 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The "boycott, divestment, sanction" movement against Israel - is it wrong?
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
So basically, should Israel exist?
<SNIP>
In contrast, both Jews who have accepted Jesus by faith, and Gentiles who are also adopted children of Abraham through faith in Jesus, are logically entitled to the land. But paradoxically, precisely by that faith they have entered into a wider and deeper – not to mention eternal – blessing of which the physical land was only a symbol/picture/down-payment; and so Christians (of whatever ethnicity), though entitled to the land, don't need it. And indeed in the present could not lay claim to the land without contradicting the kind of kingdom Jesus told them to form, a kingdom not limited to one land but comprising all believers globally....
The above is a summary of stuff found all over the NT but particularly in the Epistle to the Hebrews....
I think SL brings up some interesting points here, albeit in his own inimitable style.
There is a level of crazy cognative dissonance whereby some Christians assert things about Christianity and being "born again" and yet at the same time believe in prophesies relating to a different religion and being in the land. To that extent I agree with Steve.
On the other hand, what he says is also exhibiting a level of crazy cognative dissonance. Jews are not Christians. Using an understanding of Christianity which relegates Judaism-without-Jesus as being wrong, and therefore that Jews are not entitled to the land of Israel is pretty bonkers.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
They could always offer a home to the Yazidi.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Most of the protagonists in this particular dispute aren't Christian. So arguments about the correct interpretation of the New Testament aren't going to get us very far.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Most of the protagonists in this particular dispute aren't Christian. So arguments about the correct interpretation of the New Testament aren't going to get us very far.
The question where that does become relevant is that of whether Christians should support the state of Israel. And, IMO, Steve is correct - there is no Scriptural basis for Christians to support a religious basis for the existance of the state of Israel, in that we believe that the Old Covenant (including the government of a piece of land) has been superceded by a New Covenant in Christ.
Other arguments for the existance of the state of Israel that don't boil down to "it was promised to Abraham and his descendents" could, of course, be relevant to whether Christians should support Israel.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The question where that does become relevant is that of whether Christians should support the state of Israel. And, IMO, Steve is correct - there is no Scriptural basis for Christians to support a religious basis for the existance of the state of Israel, in that we believe that the Old Covenant (including the government of a piece of land) has been superceded by a New Covenant in Christ.
Other arguments for the existance of the state of Israel that don't boil down to "it was promised to Abraham and his descendents" could, of course, be relevant to whether Christians should support Israel.
As far as I can make out, those (usually very conservative Evangelicals) who support Israel to the extent of donating large sums to build settlements are doing so because they believe Jews in the Promised Land will bring the Second Coming.
So I'm not sure it is entirely fair to say that there is "no Scriptural basis for Christians to support a religious basis for the existance of the state of Israel", although this position is rather undermined by relying on the actions of people who don't believe in the religion to bring about the end times. I think they think that at the Second Coming all Jews will recognise Christ as messiah or something. It is a long time since I read this kind of nonsense.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by lilBuddha;
quote:
If God wants a particular group to take residence in a particular place, let him speak up now.
From where I'm standing, God has spoken and he doesn't want any 'particular group to take residence in a particular place'... especially when their doing so threatens the peace of the world....
What God wants in the present age is for everybody to put faith in Jesus and become Christians, to enjoy blessings now and in the next life which make 'the land' look trivial.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Until that happens in a thousand years, what do WE do?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Martin 60: What's that 2,600 year old Exilic 'prophecy' that was fulfilled within a century got to do with the Holocaust, oil, British,....
Your first line here is untrue. This post -exilic prophecy was not fulfilled in the return from Babylon. Relatively few Jews uprooted themselves to return at that time. The prophecies of return to the land have to apply beyond that. There are others in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah and elsewhere that state God would return Jews en masse to the land of Israel (formerly Canaan, never Palestine).
The historical event we witness in our day is in no way a justification of Israel as a nation, it is an evidence of an objective real and factual God if you care to accept it.
You cannot explain it as an international twinge of conscience about allowing the holocaust. The Brits for instance had no such twinge in their cynical withdrawal and active assistance to the Arab forces in 1948.
