Curiosity about anti-Semitism

[Russell Roberts]

I suspect that Mr. Elston will join this thread soon in great detail, but I have a question that has never been answered to my satisfaction: can you define for me "Palestinian"?

Burning ears, at your service. Do you remember what my answer to this question was last time? If so, what do you find dissatisfying about it?

I confess that I am fuzzy-of-memory on the details, but my lack of closure centers upon the concept that nationality/ethnicity... people-hood, should be determined by more than the GPS coordinates of one's accidental birth location.

Pastor Gary,

1) What, in Paul's opinion, made someone a descendant of Abraham? Was it fleshly descent or was it faith?

2) Where is the land his descendents were to inherit? (see Rom. 4:13)

3) Was the promise of the land inheritence fulfilled after the resurrection? If so, how?

[Brian]

In other words, "It's a fool that looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart", spoken by Ulysses Everett McGill in O, Brother Where Art Thou?

That pretty much sums it up, I think. Anti-semitism is as irrational and passionate as is American populist support for Israel. The Jewish people are shrowded in so much religious and malfeasant story that moderate Jews are about the only ones who have their head on straight about themselves as a topic and how to achieve a reasonable destiny.

Paul's research, above, seems to suggest (unless I'm misreading the implication) that both antisemitism and pro-zionism are spawned, in part, by Christianity. There's irony there. We are familiar with the Christian side of pro-zionism; we may have lost touch with the Christian history of antisemitism. (Which, of course, isn't "true Christianity," but what is? Uncritical Zionism?)

Tim, it isn't irrational at all if one doesn't view the religious history of Israel as a story. I believe the words of the Bible to be true and right and factual. It wasn't a story in the minds of old men when God revieled to them what there lands were and how and when they would inhabit it. Sure, if it's all a bunch of religious hoopla then the Arab world may be right.....the Israelis may be skwatters on the lands of other peoples. However, if it isn't a mere story, if it is true and right and good that the Jews inhabit the land in question then to me, TO ME, it matters not of who else wants the land. The land is God's and He can give it to whom He chooses.(whether we or the entire world think it unfair or not)

It is a no brainer that christianity pushes for the protection of the Jewish people, more specifically Israel. If christianity is a progression of the jews, a linaer line of the plan of God so to speak, then it only makes sense for christians to help do what/where God intented for Israel to be.
I for one am surprised when christians don't support Israel. I believe the scriptures are very clear about those who protect/curse Israel. I know it's a commonly used silly cliche but I've read the back of the book.....I know who wins when the armies of the world circle the nation of God.......they are utterly destroyed! Not me friend....not me!

Hey Tim, I know you didn't use "story" in the context of "fictional story". I just used it to make a larger point that the passions of those in support for the Jews inhabiting Israel isn't irrational because to them, me, and many others it is real and true ordained of God.

[dolfan]

Brian,

Maybe I've opened a can of worms on this topic that I didn't intend. But, I'd like to try and respond to your comments to Tim Elston without making it a doctrinal issue for the doctrine forum. It's going to be difficult to do that, but here goes my best shot.

I don't know that the anti-Semitism in Europe is directly -- whether consciously or not -- a response to Israel's mere presence in Palestine. If it is, and I am not convinced of it at this time, but if it is, your argument has more to do with it than anyone would admit in the circles of power.

In that vein, I would state, however, that most of Christendom does not follow a view that you suggest concerning Israel. Most in the faith throughout the planet are not ardently pro-Israel as concerns the land and rights to it. Conservative evangelicals in America are, and those influenced by American conservative evangelicalism in other countries may be, but I think it would be a less than majority view among believers outside the USA.

In fact, I'll offer this letter as some evidence of the fact that not all evangelicals within the US would take a staunchly pro-Israel stance in the matters that seem to drive the violence in the region:

July 2, 2002

President George Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

We write as American evangelical Christians concerned for the well-being of all the children of Abraham in the Middle East – Christian, Jewish and Muslim. We urge you to employ an even-handed policy toward Israeli and Palestinian leadership so that this bloody conflict will come to a speedy close and both peoples can live without fear and in a spirit of shalom/salaam.

