Zionism Undermines our Gospel

[Foxmeister]

Thanks for the correction, friend. I'll keep looking.

Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) is the practice of collecting, processing, and analyzing publicly available information to answer specific research or investigative questions. Sources used are government data, court filings, property records, regulatory documents, news sources, social media, forum discussions, and even public domain images. We used these sources in military intelligence reporting, but we had to be careful with it because many of the sources used are not always credible. When we did use it, it was after we were able to verify it to be true. Trust but verify. If we couldn't verify it it to be true, then it was discarded.

It's why it's important not to take anything you read or watch on the Internet to be true. You'll be amazed at how many times I've heard, "it must be true if it was in the Internet." People should fact check things to verify whether or not they're true. I don't use one source to get my news from. I use several. The problem with news is that it's not uncommon for something to be reported in a manner that fits an agenda. Like how people will intentionally take scripture out of context to fit an agenda that isn't biblical.

I suspected right away because there was no background audio from all those people behind the "reporter" that something was not right and became suspicious. This caused me to look more closely at her. Then what she was reporting didn't sound credible, especially because the video she used of Tehran and the military didn't fit her report. Then I began looking for other sources reporting what she was. I didn't find any to verify it. Then I decided to research The Daily Jargan.

It's really sad today that people will automatically believe something because on the surface it appears legitimate, or it fits with one's own ideals or desires. Always fact check it first before passing it on.

 

[JonC]

I disagree with the OP.

Zionism is the idea of the creation of a Jewish national state. But that state has already been established.

Having been established zionism is the idea that Israel is a sovereign nation (Israel has the right to defend itself, to govern itself).

The Jewish understanding of their identity is in opposition to the gospel, but so is the Muslim understanding of their identity.

We could question whether the Balfour Declaration was the proper thing to do, just as we could question whether Britan had the right to establish American colonies, the US to gain territory, etc.

But Israel is a nation. It has the right to srlf-determination.

 

[John of Japan]

Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) is the practice of collecting, processing, and analyzing publicly available information to answer specific research or investigative questions. Sources used are government data, court filings, property records, regulatory documents, news sources, social media, forum discussions, and even public domain images. We used these sources in military intelligence reporting, but we had to be careful with it because many of the sources used are not always credible. When we did use it, it was after we were able to verify it to be true. Trust but verify. If we couldn't verify it it to be true, then it was discarded.

It's why it's important not to take anything you read or watch on the Internet to be true. You'll be amazed at how many times I've heard, "it must be true if it was in the Internet." People should fact check things to verify whether or not they're true. I don't use one source to get my news from. I use several. The problem with news is that it's not uncommon for something to be reported in a manner that fits an agenda. Like how people will intentionally take scripture out of context to fit an agenda that isn't biblical.

I suspected right away because there was no background audio from all those people behind the "reporter" that something was not right and became suspicious. This caused me to look more closely at her. Then what she was reporting didn't sound credible, especially because the video she used of Tehran and the military didn't fit her report. Then I began looking for other sources reporting what she was. I didn't find any to verify it. Then I decided to research The Daily Jargan.

It's really sad today that people will automatically believe something because on the surface it appears legitimate, or it fits with one's own ideals or desires. Always fact check it first before passing it on.

Thanks. You sound very experienced in this area, far more than I am. I can spot and debunk false narratives on the Internet that are about my own areas of expertise (language, Bible, martial arts), but this kind of thing is outside of my experience and areas of expertise.

 

[asterisktom]

I'm wondering why this is in the Baptist Theology & Bible Study" forum. No Scripture or theology was given. And note that aterisktom himself is the author. (Is he putting forth anti-Zionism as theology?) And in the article itself, only the story of the Good Samaritan is mentioned, which has literally no connection whatsoever to Zionism.

I started to respond to your comments, John, but when I saw this I doubt it would be worth it. Do you really see no connection between the Good Samaritan passage and Zionist indifference to the Gazan plight? Incredible.

 

[asterisktom]

I do not know that asterisktom has read "The Protocols of the Elders...," though it is easily available on the Internet. However, that completely fictional Russian book is the source of much of the anti-Israel sentiment both throughout the 20th century, and now apparently in the 21st century. It is all over the Internet, but even Wikipedia (which is often wrong) calls it an "antisemitic hoax and forgery" (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - Wikipedia). The Nazis used it, and it is the source of much modern antisemitism.

