Is "Christian Zionism" Biblical ?

[parousia70]

This has all been a good discussion. Passion on both sides without condemning anyone, as it should be. Just some friendly sparring. But as for whether there is no way there can be physical Jews, one still is left with wondering why Paul said these things, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, if there are no physical, earthly differences and Jews cannot claim lineage?.

Well, Paul could say that because When he wrote those words, there WERE physical Jews who could not only claim lineage, the could PROVE lineage through the genealogical records that were housed in the Temple since the return from Babylonian captivity.

Romans 11:1-4 (NKJV) I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, 3 “Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life”? 4 But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”

Interesting that you would post this. In the first century God had also reserved a remnant of believing Jews through whom Israel would continue, of which Paul claims to be one of, and the rest would be cut off from the people...

Why would you count the disobedient sons as "Israel" and discount fully the obedient ones, by saying they are NOT Israel?

Do you also say the 7000 God preserved who "did not bow their knee to Ball" are likewise NOT Israel, but the Wicked ones are? Where does scripture teach that?

And if there are no physical descendants that can claim lineage, it puts this passage up in the air:

Revelation 7:2-8

That then begs the question... if there can be no claim to direct lineage to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, then how can these be separated for the service of God in the last days?

Only by assuming the Biblical Last days are still ahead of us would that question be "Begged".

 

[jgr]

And if there are no physical descendants that can claim lineage, it puts this passage up in the air:

Revelation 7:2-8 (NKJV) Then I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God. And he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was granted to harm the earth and the sea, 3 saying, “Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.” 4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed. One hundred and forty-four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel were sealed:

Rev. 7:3-4 describe the 144,000 as “sealed.” That description is reserved in the NT for believers in Christ – His Body and Bride – the Church:

2 Corinthians 1:21-22

Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.

Ephesians 1:13

In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Ephesians 4:30

Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.


The Rev. 7 passage is therefore conveying the insight that the OT Israelitish faithful saints of God are included under the NT banner of the Church. This is further confirmed by the meanings of the names of the listed tribes and substitutes, describing spiritual qualities and experiences of those who comprise the Church:

Judah means “praise” (Gen 29:35)

Reuben means “see, a Son” (Gen 29:32)

Gad means “fortunate” (Gen 30:11)

Asher means “happy” (Gen 30:13)

Naphtali means “wrestling” (Gen 30:8)

Manasseh means “forgetting” (Gen 41:51)

Simeon means “heard” (Gen 29:33)

Levi means “attached” (Gen 29:34)

Issachar means “wages” (Gen 30:18)

Zebulon means “dwelling” (Gen 30:20)

Joseph means “He will add” (Gen 30:24)

Benjamin means “Son of the right hand” (Gen 35:17–18)


Also of significance is the order in which the names are presented, differing from the usual presentation by order of birth. In particular, Judah appears first, in recognition of its role as the tribal progenitor of Christ, the Lion of Judah.


Is 144,000 literal or symbolic? While rebellion and apostasy were repetitive afflictions of the OT Israelites, there were still thousands who remained faithful, e.g. 1 Kings 19:18. Their number is thus depicted as 12, symbolizing the faithful saints within the 12 tribes; times 12, a scriptural symbol of completeness; times 1000, which when used symbolically denotes a large quantity (Psa. 50:10; 91:7; 2 Pet. 3:8).


Rev. 14 continues the descriptions of the 144,000, further reflecting the qualities and experiences of the redeemed – the Church. Absent here is any mention of tribal, ethnic, or other distinctions, thus conveying the reality of the inclusivity and oneness of the NT Church which now embraces both Israelite and Gentile, consistent with other scripture:


Gal. 3:28

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.


Eph. 2:14

For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall…


Additional numerical symbolism relating to the Church can be found in the 12 apostles representing saints of the NT era.


No doubt about it…the Church is written all over the 144,000.

 

[BABerean2]

Anniversary of Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty on June 8, 1967, during the Six Day War.

The ship was attacked by rockets and napalm during the initial attack.


Most of the dead were killed when an Israeli torpedo struck the ship.

34 American sailors were killed.

 

[Copperhead]

This all would be a whole lot easier if posts were not doctoral dissertations of extreme length with half the passages of the entire bible to make a point. I know why that is done, either to overwhelm the person who one is debating with or some level of pride that one has such a broad grasp on the subject. it would be much better if only one or two verses were being addressed at a time. One can alway introduce more verses in later posts. Just look inward and try to discover within yourself why you feel the need to quote half the NT in making a point.

 

[jgr]

This all would be a whole lot easier if posts were not doctoral dissertations of extreme length with half the passages of the entire bible to make a point. I know why that is done, either to overwhelm the person who one is debating with or some level of pride that one has such a broad grasp on the subject. it would be much better if only one or two verses were being addressed at a time. One can alway introduce more verses in later posts. Just look inward and try to discover within yourself why you feel the need to quote half the NT in making a point.

Not sure if it is I to whom you're referring. If it is, my most recent post quoted a total of five NT scriptures dealing with two different themes, which most people would not consider excessive.

 

[BABerean2]

Zionist Samuel Untermeyer befriended C.I. Scofield and helped him get the Scofield Reference Bible published by Oxford University Press.

Who was C.I. Scofield?

The book "The Incredible Scofield" by Joseph Canfield is one of the best sources.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Paul made it clear we do not replace the tree. Only some of the branches are cut off from the tree.