It is and was an illogical and since, much regretted, anomalous action by the UN that they have been trying to reverse ever since. Something over 130 resolutions of the UN have been directed against Israel. I think it shows that God exists and he has a stake in world affairs. So much for post modernism.
God,in the Bible,says he would restore Israel in the original land
The world hates Jews who have always been marginalised.
God has done what he said using the world.
Ergo, God exists.
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Some Arabs think the British were helping the Jews.
It all depends on perspective.
As does your post. It's down to interpretation.
That's not post-modernism. It's common sense.
Don't forget that a good number of British soldiers and civilians were killed by those nice cuddly Jewish terrorist organisations during the Mandate.
The Arabs did some nasty things too.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Martin 60: What's that 2,600 year old Exilic 'prophecy' that was fulfilled within a century got to do with the Holocaust, oil, British,....
Your first line here is untrue. This post -exilic prophecy was not fulfilled in the return from Babylon. Relatively few Jews uprooted themselves to return at that time. The prophecies of return to the land have to apply beyond that. There are others in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah and elsewhere that state God would return Jews en masse to the land of Israel (formerly Canaan, never Palestine).
The historical event we witness in our day is in no way a justification of Israel as a nation, it is an evidence of an objective real and factual God if you care to accept it.
You cannot explain it as an international twinge of conscience about allowing the holocaust. The Brits for instance had no such twinge in their cynical withdrawal and active assistance to the Arab forces in 1948.
It is and was an illogical and since, much regretted, anomalous action by the UN that they have been trying to reverse ever since. Something over 130 resolutions of the UN have been directed against Israel. I think it shows that God exists and he has a stake in world affairs. So much for post modernism.
God,in the Bible,says he would restore Israel in the original land
The world hates Jews who have always been marginalised.
God has done what he said using the world.
Ergo, God exists.
This is confused from the start and gets worse. What post -exilic (sic) prophecy are you talking about?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Martin60;
quote:
Until that happens in a thousand years, what do WE do?
Two things;
1) We preach the gospel to all, including Jews who clearly need it.
2) We get our NT interpretation right so as not to make things worse....
I'm honestly not sure whether the NT predicts the return of Israel to the land. It does appear to predict the eventual conversion of the Jewish people to Christianity - eg in Romans 11.
It has been one of the problems of this issue that the return of Jews to Israel became a major plank in the misguided Rapture/'Left Behind' eschatology scenario. Initially of course, as those responsible were preaching an 'any minute' Second Coming to rapture the Church away, they saw the return to the land as happening AFTER the Rapture and as a consequence of it; this needed some adjustment after 1948.... ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
This has led to the position where Christians support the state of Israel more-or-less whatever the state does; which can be very problematic. We need to work on what the NT actually says about the position of the Jews in the Christian era, so we get it right and preach a correct message about it.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
Ezekiel 36:24 written by Ezekiel after he was exiled.
Hi Gamaliel, welcome back. I think the Brits tried their best to sink it in 1948 and consequently were targeted as you say by Jews and also by God as well. Where is the British empire on which the sun never set now?
It is nevertheless true that poo pushing based on whatever 2nd rate source one can find sheds more heat than light. BTW,Has anyone here actually read "From Time Immemorial" by Joan Peters? I am reading it now and doubt the honesty of Her critics. Where does one find the truth in such a morass of vested interests? She at least has made an honest attempt to do so.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
I have read about Joan Peters, and few have anything good to say about From Time Immemorial. The current Israeli government think it's the bees knees, because it is in line with their policy.
Israel and Palestine is a subject about which almost everything is subjective, and this book is no exception.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Ezekiel 36:24 written by Ezekiel after he was exiled.
That's not post-exilic.
[ 05. November 2016, 09:01: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Martin60;
quote:
Until that happens in a thousand years, what do WE do?
Two things;
1) We preach the gospel to all, including Jews who clearly need it.
2) We get our NT interpretation right so as not to make things worse....
How?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I have read about Joan Peters, and few have anything good to say about From Time Immemorial. The current Israeli government think it's the bees knees, because it is in line with their policy.
