Is the Land of Israel Still a Special Place to God?

[kyredneck]

John 4:21-24 is irrelevant to the point that I am making concerning Melchizedek; the revelation about Melchizedek and Jerusalem proves that God had a special "connection" to Jerusalem long before there were any Israelites.

Hebrews 7:15 Melchizedek is there as a type of Christ, king of Salem, i.e., Prince of Peace.

Wasn't it the same fixation as yours on the 'holy land' that brought about the Crusades?

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Hebrews 7:15 Melchizedek is there as a type of Christ, king of Salem, i.e., Prince of Peace.

Wasn't it the same fixation as yours on the 'holy land' that brought about the Crusades?

Are you denying that Melchizedek himself was the king of Jerusalem? Are you denying that he himself was a true priest of God?

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Wasn't it the same fixation as yours on the 'holy land' that brought about the Crusades?

What happened in the Crusades is completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread. This thread is about discussing what Scripture does or does not reveal.

 

[AustinC]

Here's why I say the land of Israel is special to God and to all who are children of the Promise.
Genesis 17:8
And I will give the entire land of Canaan, where you now live as a foreigner, to you and your descendants. It will be their possession forever, and I will be their God.”

 

[kyredneck]

Hebrews 7:15 Melchizedek is there as a type of Christ, king of Salem, i.e., Prince of Peace....

Are you denying that Melchizedek himself was the king of Jerusalem? Are you denying that he himself was a true priest of God?

Sheesh, such drama, calm down. Why would I deny plain scripture?:

18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was priest of God Most High. Gen 14

Are you denying that Melchizedek was a type of Christ?:

15 And what we say is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest, Heb 7

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Sheesh, such drama, calm down. Why would I deny plain scripture?:

18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was priest of God Most High. Gen 14

Are you denying that Melchizedek was a type of Christ?:

15 And what we say is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest, Heb 7

No, I do not deny that Christ is another Priest who is after the likeness of Melchizedek, etc.

That point, however, does not obviate my point. Accepting what Scripture reveals about Melchizedek proves that Jerusalem was special to God completely apart from any consideration concerning the Israelites and prior to there being any Israelites.

No one can rightly assert therefore that God's interest in Jerusalem and the land of Israel was only because of the Israelites and that because of their unfaithfulness that land is no longer special to God.

 

[Aaron]

You continue to ignore what I said about Melchizedek. Either you agree with what I said in that respect and acknowledge its validity to this discussion or you state your disagreement and support your position biblically.

Bringing up other considerations is not the right way to respond to specific statements.

How about answering his questions.

 

[Aaron]

Are you denying that Melchizedek himself was the king of Jerusalem? Are you denying that he himself was a true priest of God?

Meaning that the Levitical priesthood was a temporary, parenthetical order. Jussayin'.

 

[Aaron]

What happened in the Crusades is completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread. This thread is about discussing what Scripture does or does not reveal.

Enough. Scripture does NOT reveal that God has a soft spot in His heart for that real estate. You're misunderstanding "careth for." It means He was looking after it as a place for His people.

Stahp the baloney, puh-leeze.

 

[percho]

It wasn’t the “land of Israel” before the Hebrew people took it. It was the land of Canaan.

Your question should be “is the land of Canaan still special to God”?

peace to you

Canaan. Is that the son of Ham? Did God take it away from the Canaanites and give it to the children of Israel?

Exek 36:24-28 KJV For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God. ? All, because of, the blood of the Son of God, born of woman ?

? Romans 11:26 ?

 

[percho]

Is the earth, forever? From whence, will it be ruled?

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Enough. Scripture does NOT reveal that God has a soft spot in His heart for that real estate. You're misunderstanding "careth for." It means He was looking after it as a place for His people.

Stahp the baloney, puh-leeze.

Not true. Your views do not reflect the special regard that God had for His land, as seen by God's warning His people what would happen if they were disobedient to Him:

Leviticus 26:33 And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste. 34 Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies' land; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths. 35 As long as it lieth desolate it shall rest; because it did not rest in your sabbaths, when ye dwelt upon it.