I have not read it and would not bother trying. But, since you mentioned my supposed "antisemitism", you surely must know that the term is dishonest and misleading. Reading Genesis you cannot miss the truth that the Semites included, not just the Jews, but Arabs and others as well. So, speaking against Palestinians - some of whom are Christians - would also be antisemitism, just as much as anything said against Jews. But the Zionists among the Jews have weaponized the term to only refer to themselves. And you naively accept their distortion.

 

[asterisktom]

So focus on it less and preach the gospel instead if it is offensive to you.

I do that as well. This is not an either-or situation. What seems merely to be petty offense to you is really an outworking of the Gospel that I love.

 

[asterisktom]

I'm wondering why this is in the Baptist Theology & Bible Study" forum. No Scripture or theology was given. And note that aterisktom himself is the author. (Is he putting forth anti-Zionism as theology?) And in the article itself, only the story of the Good Samaritan is mentioned, which has literally no connection whatsoever to Zionism.

"21And children were born also to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder. 22The sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram. 23The sons of Aram were Uz, Hul, Gether, and [e]Mash. 24Arphaxad begot Salah, and Salah begot Eber. 25To Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan. 26Joktan begot Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 27Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 28Obal, Abimael, Sheba, 29Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these were the sons of Joktan. 30And their dwelling place was from Mesha as you go toward Sephar, the mountain of the east. 31These were the sons of Shem, according to their families, according to their languages, in their lands, according to their nations." - Gen. 10:21-31

We could also continue with 1 Chron. 1. But surely the above should be adequate Bible references to suit you, John, since my one citation of Luke 10 did not seem to sufficiently qualify as "scripture or theology".

To anyone else reading this and not seeing the OP, this is to clearly prove that the term "antisemitism" should never be narrowed down to only refer to Jews. They are only part of the super-family of Shem. Included in this group, beisdes Arabs, are some people in Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and others. Speaking against these would also be antisemitism. The real reach of the term is so wide and diffuse that there really is no purpose in even using it. But knowing this requires one to be biblically-grounded, not politically goaded.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

Zionism is one extreme, Replacement Theology is the other.

I reject the notion that we should back Israel unconditionally no matter what. Therefore, some of the things that Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee have said regarding this are rather disturbing. We (the United States Government) should ABSOLUTELY NOT base foreign policy on Gen 12:1-3! I have voted faithfully for Ted Cruz (my Senator) and will continue to do so but he is DEAD WRONG concerning this matter!

Certain Covenant Theologians (espousing "Replacement Theology") go to the opposite end of the extreme pretty much taking sides with those who want to see Israel completely wiped off the map! Their blatant anti-semitism is absolutely sickening!

We need to be in the business of preaching the Gospel of Christ! How can we proclaim Christ to the Arab world while waving around an Israeli flag? There are believers in Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran. How many Churches are there in Israel that are comprised largely of ethnic Jews who have become belivers in Christ? They are not all Israel which are of Israel but although they are enemies for our sake, they are beloved for their (fore)fathers sake!

 

[asterisktom]

I disagree with the OP.

...

But Israel is a nation. It has the right to srlf-determination.

John, were not the Palestinians also a nation? There is ample published and photographic proof of that. And, as such, they also had a right to self-determination. Or were their rights obliterated when their towns were obliterated in the Nakhba?

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I disagree with the OP.

Zionism is the idea of the creation of a Jewish national state. But that state has already been established.

Having been established zionism is the idea that Israel is a sovereign nation (Israel has the right to defend itself, to govern itself).

The Jewish understanding of their identity is in opposition to the gospel, but so is the Muslim understanding of their identity.

We could question whether the Balfour Declaration was the proper thing to do, just as we could question whether Britan had the right to establish American colonies, the US to gain territory, etc.

But Israel is a nation. It has the right to srlf-determination.

Agreed but I would define "Extreme Zionism" (the one that is largely objected to by reasonable people) as people taking it upon themselves to fulfil end-times prophecy! We can look all throughout Church History to understand how such typically pans out!

All of this is quite timely. We are discussing Gen 12 and the "Call of Abraham" in our Wednesday Bible Study this evening.

 

[asterisktom]

Zionism is one extreme, Replacement Theology is the other.

I reject the notion that we should back Israel unconditionally no matter what. Therefore, some of the things that Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee have said regarding this are rather disturbing. We (the United States Government) should ABSOLUTELY NOT base foreign policy on Gen 12:1-3! I have voted faithfully for Ted Cruz (my Senator) and will continue to do so but he is DEAD WRONG concerning this matter!

Certain Covenant Theologians (espousing "Replacement Theology") go to the opposite end of the extreme pretty much taking sides with those who want to see Israel completely wiped off the map! Their blatant anti-semitism is absolutely sickening!