Israel and Palestine is a subject about which almost everything is subjective, and this book is no exception.
Almost everything except the fact that Britain, America, Russia, France and many other north European, their satellite and client states forced an alien presence in the Arab world and need to compensate the victims of that, to minimize future burnt offerings of redemptive violence.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
I'll come back later (possibly now Monday) on some of the issues here. But for now I want to deal with this....
by mr cheesy;
quote:
There is a level of crazy cognitive dissonance whereby some Christians assert things about Christianity and being "born again" and yet at the same time believe in prophesies relating to a different religion and being in the land. To that extent I agree with Steve.
On the other hand, what he says is also exhibiting a level of crazy cognitive dissonance. Jews are not Christians. Using an understanding of Christianity which relegates Judaism-without-Jesus as being wrong, and therefore that Jews are not entitled to the land of Israel is pretty bonkers.
Not for the first time - previously it was in relation to Islam - mr cheesy is using this strange idea that Christians discussing in this case Judaism are talking about a 'different religion'.
What's strange about it is this....
Christianity and Buddhism are different religions
Christianity and Hinduism are different religions
Christianity and Japanese Shinto are different religions
Christianity and Scientology are different religions
And I could go on to list a few more where Christianity has almost nothing in common with the other religion in question except that the adherents are human....
This is not quite so in the case of Judaism/Christianity/Islam (and one could include some other 'derivatives' like Mormonism or Christian Science). Judaism, Christianity and Islam are deeply entwined and interconnected.
Jesus was a Jew; far from claiming to set up a 'different religion' he claimed that his teachings were a follow-through/completion/fulfilment of Judaism.
He also claimed to be the 'Messiah, that is the 'anointed king of the Jews' as a descendant of King David, fulfilling a role promised by the God of Israel in prophecies of the Old Testament. He fulfilled that role in a fashion slightly differently to the typical expectations of 1st Century CE Jews, but nevertheless, that is who he claimed to be.
And in addition, he claimed, and it was a major reason for his crucifixion on a charge of 'blasphemy', that he was also an incarnation of the God of the Jews.
There is obviously an argument to be had concerning whether this is a valid position. But basically IF CHRISTIANITY IS TRUE, it is definitely NOT a different religion to Judaism.
And if so, there is no 'cognitive dissonance' in Christians basing ideas on OT teachings, as Jesus himself and his apostles, the heralds of his message, very much did. Again, you can argue that a particular case is mistaken - but not for a dissonance that applies in general to Christians doing that.
I'd argue that the application which sees Jews as somehow even after Jesus continuing as before with an unchanged relationship to the land is misguided, precisely because it ignores the difference Jesus makes to the situation - but I'd also argue that there will, if Christianity is true, be a valid interpretation of those prophecies in Christian terms.
Likewise the interpretation I offer is not a 'cognitive dissonance' because of any idea that Judaism and Christianity are 'different religions'; I'm simply following through the logic of who Jesus claims to be and the difference that makes.
IF CHRISTIANITY IS TRUE then Jews who don't accept Jesus as Messiah, who don't accept the teachings of their own God in incarnate-as-human form, have stepped outside the true fulfilment of their religion and have gone off down a side-turning. They have rejected, from a Christian viewpoint, the necessary conditions of the covenant on which their entitlement to the land depends, while those who follow Jesus - regardless of ethnic origin - are within the covenant - Jews and Gentiles 'joint-heirs' as Paul explains in several places.
A Christian who does not recognise this aspect of Christian belief - ah, now there we can see very real and deep 'cognitive dissonance'.....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I have read about Joan Peters, and few have anything good to say about From Time Immemorial. The current Israeli government think it's the bees knees, because it is in line with their policy.
Israel and Palestine is a subject about which almost everything is subjective, and this book is no exception.