They would be judged for their failures to let His land rest in their sabbaths. When God would judge them, then the land would enjoy her sabbaths and rest!

God Himself thus revealed His special regard for His special land, which He would take care of even as He would judge His unfaithful people fiercely. This passage clearly shows that God's regard for that land was not at all simply because of His care for those people.

Scripture does not speak either of any such provisions that God made for or of any such concern that God expressed about any other land than the land of Israel.

 

[Lodic]

John 4:21-24 is irrelevant to the point that I am making concerning Melchizedek; the revelation about Melchizedek and Jerusalem proves that God had a special "connection" to Jerusalem long before there were any Israelites.

Regardless of anything that John 4 does or does not teach about what would be true in the future and in what sense that would be true, it does not change what was true in the time of Melchizedek.

You asked for a Biblical argument to support the case that Israel is no longer a special place for God. The passage from John 4 makes that case. Jesus was not talking about the future, but Himself. Everyone who worships Him must worship in Spirit, not go to a special city like Muslims do.

The Melchizedek encounter simply shows that God had a plan and a purpose for the land that would eventually become Israel. That time is long since past.

 

[Aaron]

Not true. Your views do not reflect the special regard that God had for His land, as seen by God's warning His people what would happen if they were disobedient to Him:

Leviticus 26:33 And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste. 34 Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies' land; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths. 35 As long as it lieth desolate it shall rest; because it did not rest in your sabbaths, when ye dwelt upon it.

They would be judged for their failures to let His land rest in their sabbaths. When God would judge them, then the land would enjoy her sabbaths and rest!

God Himself thus revealed His special regard for His special land, which He would take care of even as He would judge His unfaithful people fiercely. This passage clearly shows that God's regard for that land was not at all simply because of His care for those people.

Scripture does not speak either of any such provisions that God made for or of any such concern that God expressed about any other land than the land of Israel.

Again, you're reading your own imagination into it. And you may do so without further interference from me.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Again, you're reading your own imagination into it. And you may do so without further interference from me.

As it stands, this comment has no substance to it and is merely unsubstantiated criticism. If you want to be taken seriously, back up your comment with substantive argumentation from the text that supports your view. Mere assertion does not establish anything.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

You asked for a Biblical argument to support the case that Israel is no longer a special place for God. The passage from John 4 makes that case. Jesus was not talking about the future, but Himself. Everyone who worships Him must worship in Spirit, not go to a special city like Muslims do.

The Melchizedek encounter simply shows that God had a plan and a purpose for the land that would eventually become Israel. That time is long since past.

No, John 4 does not make that case. After He had made those statements to the Samaritan woman, Jesus Himself continued at certain times to go to Jerusalem to worship the Father in Jerusalem. Even after His crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, the apostles and numerous other NT believers continued at certain times to worship in Jerusalem.

John 4 does not establish anything about Jerusalem not still being a special place to God.

More broadly speaking, it was never the case that Jerusalem was the only place that anyone could ever worship God in any way. God is the One who determines everything about any worship that He accepts from anyone. He Himself ordained that Jerusalem in various ways was a special place of worshiping Him, but He never ordained that it was the only place that He could be worshiped in any way.

Concerning the Melchizedek encounter, that revelation shows much more than what you say. As I have said repeatedly, it shows that God had a special "connection" to that city (and therefore to that land) completely apart from any consideration concerning the Jews as a people or as a nation.

 

[Lodic]

No, John 4 does not make that case. After He had made those statements to the Samaritan woman, Jesus Himself continued at certain times to go to Jerusalem to worship the Father in Jerusalem. Even after His crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, the apostles and numerous other NT believers continued at certain times to worship in Jerusalem.

John 4 does not establish anything about Jerusalem not still being a special place to God.

More broadly speaking, it was never the case that Jerusalem was the only place that anyone could ever worship God in any way. God is the One who determines everything about any worship that He accepts from anyone. He Himself ordained that Jerusalem in various ways was a special place of worshiping Him, but He never ordained that it was the only place that He could be worshiped in any way.

Concerning the Melchizedek encounter, that revelation shows much more than what you say. As I have said repeatedly, it shows that God had a special "connection" to that city (and therefore to that land) completely apart from any consideration concerning the Jews as a people or as a nation.