An even-handed U.S. policy towards Israelis and Palestinians does not give a blank check to either side, nor does it bless violence by either side. An even-handed policy affirms the valid interests of Israelis and Palestinians: both states free, economically viable and secure, with normal relations between Israel and all its Arab neighbors. We commend your stated support for a Palestinian state with 1967 borders, and encourage you to move boldly forward so that the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people for their own state may be realized.

We abhor and condemn the suicide bombings of the last 22 months and the failure of the Palestinian Authority in the first year of the intifada to stop the violence against Israeli citizens. We grieve over the loss of life, particularly among children, and the suffering by Israelis and Palestinians. The longer the bloodletting continues, the more difficult it will be for both sides to reconcile with each other.

We urge you to provide the leadership necessary for peacemaking in the Middle East by vigorously opposing injustice, including the continued unlawful and degrading Israeli settlement movement. The theft of Palestinian land and the destruction of Palestinian homes and fields is surely one of the major causes of the strife that has resulted in terrorism and the loss of so many Israeli and Palestinian lives. The continued Israeli military occupation that daily humiliates ordinary Palestinians is also having disastrous effects on the Israeli soul.

Mr. President, the American evangelical community is not a monolithic bloc in full and firm support of present Israeli policy. Significant numbers of American evangelicals reject the way some have distorted biblical passages as their rationale for uncritical support for every policy and action of the Israeli government instead of judging all actions – of both Israelis and Palestinians – on the basis of biblical standards of justice. The great Hebrew prophets, Isaiah and Jeremiah, declared in the Old Testament that God calls all nations and all people to do justice one to another, and to protect the oppressed, the alien, the fatherless and the widow.

Finally, Mr. President, be assured of our prayers for you and your cabinet as you lead our nation in this troubled time. May the strength and peace of the Lord be with you.

Sincerely, CC: Colin L. Powell, Secretary of State

Raymond J. Bakke
Executive Director
International Urban Associates
Seattle, WA

Craig Barnes
Senior Pastor
National Presbyterian Church
Washington, DC

Marilyn Borst
Executive Director
Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding
Houston, TX

Gary M. Burge
Professor of Theology
Wheaton College & Graduate School
Wheaton, IL

Clive Calver
President, World Relief of the
National Association of Evangelicals
Baltimore, MD

Paul-Gordon Chandler
President & CEO
Partners International
Spokane, WA

John Crosby
Pastor, Christ Presbyterian Church
Minneapolis, MN

Tim Dearborn
Chairman, International Fellowship
Of Evangelical Mission Theologians, USA
Seattle, WA

John De Haan
Executive Director
Association of Evangelical Relief & Development Organizations (AERDO)
Grand Rapids, MI

John R. Dellenback
Former director, U.S. Peace Corps
U.S. House of Representatives, retired
Medford, OR

Christopher Doyle
President & CEO
American Leprosy Missions
Greenville, SC

Craig Hilton Dyer
President, Bright Hope International
Hoffman Estates, IL

Colleen Townsend Evans
Author, Writer
Fresno, CA

Leighton Ford,
President, Leighton Ford Ministries
Charlotte, NC

Steve Hayner
Past President,
InterVarsity, USA
Madison, WI

Paul Kennel
President, World Concern
Seattle, WA

Don Kruse
Vice President
Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation
Chicago, IL

Peter Kuzmic
Distinguised Professor of World Missions & European Studies
Gordon-Conwell Seminary
South Hamilton, MA

Max Lange
President, Childcare International
Bellingham, WA

Gordon MacDonald
Board Chairman, World Relief of the
National Association of Evangelicals
Boston, MA

Michael A. Mata
Pastor of Leadership Development
Pasadena (CA) First Church of the Nazarene
Director, Urban Leadership Institute Rev. Dr. Albert G. Miller
Midwest District Minister,
The House of the Lord Pentecostal Church
Oberlin, OH

Paul Moore
President, CitiHope International
Andes, NY

Richard J. Mouw
President, Fuller Seminary
Pasadena, CA
David Neff
Editor, Christianity Today
Carol Stream, IL

Victor D. Pentz
Senior Minister,
Peachtree Presbyterian Church
Atlanta, GA

Eugene F. Rivers
Special Assistant to the President,
Pan-African Charismatic Evangelical Congress
Boston, MA

Leonard Rodgers
President, Venture International
Tempe, AZ

Andrew Ryskamp
Executive Director
Christian Reformed World Relief Committee - US
Grand Rapids, MI