You haven' t read it. She has, in there a huge base of documentary evidence including personal testimony, of the ejection of Jews from all Arab lands, the confiscation of their property and The obvious inflation of numbers of Arabs that fled Israel in 1948 and were subsequently kept in camps to use as political fodder for the purpose of inflaming world opinion against Israel. I read on Wikipedia that she was c riticised for misusing sources. If so I fail to see how she has misrepresented people when in many cases she quotes them verbatim
Eg king Hussein of Jordan said in 1960:
" Since 1948 Arab leaders have approached the Palestinian
problem in an irresponsible manner..They have used the Palestinian people for selfish political purposes. This is ridiculous and, I could say, even criminal."
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
I'll come back later (possibly now Monday) on some of the issues here. But for now I want to deal with this....
by mr cheesy;
quote:
There is a level of crazy cognitive dissonance whereby some Christians assert things about Christianity and being "born again" and yet at the same time believe in prophesies relating to a different religion and being in the land. To that extent I agree with Steve.
On the other hand, what he says is also exhibiting a level of crazy cognitive dissonance. Jews are not Christians. Using an understanding of Christianity which relegates Judaism-without-Jesus as being wrong, and therefore that Jews are not entitled to the land of Israel is pretty bonkers.
Not for the first time - previously it was in relation to Islam - mr cheesy is using this strange idea that Christians discussing in this case Judaism are talking about a 'different religion'.
What's strange about it is this....
Christianity and Buddhism are different religions
Christianity and Hinduism are different religions
Christianity and Japanese Shinto are different religions
Christianity and Scientology are different religions
And I could go on to list a few more where Christianity has almost nothing in common with the other religion in question except that the adherents are human....
This is not quite so in the case of Judaism/Christianity/Islam (and one could include some other 'derivatives' like Mormonism or Christian Science). Judaism, Christianity and Islam are deeply entwined and interconnected.
Jesus was a Jew; far from claiming to set up a 'different religion' he claimed that his teachings were a follow-through/completion/fulfilment of Judaism.
He also claimed to be the 'Messiah, that is the 'anointed king of the Jews' as a descendant of King David, fulfilling a role promised by the God of Israel in prophecies of the Old Testament. He fulfilled that role in a fashion slightly differently to the typical expectations of 1st Century CE Jews, but nevertheless, that is who he claimed to be.
And in addition, he claimed, and it was a major reason for his crucifixion on a charge of 'blasphemy', that he was also an incarnation of the God of the Jews.
There is obviously an argument to be had concerning whether this is a valid position. But basically IF CHRISTIANITY IS TRUE, it is definitely NOT a different religion to Judaism.
And if so, there is no 'cognitive dissonance' in Christians basing ideas on OT teachings, as Jesus himself and his apostles, the heralds of his message, very much did. Again, you can argue that a particular case is mistaken - but not for a dissonance that applies in general to Christians doing that.
I'd argue that the application which sees Jews as somehow even after Jesus continuing as before with an unchanged relationship to the land is misguided, precisely because it ignores the difference Jesus makes to the situation - but I'd also argue that there will, if Christianity is true, be a valid interpretation of those prophecies in Christian terms.
Likewise the interpretation I offer is not a 'cognitive dissonance' because of any idea that Judaism and Christianity are 'different religions'; I'm simply following through the logic of who Jesus claims to be and the difference that makes.
IF CHRISTIANITY IS TRUE then Jews who don't accept Jesus as Messiah, who don't accept the teachings of their own God in incarnate-as-human form, have stepped outside the true fulfilment of their religion and have gone off down a side-turning. They have rejected, from a Christian viewpoint, the necessary conditions of the covenant on which their entitlement to the land depends, while those who follow Jesus - regardless of ethnic origin - are within the covenant - Jews and Gentiles 'joint-heirs' as Paul explains in several places.
A Christian who does not recognise this aspect of Christian belief - ah, now there we can see very real and deep 'cognitive dissonance'.....
So Jewish Christians ARE entitled to Arab land?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Martin60
quote:
So Jewish Christians ARE entitled to Arab land?
ALL Christians are theoretically entitled to the land of Israel - but would be very much "missing the point" if they actually claimed it .... Not to mention some practical problems, given the number of Christians in the world...!!
