Christian Zionists and antisemitism

[ad_orientem]

Why do they think that the return of the Jews to Israel should be a physical thing and not a spiritual one? Where Jew isn't the race but the believer in Christ and all that. Didn't Christ condemn the Jews?

Indeed, which is the point I made above. The Church is the true Israel of God..

[SteveH]

So does that mean that the jews should get the fuck out of Palestine and leave it for the Palestinians?

Yes.  Well, no, but something along those lines.

[Spud]

Why do they think that the return of the Jews to Israel should be a physical thing and not a spiritual one? Where Jew isn't the race but the believer in Christ and all that. Didn't Christ condemn the Jews?

It might be worth quoting part of Genesis 17:

 1When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am God Almightya ; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. 2Then I will make my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.”

3Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4“As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5No longer will you be called Abramb ; your name will be Abraham,c for I have made you a father of many nations. 6I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. 7I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”

9Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. 13Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

[Ricky Spanish]

So basically these Christian Zionists are funding the Israelis in the hope of hurrying along the apocalypse..

[Brownie]

That is my opinion Thrud but I say it cautiously as there are some Christian Zionists who do not have quite the same agenda.
.................
Spud I was very pleased to read your post with the Biblical exegesis, I had thought, "Where is Sassy when we need her", because I am sure she would have plenty of Biblical support, but yours are very good.  It is not unreasonable for people to post Biblical quotes in support of their beliefs, in the Religion and Ethics section.

(I don't believe for one minute that every "Zionist" has a scriptural agenda)

[Spud]

So basically these Christian Zionists are funding the Israelis in the hope of hurrying along the apocalypse..

Which, if I recall correctly, they will miss due to being raptured just beforehand?

[Spud]

That is my opinion Thrud but I say it cautiously as there are some Christian Zionists who do not have quite the same agenda.
.................
Spud I was very pleased to read your post with the Biblical exegesis, I had thought, "Where is Sassy when we need her", because I am sure she would have plenty of Biblical support, but yours are very good.  It is not unreasonable for people to post Biblical quotes in support of their beliefs, in the Religion and Ethics section.

(I don't believe for one minute that every "Zionist" has a scriptural agenda)

The challenge though is to explain why the promise of Genesis 17:8 doesn't apply now.

[ippy]

The challenge though is to explain why the promise of Genesis 17:8 doesn't apply now.

Why not quote Captain Kirk in episode three, series one of Star Trek?

ippy

[Jack Knave]

It might be worth quoting part of Genesis 17:

 1When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am God Almightya ; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. 2Then I will make my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.”

3Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4“As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5No longer will you be called Abramb ; your name will be Abraham,c for I have made you a father of many nations. 6I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. 7I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”

9Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. 13Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Then it seems that all the Christians should go to their GP and get the op. And then move house to Israel.

So the spiritual amongst you this makes Jesus' (Christianity) position iffy as it seems to say they aren't the real McCoy.

[Ricky Spanish]

OK.. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article35747.htm basically sums up what is wrong with Christ believing zionists..

What about the Jewish Zionists, are they Christians?

[SweetPea]

Zionism is profoundly un-Christian. Theologically it makes no sense whatsoever and counts as rank heresy along with Arianism, Iconoclasm etc. By denying that the Church is the true Israel of God it effectively denies salvation by grace and implies that God regards people merely by the fact that they have had their foreskin removed, don't eat pork etc. That's not to mention the injustices suffered by the Palestinian people, many of whom are Christians, but then they are the wrong type of Christian for the Zionists: the ancient type.

Yes, the term 'Christian Zionists' is an oxymoron. The Talmud of Zionism is anti-Christian.

[Ricky Spanish]

Oooooo. found this: http://tinyurl.com/p5sxa5y

Will give it a proper read in the morning, but it looks quite useful as starting point.

[SweetPea]

Why do they think that the return of the Jews to Israel should be a physical thing and not a spiritual one? Where Jew isn't the race but the believer in Christ and all that. Didn't Christ condemn the Jews?

Spot-on, Jack.... for an atheist you have amazing insight.

Christ condemned the Jews because the Pharisees and Sadducees that he was addressing were followers of the Talmud and not the Torah. 

[Brownie]

Christ condemned the Pharisees and Sadducees, at least the ones we hear about in the scriptures, because they stuck to the letter of the law rather than the spirit but he had great respect for the law, just not the way those particular people practised it.
 
The Talmud as we know it was compiled in the 2nd century AD so was not relevant when Christ walked the earth.

There is nothing inherently wrong with religious Jewish people using the Talmud as a guide.

We must beware of straying into antisemitism over this issue.  There are Christian zionists who seem to use the 'Jews' in their belief system, something that Jewish people probably find laudable but that's an aside, and they are dangerous imo.  However most people concerned with Israel/Palestinian conflict are not religious, they have their own agendas.

Add:  Spud, Genesis 17:8 is something which people apply today if it suits them to do so.  There is so much in the passage you quote that is open to different interpretation:  Abraham's seed - does that mean all Jewish people, regardless of ethnic diversity, or does it refer to Christ?  Is the land of Canaan representative of a spiritual kingdom rather than a physical one?   We could go on endessly.

[jeremyp]

The challenge though is to explain why the promise of Genesis 17:8 doesn't apply now.

Why should it apply now? It was a fictional promise made up by whoever wrote that part of Genesis and it's caused no end of trouble in the last 100 years. The British basically destabilised the whole of the middle East for a superstition.