Scott C. Sabin
Executive Director
Floresta USA
San Diego, CA

Cheryl J. Sanders
Senior Pastor, Third Street Church of God
Washington DC

Howard University School of Divinity
Amb. (r) Robert A. Seiple
Founder & President
The Institute for Global Engagement
St. Davids, PA

Ronald J. Sider
President, Evangelicals for Social Action
St. Davids, PA

Luci N. Shaw
Author, Lecturer, Writer in Residence
Regent College
Vancouver, B.C., Canada

James Skillen
President, Center for Public Justice
Annapolis, MD

Glen Harold Stassen
Professor of Christian Ethics
Fuller Seminary
Pasadena, CA

Richard Stearns
President, World Vision US
Federal Way, WA

Amb. (r) Clyde D. Taylor
Board, International Justice Mission
Washington, DC

Dean Trulear
Pastor, Mt. Pleasant Baptist Church
Twin Oaks, PA

Harold Vogelaar
Resident Scholar in World Religions
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
Chicago, IL

Donald Wagner
Director, Center for Middle East Studies
North Park University
Chicago, IL

Robin & Nancy Wainwright
Board of Directors
Holy Land Trust
Pasadena, CA

Philip Yancey
Author
Evergreen, CO

The fact is, Israel gobbles up dollars of American evangelicals, but really wants them to keep their mouths shut about Jesus. "Give us your dough, your political clout, but we don't want you over here proselytizing." Such is the gist of statements in this article, at least.

My point is that American evangelicals are a handy, dandy tool for Israel to get money and foreign aid from America, and a protector in all matters in the UN Security Council. I'm not saying it is necessarily bad at all; there are some good reasons for doing so, including the presence of western style democracy in that region. It benefits us.

But, Jewish authorities in Israel do not have any serious affinity for American evangelicals. To the extent of any real sense of love, it is one way. Let there be no illusions about that as you hold fast to your support of Israel.

I support Israel, too. I want it to be secure, free and friendly to America. I don't want to see it act unjustly, though, to anyone. And, it has a track record of doing so that is more readily absorbed if you don't view Israel through a sort of (and pardon this, please) John Hagee or Pat Robertson set of glasses. If you do view Israel in that light, then no amount of factual evidence will likely temper your views.

In the end, though, and this is where we break toward the doctrinal I guess, you have to weigh the importance of this perceived ongoing covenant with Israel about the land against the "greatest commandment" from God -- to love God and to love one another. In my own view, which is not the same as yours, the greater issue for Israel (if it is still, as you would say, God's chosen people) is whether they will obey this most basic command of our Lord. If they do, then most of this issue will disappear. If they don't, it doesn't matter where their feet stand.

[bibleguy]

Watch Glenn Beck's The History of the Middle East... in a Couple of Minutes!

Too funny!

[Brian]

Dolfan, thanks for the comments. You are one smart guy and always seem to cast new light on things around here. But to be clear, I don't think Israel or the Jews should have a "blank check" to do and act however they please. I'm well aware that they may be in complete opposition to the words of Christ when He delcared His Lordship and that all people must follow Him in order to be in unity with God. I understand that. I wonder though........does that make God's promise to the children of Abraham null and void? (because of there disobidience?) I can't say for sure but I doubt it.

I have more on the topic but have to cut it short for now cause I am really busy cleaning the house...oh joy! Be back with some more thoughts.

[Pastor Gary]

Watch Glenn Beck's The History of the Middle East... in a Couple of Minutes!

Too funny!

I love Beck's sense of humor... and he gets in a point or two now and then.

[MacUser]

Middle East... in a Couple of Minutes

Me like funny beck cartoon.. so me not over think it.

[Pastor Gary]

1) What, in Paul's opinion, made someone a descendant of Abraham? Was it fleshly descent or was it faith?

According to The Bible Exposition Commentary (Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1996, c1989), Ro 4:1.) -- Both.

Abraham was called “our father,” referring primarily to the Jews’ natural and physical descent from Abraham. But in Romans 4:11, Abraham was also called “the father of all them that believe,” meaning, all who have trusted Christ (see Gal. 3:1–18).