Aside from the historical connection to Abraham, Melchizedek, and the Jews, what makes the land of Israel special to God? That land is important to Jews (especially the ones who live there), and it's obviously important to you. You have not shown me why that land is special to God? I really don't see the "Sabbath rests" as evidence that there is anything special about the land, either.

Why is it so important that we agree with you regarding the land? I pray for Israel very often, but that's because this is our only ally in the Middle East. A lot of Christians think it's important because of their "end times" views, but I don't think that's where you are going.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Aside from the historical connection to Abraham, Melchizedek, and the Jews, what makes the land of Israel special to God? That land is important to Jews (especially the ones who live there), and it's obviously important to you. You have not shown me why that land is special to God? I really don't see the "Sabbath rests" as evidence that there is anything special about the land, either.

Why is it so important that we agree with you regarding the land? I pray for Israel very often, but that's because this is our only ally in the Middle East. A lot of Christians think it's important because of their "end times" views, but I don't think that's where you are going.

I am giving biblical considerations for what I believe. I do not care if anyone agrees with me for my sake--what matters is what God has said.

You seem to be glossing over the revelation about Melchizedek. He did not just decide on his own one day that it would be nice to be a priest so he became a priest of the most high God. God chose to make him a priest who was also the king of Jerusalem.

The glorified God-Man Jesus of Nazareth is infinitely greater than Melchizedek ever was. God has chosen Him to be a priest after the order of Melchizedek. He who was born king of the Jews will rule from Jerusalem on the throne of His father David for a 1000 years. He will do so in vindication of the holiness of God's name that the Jews have profaned through their sinfulness (Ezek. 20, 36).

Ultimately, Jerusalem and Israel are still special to God because He has determined that it is there that He will hallow His name on the earth as it has never been hallowed.

 

[Lodic]

I am giving biblical considerations for what I believe. I do not care if anyone agrees with me for my sake--what matters is what God has said.

That is the most important consideration, isn't it? We have to be able to support our views from Scripture. Even though we disagree with our conclusions, I can't find fault in searching the Scriptures. What the Bible says trumps what anyone else says.

You seem to be glossing over the revelation about Melchizedek. He did not just decide on his own one day that it would be nice to be a priest so he became a priest of the most high God. God chose to make him a priest who was also the king of Jerusalem.

The glorified God-Man Jesus of Nazareth is infinitely greater than Melchizedek ever was. God has chosen Him to be a priest after the order of Melchizedek. He who was born king of the Jews will rule from Jerusalem on the throne of His father David for a 1000 years. He will do so in vindication of the holiness of God's name that the Jews have profaned through their sinfulness (Ezek. 20, 36).

Ultimately, Jerusalem and Israel are still special to God because He has determined that it is there that He will hallow His name on the earth as it has never been hallowed.

Of course God chose to make Melchizedek a priest and king of Salem. I don't mean to make it sound like I'm making light of him. I just don't see the connection between him and the land of Israel being a special place to God today. I believe that God's name will be hallowed over the entire earth, but it won't be any more hallowed in Israel than anywhere else.

Ezekiel 20 is not just about God dealing with Israel for their disobedience, their failure to obey His statutes and ordinances, and their idol worship. Ezekiel 34-37 describes the first return of the exiles under Zerubbabel, and implies the initial rebuilding of the Temple. This came to pass in Ezra 7.

I'm not sure if I have anything new to add to this topic. While I don't agree with you, I have not found you to be disagreeable. This has been an interesting discussion, but I don't either of us convincing the other of his views. All the best to you and yours.

 

[canadyjd]

…..

Ultimately, Jerusalem and Israel are still special to God because He has determined that it is there that He will hallow His name on the earth as it has never been hallowed.

So, exactly how is God going to “hallow His name on earth as it has never been hollowed”?

Jesus dying in the cross for our sins, being buried and resurrected, then ascending into heaven seems to have “hollowed” the name of God in a way that cannot be equaled.

Perhaps you believe otherwise? What will God do in Jerusalem to “Hollow His name” as never before?

peace to you