanding of the quoted verse(s).
-
Technically anyone can intepretate verses in any way he deems fit. If it was that simple, there won't be so many divisions to Christianity since the beginning.
-
This is a verse a lot of Atheist use to justify that Man can save themself
Job 40:14
Then I myself will admit to you
that your own right hand can save you.
I got this from a commentary to shed light into what it really means:
Verse 14. It is the prerogative of God alone to save the human soul. Nothing less than unlimited power, exerted under the direction and impulse of unbounded mercy, can save a sinner. This is most clearly asserted in this speech of Jehovah: When thou canst extend an arm like God, i.e., an uncontrollable power-when thou canst arm thyself with the lightning of heaven, and thunder with a voice like God-when thou canst deck thyself with the ineffable glory, beauty, and splendour of the supreme majesty of Jehovah-when thou canst dispense thy judgments over all the earth, to abase the proud, and tread down the wicked-when thou canst as having the keys of hell and death, blend the high and the low in the dust together; then I will acknowledge to thee that thy own right hand can save thee. In other words: Salvation belongeth unto the Lord; no man can save his own soul by works of righteousness which he has done, is doing, or can possibly do, to all eternity. Without Jesus every human spirit must have perished everlastingly. Glory be to God for his unspeakable gift
But we dun have to look far. Just go to John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
And we will know that man cannot save himself. We must lean on Christ -
And this verse is used by homosexuals that Jesus say its ok to be one...
Matthew 19:12
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
Oh well... -
campy, follow the format vince gives lah. Treat it like a form of bible studyOriginally posted by mhcampboy:And this verse is used by homosexuals that Jesus say its ok to be one...
Matthew 19:12
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
Oh well...
-
here is one I think had been misrepresented
Rev 3:20
Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.
often when we heard of this verse, its often used to describe the soft still voice of the Holy Spirit, or of Christ, humbly knocking softly and gently on our hearts...etc
But is this correct image what the verse is really protraying?
Let look at the rest of the verses...
1) the book of Revelation is often used to describe the last days, as in the majestic return of Christ as Lord.
2) verse 14"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:
These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God's creation.
here is the type of image of Christ that is should be, not as ''a humble carpenter', but as 'the Ruler of God's creation'.
Perhaps, its time we rethink how we see this verses ... -
aiyer so hard..Originally posted by ben1xy:campy, follow the format vince gives lah. Treat it like a form of bible study 
-
so, in other words, Job 40:14 should actually be read in the context together Job 40:6-14 as a whole...Originally posted by ben1xy:This is a verse a lot of Atheist use to justify that Man can save themself
Job 40:14
Then I myself will admit to you
that your own right hand can save you.
I got this from a commentary to shed light into what it really means:
Verse 14. It is the prerogative of God alone to save the human soul. Nothing less than unlimited power, exerted under the direction and impulse of unbounded mercy, can save a sinner. This is most clearly asserted in this speech of Jehovah: When thou canst extend an arm like God, i.e., an uncontrollable power-when thou canst arm thyself with the lightning of heaven, and thunder with a voice like God-when thou canst deck thyself with the ineffable glory, beauty, and splendour of the supreme majesty of Jehovah-when thou canst dispense thy judgments over all the earth, to abase the proud, and tread down the wicked-when thou canst as having the keys of hell and death, blend the high and the low in the dust together; then I will acknowledge to thee that thy own right hand can save thee. In other words: Salvation belongeth unto the Lord; no man can save his own soul by works of righteousness which he has done, is doing, or can possibly do, to all eternity. Without Jesus every human spirit must have perished everlastingly. Glory be to God for his unspeakable gift
But we dun have to look far. Just go to John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
And we will know that man cannot save himself. We must lean on Christ -
"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." - Mat 16:19
Some Protestants - Peter is not the rock.
Reasons - Petra vs Petros
Context error -
a) The Gospel of Matthew was written in the Koine dialect of Greek, where there was no distinction between the words petros and petra; both simply meant "rock". A male given name should be masculine, whilst, the word for "rock", is feminine (-á).
b) Jesus spoke in Aramaic. There is no distinction for either Peter or Rock or Stone as its both Kepha. IN John 1:42, Jesus calls Peter, Cephas.A better English translation, ignoring the tradition of naming the saint Peter in English, would be you are Craig, and on this crag I shall build my church..., relying on English use of the Gaelic name Craig (meaning rock) instead of using the name Peter.
-
I try hah....