As I said above, Christians have the deeper eternal beyond-this-world reality of which the land for Israel was only a shadow.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Jamat, the idea that God somehow brought about the demise of the British Empire because of its behaviour in 1948 is one of the most crass and reductionist cause and effect views of history I gave encountered.
One could argue that the Empire's days were numbered as early as the Indian Mutiny of 1857 or the Boer War.
It was pretty obvious that India would be granted independence eventually, despite attempts to dig in the imperial heels.
What unfolded in Ghana, Kenya, Malaysia and lots of other places post 1945 was part of a move/continuum that has already been unfolding for a long time. Look at the Irish Republic for goodness sake.
Tying these things in with biblical prophecy in some direct sense isn't a sensible way of using scripture.
It's not what the scriptures are for.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Eg king Hussein of Jordan said in 1960:
"Since 1948 Arab leaders have approached the Palestinian problem in an irresponsible manner..They have used the Palestinian people for selfish political purposes. This is ridiculous and, I could say, even criminal."
Before he died, the late King Hussein changed the line of succession, so that his military son was next in line. I wonder what he knew, or suspected.
I recently saw an interview with his son, who is now king. Very much a warrior.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Although I might differ in some of the detail, I'm with Steve Langton on this one.
Most of the fervid eschatological speculations about Israel are products of mid 19th century revivalism and millenarianism rather than the more sober approach taken by the wider Reformed and small r reformed traditions.
We have to avoid two extremes. A kind of mediaeval Catholic anti-Semitism on the one hand and bonkers revivalist eschatology on the other.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Martin60
quote:
So Jewish Christians ARE entitled to Arab land?
ALL Christians are theoretically entitled to the land of Israel - but would be very much "missing the point" if they actually claimed it .... Not to mention some practical problems, given the number of Christians in the world...!!
As I said above, Christians have the deeper eternal beyond-this-world reality of which the land for Israel was only a shadow.
Are you with Steve Langton on this imperialist, Islamophobic, unchristian, anti-Christian nonsense Gamaliel?
[ 06. November 2016, 12:21: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
In what sense?
I am with SL in terms of seeing the physical land of Israel and issues around its ownership as a secondary concern in the 'my kingdom is not of this world' sense.
I'm not with him on some of the detail.
I thought I'd made that clear.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Jamat
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Ezekiel 36:24 written by Ezekiel after he was exiled.
That's not post-exilic.
Don't forget this indisputable fact, this categorical truth. And that even the second and third rate hermeneutics used by Jesus and the New Testament writers respectively, because that's all they knew, doesn't approach the fourth rate (which is generous if you insist on the lack of minimal scholarship of claiming that Ezekiel 36:24 - dated up to 571 BCE - is a post-exilic prophecy; that puts it into the fifth rate) hermeneutic of making exilic prophecy, fulfilled by the post-exile of 539 BCE, arbitrarily apply to 1948 geopolitical abuse.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
G. (thank God you're back! I nearly joined you more than once.) I quoted the last thing he said, and questioned the next thing you said re Steve after that.
I'm sure you're pellucid, but my eyes are dim and I still cannot see. It probably can't be clarified for me. No matter.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
In what sense?
I am with SL in terms of seeing the physical land of Israel and issues around its ownership as a secondary concern in the 'my kingdom is not of this world' sense.
I'm not with him on some of the detail.
I thought I'd made that clear.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Martin60
quote:
Are you with Steve Langton on this imperialist, Islamophobic, unchristian, anti-Christian nonsense Gamaliel?
I don't think I would accept any of that characterisation of my position - where did that come from?
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Probably this bit quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
ALL Christians are theoretically entitled to the land of Israel
![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Eutychus;
quote:
Probably this bit
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
ALL Christians are theoretically entitled to the land of Israel
[Paranoid]
Did nobody notice the rather big "BUT" which immediately followed? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
And did nobody realise that I was the last person likely to be, for example 'imperialistic'????
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Gamaliel :
Jamat, the idea that God somehow brought about the demise of the British Empire because of its behaviour in 1948 is one of the most crass and reductionist cause and effect views of history I gave encountered.