2) Where is the land his descendents were to inherit? (see Rom. 4:13)

Are you suggesting that you interpret Romans 4:13 to mean the spiritual descendants of Father Abraham literally inherit the entire planet earth?
"...that he should be the heir of the world..."—or, that “all the families of the earth should be blessed in him.”

(Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, A. R. Fausset et al., A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), Romans 4:13.)

3) Was the promise of the land inheritence fulfilled after the resurrection? If so, how?

Since the fatherhood of Abraham was both physical and spiritual, there seem to be two different promises... one of a land inheritance to his physical heirs, and a promise of blessing to his spiritual heirs.

We may have to break this branch off into a doctrinal discussion since we have drifted from a general political discussion to doctrinal background?

[Tim Elston]

I wonder though........does that make God's promise to the children of Abraham null and void? (because of there disobidience?) I can't say for sure but I doubt it.

It's fair enough for dispensationalists to believe that, Brian, but if God were going to keep that presumed promise, then it would include parts of Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Is there some reason why God could not fulfill such a miracle even if Israel does justly, loves mercy, and walks humbly with its God? I mean, assuming the dispensationalist paradigm, what if Israel's enemies were the wrongdoers and not also Israel? Wouldn't God be able to work around Israel's justice and mercy to accomplish a promise he made to them? Or does his promise require them to commit injustices, by definition?

Of course, we could say that God has the prerogative to kick people in the teeth, so who the heaven cares what Israel does to anybody sqatting on its territory! Sure, God presumably has the right to ask his people to rape a thousand women, but since he cares for sparrows maybe he cares for women, too, even if they are squatters.

Since, according to the paradigm, he's going to have to work a miracle to fulfill the full territorial extent of the promise, why not give him the benefit of the doubt and suppose that he'd rather his people treat their neighbors justly and let him take care of whatever dirty work needs to get done, miraculously? Wouldn't justice and mercy redound to the glory of God in a way that displacing people couldn't? Imagine the concepts: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The meek shall inherit the earth. Do good unto them that despitefully use you. Ridiculous, I know, but purportedly God's idea. Do you think he could work with that? Do you think that the principles of his kingdom, contrary as they are to reality as we perceive it, might even be able to work with what would have to be a miracle anyway?

Obviously my point assumes that Israel has committed injustices against the Palestinians. I am not, however, of the opinion that Israel's neighbors have not committed injustices against Israel. Nor am I of the opinion that Israel's current strike against Hamas is not justified. My point doesn't turn on who is innocent or guilty, or whether military retaliation is warranted or not, but on whether God, in the dispensationalist paradigm, is able to fulfill his promises of land from Turkey to Egypt, from the Mediterranean to Iraq, even if Israel acts like its Old Testament prophets said God wanted it to act. That question has force as contained within the Jewish scriptures alone, entirely apart from the new covenant of Christ, if dispensationalists insist on that.

[bibleguy]

I wonder though........does that make God's promise to the children of Abraham null and void? (because of there disobidience?) I can't say for sure but I doubt it.

It's fair enough for dispensationalists to believe that, Brian, but if God were going to keep that presumed promise, then it would include parts of Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.

I've heard this, but Israel received all of the land of promise. This is made clear in an oddly very unknown passage in Joshua 24:43-45.

“And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand. There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.”

This flies in the face of modern conventional wisdom, but a careful reading of the promise to Abraham coincides with the words of Joshua 24 perfectly.

Now, Paul did see more in the promise to Abraham than the physical borders of Canaan, as he shows in Romans 4:13, “For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.” But the promise of the land as far as physically "as far as you can see North, South, East, West," that was fulfilled in the days of Joshua.

[Tim Elston]

This flies in the face of modern conventional wisdom, but a careful reading of the promise to Abraham coincides with the words of Joshua 24 perfectly.

Show me the promise and how it coincides. (Best put into the Doctrine forum, probably.)

[Tim Elston]

This flies in the face of modern conventional wisdom, but a careful reading of the promise to Abraham coincides with the words of Joshua 24 perfectly.

Show me the promise and how it coincides. (Best put into the Doctrine forum, probably.)

Hey, you know what? Never mind. This one will get me into water here that I don't feel at liberty to get into. God said it, you believe it, that settles it. Nuff said.

