Peace, grace and mercy to all of the Lord Jesus Christ. There are three
groups of people to whom God wants to speak to me; is Christians who
automatically ALLY one of these three groups in the modern state of Israel.
The vast majority of Christians I have met are Zionists. They marry not
only a Jewish right to a homeland in Israel, but they refer to Jews as & #
8217 God; s Chosen People and believe it is their duty as good Christians
to defend Israel no matter what.
When I ask if Christian Zionism is a valid position to take, I do not ask
if they believe in Jewish law in their own homeland. I believe that every
group of people should have their own country if they have a desire.
Instead, I speak of reflexive posture of submission and subservience shown
by Christian Zionists toward the State of Israel in the belief that doing
so bring blessings from God.
In this article, I will examine the position of Christian Zionism both
biblical and ethical point of view. But before some items decide to qualify
with insults, I d like to explain something first.
As I mentioned on my site, I was born and raised in Reform Judaism. It's as
close as you can get to secular humanism while maintaining a veneer of
religion, and I even went to Israel for my Birthright trip at the age of 26
years.
However, I did not have a relationship with God or a belief in religion at
all until much later in life. In fact, I was not saved by the Lord Jesus
Christ to become born-again until I d been by atheist phase, a New Age
stage, and even a brief Luciferian phase.
In other words, what I'm about to write is not the result of some sort of
bias. It is the result of many years of serious philosophical study and
discovery, ultimately leading to my salvation to the end of 2015.
That's when all my illusions were blown away, and the truth is undoubtedly
know me. As said, we break s Christian Zionism and see if it's a biblically
sound position to hold.
The Abrahamic Covenants
To defend their position as Zionists, most Christians refer to the
covenants God made with Abraham and his descendants in the Old Testament.
In exchange for Abraham's agreeing to murder his own son and deliberately
cut off part of his penis, the Old Testament, God made some alliances with
him.
God said to Abraham in Genesis 12: 2-3, & # 8230; I will make of thee a
great nation and I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall
be a blessing. And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him who
curses you; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed & # 8221.
We read in Genesis 3:18 p.m.,. The same day the Lord made a covenant with
Abram, saying, your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt
unto the great river, the river Euphrates
Finally, we read in Genesis 17: 7-8, and establish my covenant between me
and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee and to thy seed after thee. And I will give
to thee and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger,
all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their
God & # 8221.
Based on these verses (and some others later in the Torah), Christians
recognize that the Israelites were the chosen people of God in the Old
Testament. That the Jewish people in Israel are in power actually
descendants of Israelites said blood is a question for another time and #
8211, but a question that should (clearly) of vital importance.
After all, if the Jewish people in Israel are in power are not the
descendants of ancient Israelites blood, then there should be no reason for
most Christians to defend as the Old Testament's writings. I have read both
sides of this argument, and I think it is very important to study.
There is a big difference between those who Jesus called those who say they
are Jews but are not, and those called Peter & # brothers Israelites 8221.
Anyway, this is the node the problem starts.
covenants fulfilled
The same Christians who refer to the Old Testament alliances to defend
their belief in Israel & # 8221 Chosen People; turn around very quickly and
say & # 8211; when it best fits the argument in hand & # 8211; than . the
Old Covenant was fulfilled by Jesus and are under NEW Pact now instead
They make this argument & # 8211; which is totally incompatible with their
beliefs mentioned above in the covenants of the Old Testament & # 8211;
when presented with questions such as why do? T follow the dietary laws of
the Old Testament or why didn t you circumcise your son & # 8221 ?;
During the passage of their argument we're now under the New Alliance side,
many Christians cite Paul's letters on the subject. They are correct in
their assertion that Paul believed the Old Testament had no other meaning
or purpose after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Old Testament was a joke, bro. & # 8211; St. Paul
There are whole chapters in the New Testament specifically devoted to
answer the question whether the Old Covenant & # 8221; is still relevant.
In Galatians 3: 28-29, Paul summarizes his answer to this question with the
following passage & # 8230;
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male
and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ,
you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Paul wrote & # 8211; in very ambiguous terms & # 8211; that the heirs of
God's promise to Abraham are now those who follow Christ.
If Christ's heartbreaking removed the veil of separation between Jews and
Gentiles, opening the Kingdom of God for all who believe in Him & # 8230;
so how could a Christian justify still believing that only a particular
group of people are favored by God?
More importantly, how could they justify believe that the only people
favored by God are those who rejected his son and the Gospel? It's a crazy
thing to believe.
As it should be noted, that Paul preached on this subject is not what
Christ really living preached during his ministry. In fact, it is the
opposite polar.
As mentioned in the Gospels (the New Testament writings outside Paul's
letters), Jesus was clear about his belief that the Old Testament
commandments to follow. Even more, he insisted that his teachings were only
for the Jews. Paul the decision to cancel these instructions of Christ has
been widely debated since the day he did.
That's why the Jews early Christian sects, such as the Nazarenes and
Ebionites, rejected completely Paul and his anti-Torah message. They
followed what the living Christ said, and followed the Old Testament
commandments to the letter.
Therefore, the Jewish Christians like the aforementioned groups (and modern
sects such as the Jewish synagogue) Messianic could justify their defense
of Israel if its modern leaders were actually descendants of the ancient
Israelites. However, any Christian who believes in Paul's message must
necessarily reject Zionism as an unscriptural heresy.
The ethical defense of others
Now that we have examined the Old vs. New Alliance dilemma, we will move to
consider whether it's really ethical to defend a particular group of people
& # 8211; no matter what they do.
I think that is a rather dangerous position to take, and which leads to
very negative logical conclusions. After all, if one has composed a s
spirit to defend a person or group of people, no matter what they do, then
is there a point where we could hold that person or persons responsible?
Are there so vicious crime, an act so heinous, that your sense of decency
(or self-preservation) would come into play and you would defend yourself
from them, instead of defending these actions?
Or, if Israeli politicians are & # 8217 God; s Chosen People that can not
hurt, do you just turn their eyes to something bad they are for fear of
offending God?
This is a very serious matter, as the Old Testament says only those who
curse Israel will be cursed in turn. It puts man thinking in a difficult
situation if he believes in the Old Testament and ignores Paul's thoughts
on the subject.
Of course, the problem is easily solved if it is true that the Jewish
people running Israel currently have no blood relationship to ancient
biblical Israelites. If that's the case, not only Christians are under no
obligation to defend them without thinking, but we can also safely hold
them accountable for their actions without fear of divine retribution.
Read more: How American Christians have been manipulated in Love Israel
No comments:
Post a Comment