 

[BABerean2]

Based on Romans 11, only the unbelieving Israelite branches were broken off.
The Gentile branches were grafted in among the faithful Israelites.

Therefore the Olive Tree of Romans 11 is a symbol of the New Covenant Church made up of both Israelites and Gentiles.

Paul said the branches broken off can be grafted back into the tree, through faith in Christ.

(Please ignore the reference to beekeeping in the title of the picture. This was the only picture I found which showed a partial graft.)

.

 

[BABerean2]

Animal sacrifice in modern America

Sacrificing chickens to take away sin.

Is this a part of Judeo-Christian Bible doctrine?

 

[parousia70]

Animal sacrifice in modern America

Sacrificing chickens to take away sin.

Is this a part of Judeo-Christian Bible doctrine?

Woah... I had no idea about this.

Thank you for sharing.
Hard to watch.

How any Christian can claim this is an equally legitimate path to atonement and is pleasing to the Father on par with the sacrifice of Christ is beyond me.

 

[jgr]

Animal sacrifice in modern America

Sacrificing chickens to take away sin.

Is this a part of Judeo-Christian Bible doctrine?

"Bestial" is too charitable.

 

[BABerean2]

Woah... I had no idea about this.

Thank you for sharing.
Hard to watch.

How any Christian can claim this is an equally legitimate path to atonement and is pleasing to the Father on par with the sacrifice of Christ is beyond me.

In the past Pastor John Hagee claimed that modern Jews do not need Christ, because they have their own covenant with God. This concept of "dual covenant" theology is not verbalized by most evangelicals, but it is how many seem to view the "distinctions between Israel and the Church", as they say.

Many believe that modern Orthodox Judaism is Old Testament Judaism.
I used to be one of them.
However, nothing could be further from the truth.

"Judaism's Strange God's" written by Michael Hoffman is something that opened my eyes to what is being promoted by many modern rabbis.
This example of chicken sacrifice is in Hoffman's book.

.

 

[BABerean2]

Written Torah vs. Oral Torah, according to an Orthodox rabbi

Old Testament vs. Babylonian Talmud

Mat_15:2　 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
Mat_15:3　 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?



Mat_15:6　 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.



Mar_7:8　 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
Mar_7:9　 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.


Mar_7:13　 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

.

 

[BABerean2]

 

[BABerean2]

Rabbi speaks out against Zionism

 

[BABerean2]

Lord Rothschild explains the creation of the modern State of Israel:

Was it created by God, or by politicians?

.

 

[Biblewriter]

We need to simply ignore all the nonsense, and rely upon the clear and unambiguois statements of scripture.

Ezekiel 36:10 very clearly and explicitly says that in a future day, "all the house of Israel, all of it," will again inhabit "the mountains of Israel," with "the hills, the rivers, and the valleys." (verse 6) Other scriptures promise restoration, not only to "Israel," but also to Judah," to "Ephraim," and to each of the twelve tribes by name. To deny that this is actually going to happen, is to deny a very large number of explicitly stated scriptures.

People who want to deny this truth love to pretend that this idea is a relatively modern invention. But that is blatantly false. In 1611, the Bible first became widely available at a rational price, and Bible study exploded in England. The promised future blessing of Israel and her future return to her land was taught by many English writers in the following century. But even then, the idea was not new. It is as old as the study of the scriptures.

 

[BABerean2]

We need to simply ignore all the nonsense, and rely upon the clear and unambiguois statements of scripture.

Ezekiel 36:10 very clearly and explicitly says that in a future day, "all the house of Israel, all of it," will again inhabit "the mountains of Israel," with "the hills, the rivers, and the valleys." (verse 6) Other scriptures promise restoration, not only to "Israel," but also to Judah," to "Ephraim," and to each of the twelve tribes by name. To deny that this is actually going to happen, is to deny a very large number of explicitly stated scriptures.

People who want to deny this truth love to pretend that this idea is a relatively modern invention. But that is blatantly false. In 1611, the Bible first became widely available at a rational price, and Bible study exploded in England. The promised future blessing of Israel and her future return to her land was taught by many English writers in the following century. But even then, the idea was not new. It is as old as the study of the scriptures.

And with Zionist Samuel Untermeyer helping fund the Scofield Reference Bible, and with the support of Lord Rothschild and the Balfour Declaration, and that godless organization known as the United Nations, it all fell into place during 1948.


Never mind that the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and is specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

Forget that Peter addressed the crowd on the Day of Pentecost as "all the house of Israel", in Acts 2:36.

Forget that Christ said in Matthew chapter 21 that the "son" is the "heir" to the land and that the kingdom would be taken from those who rejected the "chief cornerstone" and it would be given to another. In 1 Peter 2:4-10 we find that holy nation which accepted the "chief cornerstone".

Since most of the pure bloodlines of the original 12 tribes were mixed in with the Gentiles long before the time of Christ, you better look for some frozen Israelites to obtain your DNA samples. Forget that the 144,000 are described as "firstfruits" of the Lamb, which is the same language Paul used to describe Christians in Romans 16:5.

.

 

[Biblewriter]

So the God of heaven is unable to do what He said He would do, because you do not think He could sort out the bloodlines?

And what do events that took place in the 1900s have to do with events that took place in the 1600s and 1700s?

 

[BABerean2]

So the God of heaven is unable to do what He said He would do, because you do not think He could sort out the bloodlines?

1Ti 1:4　 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.　


The New Covenant is about Grace, instead of race. (Matthew 3:9, Galatians 3:16)

.