We need to be in the business of preaching the Gospel of Christ! How can we proclaim Christ to the Arab world while waving around an Israeli flag? There are believers in Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran. How many Churches are there in Israel that are comprised largely of ethnic Jews who have become belivers in Christ? They are not all Israel which are of Israel but although they are enemies for our sake, they are beloved for their (fore)fathers sake!

I certainly do not want Israel to be wiped off the map. I feel sorry for those citizens who are dragged into and are suffering from this war.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I certainly do not want Israel to be wiped off the map. I feel sorry for those citizens who are dragged into and are suffering from this war.

There are good people caught up in the middle on both sides of the conflict and we ought to remember them! War sucks and no one hates war more than those who have to actually go out and fight!

 

[John of Japan]

I started to respond to your comments, John, but when I saw this I doubt it would be worth it. Do you really see no connection between the Good Samaritan passage and Zionist indifference to the Gazan plight? Incredible.

Putting words in my mouth, aren't you? And I still see no theology there. And I do not see from the 100s of news programs I've seen and read about the whole thing that Israel is "indifferent" to Gaza. In fact, they have been incredibly careful in their attacks to avoid civilian population, unlike Hamas. Do you agree that Hamas raped and killed many hundreds of Israelis, including babies and little children? Does that mean nothing to you?

Concerning the OP, more notes:

1. Any good book on hermeneutics will tell you that it is a mistake to make theology from a parable. They are like sermon illustrations, there to illuminate the truth, not communicate it.

2. If I were to apply the Good Samaritan parable to Israel vs Hamas, here is what it would look like. The Samaritan sees the Jew lying beside the road, and stops to help him. As the Samaritan bends over, the Jew stabs him in the stomach, runs off laughing, then goes to the Samaritan's house to assault his wife, and then kills his family. That is actually what Hamas did.

Hamas is Satanic evil. Anyone on the side of Hamas is thus on the side of evil as bad as the Nazis, since Hitler was Satanically possessed by all accounts. And yes, Israel has erred in various ways. I recently read the DMin dissertation of a pastor in Israel. He and his people are harassed and persecuted by Israelis, it is true, but souls are being saved among the Jews. As several have said on this thread, that is what we are supposed to do.

 

[asterisktom]

Christians do not hate the Jews, or those who chant "from the river to the sea." We are to love the lost, and our enemies. But that does not mean we should abandon our protection of human life from those who believe murder is justified. We believe we should treat others the way we want to be treated, with truth, justice and mercy.

Bottom Line:
Nothing undermines Our Gospel. Full Stop

I think you know what I meant. Yes, of course, God's Word will always eventually do what He intends. Yet still, Christians on a personal level can still undermine the Gospel message that they are giving out in their personal spheres of influence. Good grief, do I have to type everything out like a lawyer?

 

[asterisktom]

Putting words in my mouth, aren't you? And I still see no theology there. And I do not see from the 100s of news programs I've seen and read about the whole thing that Israel is "indifferent" to Gaza. In fact, they have been incredibly careful in their attacks to avoid civilian population, unlike Hamas. Do you agree that Hamas raped and killed many hundreds of Israelis, including babies and little children? Does that mean nothing to you?

Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. Why so belligerent? No one is talking about Hamas. I do not deny their atrocities, but they are not the entirety of the Palestinians.

And I said nothing about Israel being indifferent. I referred to Zionists - Christians and non-Christians - being indifferent. Maybe if you read more slowly for information instead of ammunition your responses would be more relevant.

Concerning the OP, more notes:

1. Any good book on hermeneutics will tell you that it is a mistake to make theology from a parable. They are like sermon illustrations, there to illuminate the truth, not communicate it.

This is incredible. OK, lets work this out. Jesus teaches us in this passage that we must be willing to consider anyone our neighbor. Are we good so far? That we include the Palestinians as well. Are we just "illuminating the truth" here, or are we venturing on into theology?

You have weird compartmentalization going on here. I have read a number of books on hermeneutics in my Bible studies at school, good and bad, but the better ones do not divorce theology from parables. They might teach that we don't make parables "walk on all four legs" (I forget which one put it that way). But we certainly can draw theology from parables. It was the obtuseness of the Disciples that they did not draw proper theological conclusions from the Master's parables and metaphors. And you are doing the same thing.

2. If I were to apply the Good Samaritan parable to Israel vs Hamas, here is what it would look like. The Samaritan sees the Jew lying beside the road, and stops to help him. As the Samaritan bends over, the Jew stabs him in the stomach, runs off laughing, then goes to the Samaritan's house to assault his wife, and then kills his family. That is actually what Hamas did.