[bibleguy]

I'll address this in this General Discussion, because it's history, and can be looked at without the prism of doctrine:

Sorry for the size of the attached picture, but the resolution is tremendous. Basically, two things characteristics of the promise appear to be misunderstood: "the River of Egypt," and the names of the nations.

Here is the promise, “In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites” (Genesis 15:18-21).

First, the River of Egypt is not the Nile, but what is known as the Wady of Egypt on the Sinai peninsula (it is clearly marked on the map below). In Joshua 15:47, it is included in the inheritance of Judah, and it says, "Ashdod ... Gaza with her towns and villages, unto the river of Egypt..." clearly showing that this "river of Egypt" abuts Gaza (which nearly describes even Israels modern southern border).

Then there is the issue of the nations described. I will deal with just one here: the Hittites, because everyone knows that the Hittites were in modern Turkey. So isn't God promising all the land up to the land of the Hittites? Well, no. He even forbad Israel from taking the lands of Moab, Ammon and Edom because they got their land by Divine deed as well ( Deuteronomy 2:9-12;19).

What God is saying is, "From your northern border (Euphrates), to your southern border (River of Egypt), I'm giving you all the nations that dwell there." For example, if Gog promised America to Israel and said, "From the Great Lakes to the Rio Grande, the Germans, the Mexicans, the Polish, the Italians, the Russians, etc.," He wouldn't be promising to give them Germany, Poland, Italy, or Russia. Not even Mexico (according to this description), even though it abuts the described territory. Just that those nationalities found in that territory would, every one of them, be conquered.

As far as the Euphrates, Solomon's kingdom extended all the way to it, as is shown in 1 Kings 4:24 (Tiphsah being on the southern bank of the Euphrates), “For he had dominion over all the region on this side the river, from Tiphsah even to Azzah, over all the kings on this side the river: and he had peace on all sides round about him.”

This is how Joshua 21:43 can state unequivocably that the promise was fulfilled in their day.

[Brian]

I wonder though........does that make God's promise to the children of Abraham null and void? (because of there disobidience?) I can't say for sure but I doubt it.

It's fair enough for dispensationalists to believe that, Brian, but if God were going to keep that presumed promise, then it would include parts of Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Is there some reason why God could not fulfill such a miracle even if Israel does justly, loves mercy, and walks humbly with its God? I mean, assuming the dispensationalist paradigm, what if Israel's enemies were the wrongdoers and not also Israel? Wouldn't God be able to work around Israel's justice and mercy to accomplish a promise he made to them? Or does his promise require them to commit injustices, by definition?

Of course, we could say that God has the prerogative to kick people in the teeth, so who the heaven cares what Israel does to anybody sqatting on its territory! Sure, God presumably has the right to ask his people to rape a thousand women, but since he cares for sparrows maybe he cares for women, too, even if they are squatters.

Since, according to the paradigm, he's going to have to work a miracle to fulfill the full territorial extent of the promise, why not give him the benefit of the doubt and suppose that he'd rather his people treat their neighbors justly and let him take care of whatever dirty work needs to get done, miraculously? Wouldn't justice and mercy redound to the glory of God in a way that displacing people couldn't? Imagine the concepts: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The meek shall inherit the earth. Do good unto them that despitefully use you. Ridiculous, I know, but purportedly God's idea. Do you think he could work with that? Do you think that the principles of his kingdom, contrary as they are to reality as we perceive it, might even be able to work with what would have to be a miracle anyway?

Obviously my point assumes that Israel has committed injustices against the Palestinians. I am not, however, of the opinion that Israel's neighbors have not committed injustices against Israel. Nor am I of the opinion that Israel's current strike against Hamas is not justified. My point doesn't turn on who is innocent or guilty, or whether military retaliation is warranted or not, but on whether God, in the dispensationalist paradigm, is able to fulfill his promises of land from Turkey to Egypt, from the Mediterranean to Iraq, even if Israel acts like its Old Testament prophets said God wanted it to act. That question has force as contained within the Jewish scriptures alone, entirely apart from the new covenant of Christ, if dispensationalists insist on that.

Stop confusing me with the facts Tim!! Seriously, need some time to have a comeback, good stuff.

[Tim Elston]

Stop confusing me with the facts Tim!! Seriously, need some time to have a comeback, good stuff.

That's why it's so easy to take guff from you, Brian. You have an awesome attitude. And your guff is always good natured. I wish I had your spirit.