Yeah Gamaliel, I get a lot of that🙂
Sodom and Gomorrah as well. You gotta remember that Christianity and God and all that stuff needs to be accessible to us cretins..the ones that believe Matthew's hermeneutics about the incarnation. "Unless you become as little children etc"
[ 06. November 2016, 22:28: Message edited by: Jamat ]
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Martin60
quote:
Are you with Steve Langton on this imperialist, Islamophobic, unchristian, anti-Christian nonsense Gamaliel?
I don't think I would accept any of that characterisation of my position - where did that come from?
Don't worry Steve Langton,( illegitimus non carborundum..Don't let the bastards get you down)
Or wind you up in this case.
I agree that Christians have no claim to the real estate but participate in Jewish covenants spiritually. In that sense we are children of Abraham.
Where we may differ a bit is in the relevance of the real estate to God's current purposes. Literalist that I am I see current Israel as God's standard to the nations as in I think, Isaiah ch 11:10,11,12. The root of Jesse seen as Jesus, the recovery is the standard to the nations in v12. It is't fulfilled totally of course yet but I think it will be in the future kingdom.
[ 06. November 2016, 22:46: Message edited by: Jamat ]
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Jamat
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Ezekiel 36:24 written by Ezekiel after he was exiled.
That's not post-exilic.
Don't forget this indisputable fact, this categorical truth. And that even the second and third rate hermeneutics used by Jesus and the New Testament writers respectively, because that's all they knew, doesn't approach the fourth rate (which is generous if you insist on the lack of minimal scholarship of claiming that Ezekiel 36:24 - dated up to 571 BCE - is a post-exilic prophecy; that puts it into the fifth rate) hermeneutic of making exilic prophecy, fulfilled by the post-exile of 539 BCE, arbitrarily apply to 1948 geopolitical abuse.
Which amounts to saying you know more than Jesus did.
"Professing to be wise.."
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Logic is remorseless isn't it? Hard to beat. One can always pretend it's not there I suppose. Ignore it. But my parents were married prior to my conception, thank you.
And DO I acknowledge your gracious acknowledgement of your being wrong in your fifth rate hermeneutic.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Jamat
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Ezekiel 36:24 written by Ezekiel after he was exiled.
That's not post-exilic.
Don't forget this indisputable fact, this categorical truth. And that even the second and third rate hermeneutics used by Jesus and the New Testament writers respectively, because that's all they knew, doesn't approach the fourth rate (which is generous if you insist on the lack of minimal scholarship of claiming that Ezekiel 36:24 - dated up to 571 BCE - is a post-exilic prophecy; that puts it into the fifth rate) hermeneutic of making exilic prophecy, fulfilled by the post-exile of 539 BCE, arbitrarily apply to 1948 geopolitical abuse.
Which amounts to saying you know more than Jesus did.
"Professing to be wise.."
Of course I do. He promised we would do greater things than Him. Our hermeneutic is such.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
by Jamat;
quote:
You gotta remember that Christianity and God and all that stuff needs to be accessible to us cretins..the ones that believe Matthew's hermeneutics about the incarnation. "Unless you become as little children etc"
Jamat, I need to be convinced that the same God who, in Jesus, said "My kingdom is not of this world" is also, in the same post-Jesus era, wanting Jews to operate Israel as very much a 'kingdom of this world'.
And that He wants them to be supported in this by everybody else in the world even when the way they go about it seems more than a bit actually ungodly, often even by OT standards let alone the values of the NT....
And that he wants this not for faithful Jews who obey their dual Divine/Davidic King Jesus, but for Jews who actually reject Jesus, and reject God in Him....
As a 'child' I prefer to believe in a God who does not contradict himself, but is consistent to the ideas expressed by his incarnate Self and the Apostles he commissioned to convey that to the world.
In places throughout the NT, but especially Hebrews, Romans and Ephesians - and many of Jesus' own words as well - I am told that Christians are 'co-heirs' of the promises made to Abraham. That Gentile Christians are adopted children of God alongside the Jews; that the Church is not a replacement of the Jews but a body in continuity with OT Israel. Jews rejecting Jesus are depicted as 'broken off' from the tree of God's people while faithful Gentiles are 'grafted in'. Yet these people 'broken off' are nevertheless supposed to be entitled to 'the land' in the here and now as if they were fully faithful to the old covenant...?
