The Church's One State Solution - Alf Cengia -
http://www.omegaletter.com/articles/articles.asp?ArticleID=8201
Don't let anyone kid you when they talk about the so-called Two State solution to one of the Middle East conflicts. Yes, once upon a time it used to be a singular conflict. Now it's plural - 'conflicts'.
As an aside, pay close attention to what has been occurring in Syria. Take note of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China and Iran. These conflicts may well have global ramifications. Also, do yourself a favor and listen to J D Farag's 21st Feb 2016 video HERE. I make no apology for the prophetic (same may say speculative) nature of JD's update. It's time for some Christians to take their heads out of the sand buckets and get themselves a clue.
But back on point - the Two State solution is touted by earnest advocates as the only way to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinians. In fact, these pundits have often suggested that it is the only way to bring peace all over the Middle East and, ultimately, the world. Even crazier than this wild assertion is the amount of activists who nod their heads in accord.
Israel is expected to embrace two separate entities (Hamas and the PA) who actively plan its destruction. We live in an irrational world where Islamic terrorists plausibly justify murder via the Qur'an and hadiths. Christians are either murdered or treated as dhimmis in Islamic dominant nations. Yet Islam is called a religion of peace and tolerance.
The Two State solution is a fractured fairy tale propagated by deluded idealists and outright antagonists of Israel. Don't believe it. It's a farce. What Islam wants is a One Sate solution - one without Israel.
Furthermore, a lot of Christians are either consciously or unconsciously climbing into the same leaky one-state-boat. Some are already sitting happily on its deck chairs sipping Kool-Aid. The mask has been slipping off the clerical face. And it isn't pretty.
As noted previously, while Christian Zionists are routinely accused of Israel-idolatry, Palestinian Christian leaders and organizations are focused on their own nationalist agendas. Not just land claims, some also co-opt Christ and Scripture into the Palestinian cause against the Jew.
The Palestinian Authority claims Jesus was a Palestinian Muslim and the first Palestinian martyr. One can understand Muslim bias. Bethlehem Bible College's President, Jack Sara, should know better. Yet during the 21012 Christ at the Checkpoint Conference, he alluded to Ezekiel 37 and put his own spin on it:
'The hand of the Lord was on me and He brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of the West Bank- Bethlehem, Jenin and Salvit and Nablus and Ramallah. It was full of bones....He asked me 'Son of Man can these bones live? Can the Palestinian people live?' Then He said to me 'prophesy to these bones and say to them "dry bones hear the word of the Lord."'....You see the Palestinian people were and are a lot like this valley of dry bones that is in need of the Church to come and prophesy life on them.' (Emphasis mine)
Sara twisted Ezekiel 37 and misapplied it to his Palestinian cause. The prophecy of the Valley of Dry Bones concerns national Israel, not the Palestinians, and not the church. These people are disinfecting Scripture and the land from any current or future national Jewish claim. That's what the incessant "occupied territory" squealing is really all about.
A tactic in the anti-Zionist clerical arsenal is to mendaciously demonize Israel. Sizer, Burge and Hanegraaff are notable offenders. Yet there are many others who hold leadership positions.
In one 2009 example cited by CAMERA, Lutheran Bishop Margaret Payne was corrected on several (typical) claims she and others had made about Israel. Instead of humbly acknowledging her errors, she got her clerical frock in a knot. When the errors weren't corrected, they became lies. Nothing has changed - the lies are perpetuated to this day:
"For most Christians, Lent is a time of introspection, fasting and repentance. But for Rev. Loren McGrail, a pastor in the United Church of Christ working in Jerusalem, the forty days before Easter are an opportunity to use her position at the YWCA in Jerusalem to broadcast anti-Israel propaganda to fellow Christians in the United States." (Emphasis mine)
Another wretched tactic is to question Jewish ethnicity. This is what several people associated with Bethlehem Bible College have done in the past. How would you react to someone questioning yours? Would these people dare question the ethnicity of certain other minority groups? I guarantee you they wouldn't. The PC police would promptly tar and feather them.
This past week I came across a popular Christian blogger who did this. He asked the question and invited responses. Had he bothered doing some simple research, he'd have found plenty of scientific data supporting Jewish ethnicity. Heck, even David Duke acknowledges it. What motivates someone to ask such a politically incorrect question?
The reason he did so is because of his postmillennial theology. There's no room in his tradition for a prophetically valid Jewish nation now, or in a future millennium. These Christians are averse to allow a Jewish state for whatever unbiblical reasons they can concoct to justify their objections.
Another typical objection is that there is only One People of God. Hence Israel is not the people of God. Sorry, no cigar:
1) There will be a number of peoples of God (see Isaiah 19:25). And Israel will be prominent (see Isaiah 60:12 and Zechariah 8:23).
2) Jews can verify their ethnicity through science. See, for example, Chris White's Video. See also this article by Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz.
3) God has promised a future for a redeemed ethnic Israel in their land (see Jeremiah 31:31-37; Ezekiel 36:22-28; Amos 9:14-15 etc).
Has God indeed said (Gen 3:1)? Yes, He did. Take it up with Him.
End of story.
I've read book after frustrating book which denies a future for Israel. These scholastic Christian writers indulge in clever games of theological obfuscation. They're only too happy to oblige you with "informed" reasons why the plain meaning of a particular verse or book (e.g., The Revelation) needs to be plumbed further until it reads nothing like its original sense.
God's word is clear on most things. It doesn't need clever redefining unless one's tradition cannot accept what it says. Why would you play hermeneutical games when it comes to Israel (covenants and eschatology) or Genesis (creation), but not your own salvation (soteriology)?
I'm beginning to throw my hands up in despair as to what some Christian clerics actually believe in a number of key areas....and whether I ultimately care. They appear to be obstinately locked into their positions. For now I'm relegating them to the willfully deluded category.
One day we'll all have to answer to the Lord. Are we all comfortable with that?
I know I'm not.
No comments:
Post a Comment