Matthew 19:12 is really part of a teaching that spans from verse 1. so the entire context should be Matthew 19:1-12Originally posted by mhcampboy:Matthew 19:12
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
And this verse is used by homosexuals that Jesus say its ok to be one...
Oh well...
The subject of discussion is not about homosexuality, its about Divorce and Marriage.
It started off with the Pharises asking about Moses' instruction regarding Divorce. and Jesus saying "anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Then the disciples says... so hard ah, then better not get married...
and here is the part :
11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[c]because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."
linking these two verse to those preceding verses... it may seems to me he is responsing to the question : Is it better not to get married at all? -
technically, yes... but there are some that are really very obvious that are taken out of context... like quoting half a statement, or even half a sentence to form a whole doctrine/theology.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Technically anyone can intepretate verses in any way he deems fit. If it was that simple, there won't be so many divisions to Christianity since the beginning.
-
Have you thought of this:Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." - Mat 16:19
Jesus asked his disciples the famous question. Peter happened to be the first one to answer. What about the others? Did they know the real identity of Jesus Christ?
Or you suppose Jesus also plays fastest finger. The first one to answer gets the prize.
-
err... you are quoting Matthew 16:18-19 right? (not just verse 19)Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." - Mat 16:19
Some Protestants - Peter is not the rock.
Reasons - Petra vs Petros
Context error -
a) The Gospel of Matthew was written in the Koine dialect of Greek, where there was no distinction between the words petros and petra; both simply meant "rock". A male given name should be masculine, whilst, the word for "rock", is feminine (-á).
b) Jesus spoke in Aramaic. There is no distinction for either Peter or Rock or Stone as its both Kepha. IN John 1:42, Jesus calls Peter, Cephas.
but I believe the full context should be start from verse 13
hence should be quoting Matthew 16:13-19 for the full picture...
verse 17-19
17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this (here 'this' is refering to verse 15-16, Peter's confession on Jesus being the Christ, the son of the living God) was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.
like you said, there are two argument to this...
1) the 'this Rock' that Jesus is refering to is Peter
2) the 'this Rock' that Jesus is refering to is Peter's confession
either way, the 'you' that Jesus is refering (in verse 19) to as the receiptent to the 'keys' is most like refering to Peter (the person), since Jesus is talking to Peter (context) -
OOT a little....
many years back a pastor was speaking on the ills of the 4Cs... and he went on and on, and at one point, he said "Cash, Cars, Credit cards and...." (he meant to say Condominium) "Condoms.."
I tried very very hard not to laugh....
There's a misquote for you....
Good morning all. -
back to misquotes....
we need to remember that the original text of scripture DID NOT have chapters and verses. there it is important to know that we SHOULD NOT quote VERSES per se. Numerical denotation were added to make reference easier.
bearing that in mind.... any verse can be misquoted. -
Originally posted by vince69:Lets see where this will lead, if the mods thinks it bad idea, please close cannot close lah... scully kena accused as being autocratic.
any intention to closed has to be signed and approved by representations from all major religions and philosophy...
NOT! -
I have an urge to quote what the charismatics have misquoted.....but then again.....
-
go ahead.... i'll watch the flames....Originally posted by laoda99:I have an urge to quote what the charismatics have misquoted.....but then again..... -
can ... just remember to give reason for saying why its misquoted and the actual context/interpretation (subject to discussion lah)..oh... remember to be objective and not personal..Originally posted by laoda99:I have an urge to quote what the charismatics have misquoted.....but then again..... thanks...
*** charismatics tends to have this 'reading between the lines' problem.. -
Originally posted by vince69:*** charismatics tends to have this 'reading between the lines' problem..
heng, your charismatic....
if I say this, I sure kena one. -
I used to make this type of mistakes too...Originally posted by Chin Eng:
heng, your charismatic....
if I say this, I sure kena one.
-
here is an example of a sentence being cut into twoOriginally posted by Chin Eng:back to misquotes....
we need to remember that the original text of scripture DID NOT have chapters and verses. there it is important to know that we SHOULD NOT quote VERSES per se. Numerical denotation were added to make reference easier.
bearing that in mind.... any verse can be misquoted.
John 3:14-15
14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
noticed that a single sentence is actually made up of two verse, 14 and 15?
*edit: spelling error -
Can I suggest something to improve this form of discussion?
Instead of lumping everything in one thread "misquoted verse(s)", can we start a thread for each discussion?
For example,
Thread title: [Discussion] Job 40:14
Is this better?
I think it will be neater this way.