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
Sorry, while compiling that one I missed the post about Isaiah 11.....
A quick reaction is that I'd see the fulfilment NOT in the return of Israel to the land literally, but in the 'remnant' Paul sees in Romans as having faith in Jesus, and in an ultimate saving of 'all Israel' foretold by Paul in Romans 11/25-6 - Jews saved by (re)incorporation into God's holy nation the Church (I Pet). See Heb 11/16 and 12/22....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Sorry, while compiling that one I missed the post about Isaiah 11.....
A quick reaction is that I'd see the fulfilment NOT in the return of Israel to the land literally, but in the 'remnant' Paul sees in Romans as having faith in Jesus, and in an ultimate saving of 'all Israel' foretold by Paul in Romans 11/25-6 - Jews saved by (re)incorporation into God's holy nation the Church (I Pet). See Heb 11/16 and 12/22....
Why not both and instead of either or?
The issue is the promise to Abraham only ever partially fulfilled. It has to happen or God is a liar and he is not.
BTW no prob with current Israel needing to recognise Jesus as their Messiah, that is a given. To me unregenerate Israel is still an international flag. God is doing what he said he would though the end is not yet. My bottom line is that there is a literal restoration predicted that cannot be spiritualised.
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Logic is remorseless isn't it? Hard to beat. One can always pretend it's not there I suppose. Ignore it. But my parents were married prior to my conception, thank you.
And DO I acknowledge your gracious acknowledgement of your being wrong in your fifth rate hermeneutic.
Rubbish in rubbish out. Your premises determine your conclusion and in your case they are impenetrable. I mean your post modern world view. ISTM you are so influenced by perceived abuses from fundamentalists that the baby is down the plug hole.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Your premises determine your conclusion
Yes. That is what deductive logic IS.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Eutychus;
quote:
Probably this bit
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
ALL Christians are theoretically entitled to the land of Israel
[Paranoid]
Did nobody notice the rather big "BUT" which immediately followed?
Yes, but it is not clear how what follows in your post contradicts this entitlement of Christians, be it theoretical or otherwise, to the land.
You said they'd be stupid to content themselves with it, not that they weren't entitled to it.
[ 07. November 2016, 05:40: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
To me unregenerate Israel is still an international flag.
With this I agree entirely.
So why draw hasty parallels between developments in this unregenerate Israel and a regenerate Israel? As far as I can see unregenerate Israel cultivates this confusion for its own, entirely secular benefit.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Jamat--
What do you mean by "international flag", please? Thx.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
A Christian who does not recognise this aspect of Christian belief - ah, now there we can see very real and deep 'cognitive dissonance'.....
First of all, you don't get to determine what I believe. Thanks all the same, but you have zero authority as a marker of Christian belief for me.
Second of all, Christianity is clearly a different belief from the Judaism the majority of Jews believe. That's not under dispute.
Third of all, of course I accept that Christianity has origins in Judaism. That's got nothing to do with the issue of how Zionist Jews understand the Theology of the Land.
The dissonance occurs when you fail to appreciate that other people could possibly read the same religious texts as you and get to a different conclusion. On the one hand you say that Jesus isn't into building a kingdom of this earth, then you say that Christians are more entitled to Israel than the Jews, Muslims or anyone else. So which is it?
For your information, I reject this Theology of the Land, and I reject all Theologies of the Land. I don't believe any land "belongs" to anyone on the basis that the deity has given it to them. Mainly because that idea is in stark contrast to the New Testament Jesus.
But that isn't to say that (a) states are useless anti-Christian constructions or (b) that other people who think differently are not entitled to arrange themselves differently.
My Christianity doesn't extend so far as believing it gives me a trump card and the final say over how other people in other religious and political systems organise themselves.
Now, please do not bother addressing me, because I have no intention of replying to your useless binary single-minded brainfart posts again.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Jamat--
What do you mean by "international flag", please? Thx.