[floo]

I have nothing against Jews as a race. I don't like the way Israel has treated the Palestinians over the years since Israel was created. I firmly believe it was a mistake not to create a homeland for the Palestinians at the same time.

The idea that Jews are special because the Biblical god is supposed to favour them is of course a stupid idea, they are no more special than any other people on Earth.

[SweetPea]

Christ condemned the Pharisees and Sadducees, at least the ones we hear about in the scriptures, because they stuck to the letter of the law rather than the spirit but he had great respect for the law, just not the way those particular people practised it.

Yes, I'm with you here.
 

The Talmud as we know it was compiled in the 2nd century AD so was not relevant when Christ walked the earth.

True. But the well known warning of Jesus Christ about the tradition of men that voids Scripture (Mark 7:1-13), is in fact, a direct reference to the Talmud, or more specifically, the forerunner of the first part of it, the Mishnah, which existed in oral form during Christ's lifetime, before being committed to writing. Mark 7:1-13 represents Our Lord's pointed condemnation of the Mishnah.
 

There is nothing inherently wrong with religious Jewish people using the Talmud as a guide.

Disagree here; the Talmudic commentary on the Bible is their supreme law, and not the Bible itself. That commentary does indeed, as Jesus said, void the laws of God, not uphold them. The Pharisees teach for doctrine the commandments of rabbis, not God. For example:

Sanhedrin 57a. When a Jew murders a Gentile, there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a Gentile he may keep.

Sanhedrin 57a. A Jew need not pay a Gentile the wages owed him for work.

Gittin 69a. To heal his flesh a Jew should take dust that lies within the shadow of an outdoor toilet, mix it with honey and eat it.

Sanhedrin 55b. A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years "and a day" old).

Sanhedrin 54b. A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.


Jews of the Torah will have nothing to do with the above.

 

[Spud]

Why should it apply now? It was a fictional promise made up by whoever wrote that part of Genesis and it's caused no end of trouble in the last 100 years. The British basically destabilised the whole of the middle East for a superstition.

The British position can be seen in the Balfour Declaration of 1917:
"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

[Brownie]

SweetPea, we really need some Jewish posters to give more insight.  However they always say, "Where there are two Jews there are three opinions", so in the event we might still be no further forward!  Nevertheless I don't feel sufficiently confident to speak with authority on the Mishnah, the Gemara etc, I only know what I have read over the years.  As a Christian I would be arrogant if I said this or that was wrong about any school of Jewish teaching, particularly if I brought Christ into it.

Spud, thanks for printing the extract from Balfour Declaration of 1917;  this bit is particularly pertinent: "... nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine,...".  I certainly agree with that.

Now I am going to leave this discussion to others who know a bit more than I.

[Jack Knave]

Spot-on, Jack.... for an atheist you have amazing insight.

Christ condemned the Jews because the Pharisees and Sadducees that he was addressing were followers of the Talmud and not the Torah.

So going back to the quotes Spud gave who banned circumcision for the Christians, if they are suppose to be the chosen people of God?

[Brownie]

Jack, Christians are not banned from being circumcised, they are just not obliged to be circumcised.  We believe it is not something that will aid our salvation in any way and Paul speaks of this many times in the NT;  he did however ask one of his followers, Timothy, who was partly Jewish, to be circumcised so that he could mix freely with and evangelise Jews  (Acts 16).

Plenty of Christian men are circumcised and in some countries it is a cultural norm.  It is just not a necessary part of the practice of Christian faith, the emphasis being more on a spiritual covenant than a physical one.

(Floo, the Jews are not a 'race', there is considerable racial diversity, they consider themselves, collectively, to be 'a people'.)

[ad_orientem]

Christians absolutely should not be circumcised, otherwise they become slaves to the law and they have no salvation in Christ. We have the sacraments of Christian initiation (baptism, confirmation/chrismation and holy communion).

[Sebastian Toe]

Christians absolutely should not be circumcised, otherwise they become slaves to the law and they have no salvation in Christ. We have the sacraments of Christian initiation (baptism, confirmation/chrismation and holy communion).

No converts allowed then, if on inspection, they have that particular physical feature?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Christians absolutely should not be circumcised, otherwise they become slaves to the law and they have no salvation in Christ. We have the sacraments of Christian initiation (baptism, confirmation/chrismation and holy communion).

What about on medical grounds?

[Brownie]

Of course Christians can be circumcised, I don't know what ad_o is talking about unless he means that we are no longer under that particular law, with which I agree.   Loads of Christians are circumcised throughout the world for all sorts of reasons but in the case of Christians, it is not a religious requirement as it is for Jewish people (& for Muslims). Anything that smacked of slavery to 'the law' (circumcision not being the only one), was discouraged in the early days of Christianity but not forbidden and there is nothing inherently wrong with the practice.  There are several Biblical references, I'll find them.

Paul speaking:  Galatians: 2 1-5 Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4 This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5 We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. NIV

Here is the reference to Timothy, mentioned earlier:  Acts 16:3: Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.  ESV

There are numerous Biblical references to circumcision but not much point in me printing them all here because if anyone is interested they can google for themselves.   
It's quite clear that circumcision is not necessary for Christians but not wrong in itself.
Even the covenant with Abraham was first and foremost a spiritual thing, the circumcision was an outward sign of the covenant so that he and his descendants, as God's chosen, were set apart from others.