Doc Holliday said:
Mothra said:
Doc Holliday said:
On the Israel stuff. First off, dispensationalism and Christian-Zionism is not only wrong, but evil. There is one, continuous people of God united in Christ, seeing the Church as the fulfillment of, not a replacement for, Israel. One covenant, shown even all the way back to Genesis 3.
Second, all criticism of the modern atheist government of Israel should not be equated with antisemitism.
We should not hate anybody.
Obviously this is red meat for the antisemites, but is it in any way true? Probably depends on the premise and preconceived notions one adheres to.
Dispensationalists do not believe that there is a way to God outside of faith in Christ. We've been over this, and I think this is the mistaken preconceived notion you continue to propagate, and unfortunately, it's no way accurate. What we know from Paul's writings is that there remains a covenantal status (based on Romans 11:28-29) between Jews (i.e. descendants of Abraham) and God. Does that mean Jews are saved, if they remain a "chosen" people? No, and I think you will have a difficult time finding any mainstream dispensationalists who hold that belief.
However, from the very beginning, God had a plan of redemption in mind for humanity, and He needed a people group through which to work it out. Abraham and his descendants were chosen to be that means by which the whole world would be able to be saved. They were chosen to bring the messiah to Earth. This was the ultimately purpose of the Abrahamic Covenant. We also know from Romans 9 and 11 that God still has a plan for those people, and that God does not break is covenants.
Does that mean Jews are part of the elect of God? No. Again, salvation is through Christ alone. But it also doesn't mean that God has broken his covenant or does not have a plan for Jews. Indeed, we know he does from Romans.
We also know that the land of Israel - the site of Christ's ministry and death - will always be a holy land for Christians, and should hold a special place of importance, which is why those who say we should just let it rot or be destroyed are so foolish.
So let me get this right, if Christians don't adhere to a modern dual covenant theology that wasn't widely accepted until the 1950s, then they must be in favor of letting the Holy lands rot or be destroyed?!
The vast majority of Christians don't buy into dispensationalism...so they're providing red meat to antisemites?
I think it is dubious to say that the modern day nation of Israel established in 1948, rather than ethnic Israel, is the EXACT same Old-Testament Israel. Modern Israel is in no way ancient Israel. Modern Jews are not sons of Abraham. In Galatians 3, Paul says the Abrahamic promise is to a singular seed, and identifies that seed as Christ. And then he draws the necessary conclusion: those who are in Christ are Abraham's seed and heirs of the promise. Demonstrating that the inheritance flows through union with the one Seed.
You said " Again, salvation is through Christ alone. But it also doesn't mean that God has broken his covenant or does not have a plan for Jews."
That doesn't make sense. How could there by any other plan for Jews than Christ?
43 " Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" Matthew 21:43
See Galatians 4:21-31 as well: Paul defines the true Jerusalem as "above" and "free," contrasting it with the physical, "enslaved" city of his time. He uses this allegory to teach that believers (both Jew and Gentile) are children of the promise, constituting the true Israel of God through faith in Christ, rather than ethnic descent.
I wasn't referring to you specifically when I made the comment "we should not let it rot or be destroyed," though obviously, without our defense capabilities, that is much more likely to happen. We all know that Israel is a nation of limited resources, and a full-fledged attack by Arab neighbors could result in its destruction, just because of the sheer numbers. And of course, you have spoken very negatively about the Israeli govt., which at least seems to imply you are in favor of no longer supporting it. But feel free to correct me if I am misstating your position.
As for the rest, I find it incredible that you are unable to reconcile salvation through Christ with the recognition of Abraham's descendants as a "chosen" people. Your position implies that all of God's chosen people were "saved," when know from OT scripture that was not the case. The OT is replete with examples of Jewish disobedience, and God allowing the Jews destruction, and presumably, separation from God in the afterlife. That being the case, why can a chosen people not also be a disobedient people that are not saved from condemnation?
None of the verses you cited state (or I would argue, imply) that God has broken his covenant with the descendants of Abraham. That position is also contrary to Paul's statements in Romans:
"As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs,
29 for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.
30 Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience,
31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now[
h] receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you."
Indeed, there is a plan for God's chosen people to be reconciled through Christ. That much is very clear. The great weight of scripture simply doesn't support your position.