Read what I wrote again. You miss my point entirely. I am not applying the parable to Israel vs. Hamas. I am applying it to you. You and anyone else that has a hard time seeing that the Palastinians are our neighbors.

Hamas is Satanic evil. Anyone on the side of Hamas is thus on the side of evil as bad as the Nazis, since Hitler was Satanically possessed by all accounts. And yes, Israel has erred in various ways. I recently read the DMin dissertation of a pastor in Israel. He and his people are harassed and persecuted by Israelis, it is true, but souls are being saved among the Jews. As several have said on this thread, that is what we are supposed to do.

Hamas is Satanic evil. Yes. So are those IDF soldiers who lure hungry Palestinians to food distribution centers and then shoots them. Or those who shoot innocent children simply because they might, as one said, "grow up to be Hamas".

You supposedly have read "100s of news programs" yet you act like you are unaware of this. Or of Israel totally destroying the remaining cities and villages of Palestine. You are probably unaware - or maybe prefer to be unaware - of the Nakhba against these people. And what is happening now is much worse. Nakhba 2.0.

Of course, you will not get the whole story from the overwhelming majority or your 100s of news programs when you consider who owns them. Quit being naive.

 

[John of Japan]

Talk about putting words in someone's mouth. Why so belligerent? No one is talking about Hamas. I do not deny their atrocities, but they are not the entirety of the Palestinians.

Are you unaware that the citizens of Gaza themselves elected Hamas as their government? And some even joined and participated in the Oct. 7 attack? So, if you are talking about Gaza, you are ergo talking about Hamas. Try all you want, you cannot escape that.

And I said nothing about Israel being indifferent. I referred to Zionists - Christians and non-Christians - being indifferent. Maybe if you read more slowly for information instead of ammunition your responses would be more relevant.

You are parroting the Islamist definition of Zionism. Merriam-Webster says, "an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in the historical region of Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Zionism). Therefore, actual Zionism has been achieved. It is only anti-zionism if you oppose the Jews having their own nation. Is that you? If so, you are aligning yourself with Islam, which has a doctrinaire belief that all Jews (so-called Zionists) must die. Do you agree with Islam (and thus all non-Christian Palestinians) that all Jews must die?

Do you hold to the slogan, "From the river to the sea"? That Palestinian slogan is calling for the destruction of the nation of Israel and the death of every single Jew.

This is incredible. OK, lets work this out. Jesus teaches us in this passage that we must be willing to consider anyone our neighbor. Are we good so far? That we include the Palestinians as well. Are we just "illuminating the truth" here, or are we venturing on into theology?

I am entirely in favor of caring for genuinely bereft Palestinians. The trouble is that Hamas controls all relief going to the poor Palestinians, and keeps it for its own purposes.

You have weird compartmentalization going on here. I have read a number of books on hermeneutics in my Bible studies at school, good and bad, but the better ones do not divorce theology from parables. They might teach that we don't make parables "walk on all four legs" (I forget which one put it that way). But we certainly can draw theology from parables. It was the obtuseness of the Disciples that they did not draw proper theological conclusions from the Master's parables and metaphors. And you are doing the same thing.

A parable only gives one central truth. (Cf Protestant Biblical Interpretation, by Bernard Ramm, p. 261, and many other sources). When you drag the parable of the Good Samaritan into the political realm of Israel vs. Palestine, you are doing damage to the truths of Scripture.

Read what I wrote again. You miss my point entirely. I am not applying the parable to Israel vs. Hamas. I am applying it to you. You and anyone else that has a hard time seeing that the Palastinians are our neighbors.

Actually, you are applying the parable to Israel vs. Hamas.

Hamas is Satanic evil. Yes. So are those IDF soldiers who lure hungry Palestinians to food distribution centers and then shoots them. Or those who shoot innocent children simply because they might, as one said, "grow up to be Hamas".

Finally I see you stand against Hamas. It was like pulling teeth to get you to say this. As for IDF soldiers, there have been some very sad incidents, but I seriously doubt your depiction here. Such news items are usually out of Gaza, and all news sources there are run by Hamas. Does Hamas lie? Asked and answered.

You supposedly have read "100s of news programs" yet you act like you are unaware of this. Or of Israel totally destroying the remaining cities and villages of Palestine. You are probably unaware - or maybe prefer to be unaware - of the Nakhba against these people. And what is happening now is much worse. Nakhba 2.0.

