Trump and Israel

[ken777]

Absolutely! The writer of Hebrews (I believe to be Paul), Is making that very clear. In Hebrews 9 he makes it clear the Old Covenant is no more...therefore Jerusalem is insignificant under the New Covenant. The focus becomes the "Jerusalem above". Earthly Jerusalem under the Old Covenant looked to the Jerusalem above.

Once again Paul is very clear in Galatians 4:21-31 earthly Jerusalem is insignificant under the New Covenant. Jerusalem was where God dwelt in the temple under the Old Covenant after Israel entered the promised land and it was built. When Christ died on the cross, the veil of the temple was torn in half as God was signifying that He no longer dwelt there.

Jesus equally told the woman at the well Jerusalem was in significant in John 4:21-24. Jesus is revealing that after He would sacrifice Himself there is no need to come to Jerusalem for worship.

Certainly with regard to worship, Jerusalem is not significant for the Christian. However, there are prophecies (such as Luke 21:24) that would appear to pertain to a literal Jerusalem.

 

[ebedmelech]

Certainly with regard to worship, Jerusalem is not significant for the Christian. However, there are prophecies (such as Luke 21:24) that would appear to pertain to a literal Jerusalem.

That happened in 70 AD! It certainly was literally fulfilled.

Jesus pronounced Jerusalem desolate in Matthew 23:37-39. He then went on to explain to the 12 how it would happen in the Olivet Discourse recorded in Matthew 24, Luke 21:10-36 and Mark 13. John follows it up with the book of Revelation.

 

[Endtime Survivors]

I have never heard the Israeli government use the "prize of war" argument in defence of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

The historical connection and having defensible borders are secular arguments that seem valid to me.

The difference between "prize of war" and "historical connection" is one of perception. One sounds a little more diplomatic than the other, but don't they amount to the same thing?

Why should Christians support a nation to not love it's neighbor? In other words, The nation of Israel's position towards Palestine could hardly be called neighbor loving. Why should any Christian feel obligated o support that?

 

[ken777]

The difference between "prize of war" and "historical connection" is one of perception. One sounds a little more diplomatic than the other, but don't they amount to the same thing?

Why should Christians support a nation to not love it's neighbor? In other words, The nation of Israel's position towards Palestine could hardly be called neighbor loving. Why should any Christian feel obligated to support that?

From a prophetic point of view, many Christians believe that Israel has a God-given right to the land. They believe 1948 & 1967 were fulfillment of some of these prophecies.

It must be very difficult to be "neighbor loving" to people who would like to destroy you.

Israel still operates under the "eye for an eye" principle.

 

[ken777]

That happened in 70 AD! It certainly was literally fulfilled.

Jesus pronounced Jerusalem desolate in Matthew 23:37-39. He then went on to explain to the 12 how it would happen in the Olivet Discourse recorded in Matthew 24, Luke 21:10-36 and Mark 13. John follows it up with the book of Revelation.

The first part of Luke 21:24 happened in 70 AD. What about the second part?

 

[Endtime Survivors]

It must be very difficult to be "neighbor loving" to people who would like to destroy you.

Indeed. I wonder what a comparison of the casualty rate for each side would say about that.

 

[ken777]

Indeed. I wonder what a comparison of the casualty rate for each side would say about that.

It is not the casualty rate but the instigator that is more significant when apportioning blame. In the last war in Gaza, the Palestinian casualty rate was deliberately increased by using tactics that involved citizens so they could garner world sympathy. The "martyr" syndrome has been - and still is - exploited by the Palestinians to sacrifice their young.

 

[Endtime Survivors]

It is not the casualty rate but the instigator that is more significant when apportioning blame. In the last war in Gaza, the Palestinian casualty rate was deliberately increased by using tactics that involved citizens so they could garner world sympathy. The "martyr" syndrome has been - and still is - exploited by the Palestinians to sacrifice their young.

That's interesting. I've heard atheists use the same argument regarding Jesus' death on the cross; that Jesus' casualty rate was deliberately increased to garner sympathy.

 

[ebedmelech]

The first part of Luke 21:24 happened in 70 AD. What about the second part?

This is where the real problem of understanding "prophetic imagery" in the Olivet Discourse causes those who want to understand it as literal have problems. Jesus is quoting Isaiah 13 where God brought judgement to Babylon using the Medes. This is prophetic imagery of judgment and is not to be understood literally. The "sun being darkened" and the "moon not giving it's light" are not to be understood literally.

This is judgment language...language found in much prophecy as well as in the Psalms.

 

[ken777]

This is where the real problem of understanding "prophetic imagery" in the Olivet Discourse causes those who want to understand it as literal have problems. Jesus is quoting Isaiah 13 where God brought judgement to Babylon using the Medes. This is prophetic imagery of judgment and is not to be understood literally. The "sun being darkened" and the "moon not giving it's light" are not to be understood literally.

This is judgment language...language found in much prophecy as well as in the Psalms.

So how do you regard 1948 & 1967? They have no Scriptural significance?

 

[ebedmelech]

So how do you regard 1948 & 1967? They have no Scriptural significance?

None whatsoever. The earthly nation of Israel is no longer God's covenant nation.
Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8:7-13.