Remember, I am contemptuously described around here as a literalist. I mean simply that God has created/enabled/providentially secured a politically unlikely and yet very obvious international signal through the very existence of a nation called Israel, thus drawing attention to himself. I think it was Mark Twain who when asked how he knew God existed, casually replied "The Jew." and that was in the 19th century.
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Oh, well forget what I said, then.
I thought you meant the nation state of Israel was nothing more than an international flag.
It's precisely when one starts to make the leap from this kind of contemporary entity to biblical promises to superficially similar but fundamentally different entities that things go awry. Or at least that is the lesson of history.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Mr Cheesy:
For your information, I reject this Theology of the Land, and I reject all Theologies of the Land. I don't believe any land "belongs" to anyone on the basis that the deity has given it to them. Mainly because that idea is in stark contrast to the New Testament Jesus.
Which ISTM means the whole OT is probably out for you or you simply do not have a belief system that includes it at all. I doubt Steve gives a rats ass about your views and I'd be surprised if anyone else does either. I do not read him as trying to impose his views unless you interpret having a different opinion to yours is doing that. We all tend to argue passionately but is that not the norm?
The New Testament Jesus was certainly concerned with the land. "Jerusalem Jerusalem how often I wanted to gather you as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you would not. Now, your house is left unto you desolate" There is also the "one stone shall not be left upon another" reference in Matthew 24. And you shall not see me again until you say
" Baruch haba beshem adonai".(Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord). IOW Jesus has promised to return to the land when its inhabitants call him back.
Of course, you can feel free to reject theologies of the land or create,as many do, theologies that do not include the land but to do that you have to allegorise and spiritualise and ignore much scripture as Augustine did and the Catholics do.
[ 07. November 2016, 08:36: Message edited by: Jamat ]
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Oh, well forget what I said, then.
I thought you meant the nation state of Israel was nothing more than an international flag.
It's precisely when one starts to make the leap from this kind of contemporary entity to biblical promises to superficially similar but fundamentally different entities that things go awry. Or at least that is the lesson of history.
You forgot to add in your opinion or are you speaking ex cathedra? I know quite a few Christians outside this little pond that have not yet started a crusade yet consider current Israel prophetically significant. Of course they do not all agree as to how.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Logic is remorseless isn't it? Hard to beat. One can always pretend it's not there I suppose. Ignore it. But my parents were married prior to my conception, thank you.
And DO I acknowledge your gracious acknowledgement of your being wrong in your fifth rate hermeneutic.
Rubbish in rubbish out. Your premises determine your conclusion and in your case they are impenetrable. I mean your post modern world view. ISTM you are so influenced by perceived abuses from fundamentalists that the baby is down the plug hole.
I can't understand the postmodern worldview for you. Its Copernican premises are too simple compared with your Ptolemaic ones obviously. Which is an insult to Ptolemy, his reasoning was based on one false premise.
You justify the massive geopolitical abuse of Zionism perpetrated by the world on the Arab people as God's will based on a counterfactual declaration that no one else on Earth asserts, that no one believes, including you, because it is impossible, that Ezekiel 36:24 is contextually post-exilic. You have to 'believe' that so that the return from exile doesn't fulfil it and that at last the 1948 show can be abused to fill that void you, most postmodernly, have made up.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
You forgot to add in your opinion or are you speaking ex cathedra?
Don't you start on this nonsense.
quote:
I know quite a few Christians outside this little pond that have not yet started a crusade yet consider current Israel prophetically significant. Of course they do not all agree as to how.
There are plenty of ways to lend undue importance to current Israel that fall short of starting a crusade, and you know it.
I stand by my contention that the lesson of history is that identifying contemporaneous geopolitical entites with biblical ones is a practice that has failed repeatedly. It is also a singularly egocentric view of history since it assumes (as has every other failed prophet of the past) that our age is the subject of these prophecies.
I grew up hearing stuff like, Jesus absolutely had to come back by 1982 at the latest as a result of the foundation of Israel in 1948. I couldn't work out that maths even at the time, but I'm through with that kind of bullshit.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