The Palestinian people are simply Arabs by their DNA and language and customs, just like the Arabs in Jordan and other countries round about. They are not a special, unique people group. They are part of the same lineage that immediately attacked the new nation of Israel established by the UN in the partition in 1948. The Israeli effort to completely destroy Hamas is not a "Nakhba." You are accepting Islamic propaganda.

Of course, you will not get the whole story from the overwhelming majority or your 100s of news programs when you consider who owns them. Quit being naive.

Or are you being naive by accepting all "news" items out of Hamas controlled Palestine?

 

[JonC]

John, were not the Palestinians also a nation? There is ample published and photographic proof of that. And, as such, they also had a right to self-determination. Or were their rights obliterated when their towns were obliterated in the Nakhba?

No, the Palestinians were not a nation. Palestine has never been an independent sovereign nation.

That is a difference, but not a difference that matters in this discussion.

Israel has been (in antiquity) an independent sovereign nation and it is now (currently). In fact, Israel was the first actual nation to occupy Israel (prior to Israel there were city-states but no nations in that area).

One could argue that the Balfour Declaration and following UN partition should not have occurred. But it did. Israel is an independent sovereign nation again.

Nobody can rationlly deny that.

Same with the US. One can argue the Revolutionary War was not a just war (I would argue that), or that the US should not have obtained the land. But nobody can rationally deny the existence of the US.

Israel is an independent sovereign nation.

Palestinian has never been an independent sovereign nation.

The problem is everytime Palestine is given the chance to become a nation they decline because they do not want Israel to exist.

 

[Foxmeister]

John, were not the Palestinians also a nation? There is ample published and photographic proof of that. And, as such, they also had a right to self-determination. Or were their rights obliterated when their towns were obliterated in the Nakhba?

Palestine was never a sovereign nation, but just a geographical region occupied by the Philistines on the coast where the Gaza strip is now. That region also went further inland where Israelites and Canaanites lived in the hills and northern area. The name Palestine is what the Greeks called the area. Nobody was called a Palestinian until the late 19th century.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The problem is everytime Palestine is given the chance to become a nation they decline because they do not want Israel to exist

Exactly! And Israel does not want Palestine to exist.
Sometimes I feel like the Prince of Verona in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, who said, "A plague on both your houses!" It strikes me that only the Gospel of Jesus Christ can end the plague.

Palestine was never a sovereign nation

True, but Israel ceased to be a sovereign nation in 63 BC, 2,089 years ago, when it was conquered by the Romans under Pompey the Great. In 136 AD, after the Bar Cochba revolt, the Emperor Hadrian forbade any Jew to live within 50 miles of Jerusalem. In around 640 AD, the Arabs conquered the Byzantine province of Palestine, so that from that date, with a short break during the Crusades, Israel/Palestine has been under Muslim control until 1948, and the area was called Palestine even before 640.
But Israel has existed for nearly 80 years now, and the Israelis cannot simply be turfed out of the land; but nor can the Palestinians be thrown out of Gaza and the West Bank. There has to be a Two State Solution, and that must involve the leadership of Hamas leaving Gaza and Israel giving back the land its settlers have occupied forcibly over the last few years.
But the main thing that needs to happen is reconciliation; Jew and Arab freely agreeing that they will kill each other no more. That's the bit that requires the Lord Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit.

 

[xlsdraw]

Exactly! And Israel does not want Palestine to exist.
Sometimes I feel like the Prince of Verona in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, who said, "A plague on both your houses!" It strikes me that only the Gospel of Jesus Christ can end the plague.

True, but Israel ceased to be a sovereign nation in 63 BC, 2,089 years ago, when it was conquered by the Romans under Pompey the Great. In 136 AD, after the Bar Cochba revolt, the Emperor Hadrian forbade any Jew to live within 50 miles of Jerusalem. In around 640 AD, the Arabs conquered the Byzantine province of Palestine, so that from that date, with a short break during the Crusades, Israel/Palestine has been under Muslim control until 1948, and the area was called Palestine even before 640.
But Israel has existed for nearly 80 years now, and the Israelis cannot simply be turfed out of the land; but nor can the Palestinians be thrown out of Gaza and the West Bank. There has to be a Two State Solution, and that must involve the leadership of Hamas leaving Gaza and Israel giving back the land its settlers have occupied forcibly over the last few years.
But the main thing that needs to happen is reconciliation; Jew and Arab freely agreeing that they will kill each other no more. That's the bit that requires the Lord Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit.

You greatly underestimate God's ability.