It is encouraging to be reminded that Christianity is not uniformly pro-Zionist-Israel. I would rather that those opposed to it pushed more substantial flesh and blood reasons for their critique than the medieval notion of religious heresy, but at least tiny glimpses of some of the flesh and blood human reasons for opposing it are captured in Charles’ Carlson’s article, The Unacceptable Cost of Judeo-Christianity; Its Legacy of Pain.
Gosh darnit, it is really is gobsmacking to read how so very slight, narrow and US-centric are the human costs cited in this article. But any effort from within “the belly of the beast” addressing an audience with little access to an international perspective probably should be applauded. (My personal energies will be directed in support for the likes of the ISM.)
Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)
- Varieties of Atheism #2 - 2023-05-21 02:18:55 GMT+0000
- Varieties of Atheism - 2023-05-20 07:10:56 GMT+0000
- The Troubled “Quiet” before the Jewish Diaspora’s Revolt against Rome: 116-117 C.E. - 2023-05-10 07:58:29 GMT+0000
If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!
7 thoughts on “The Cost of Christian Zionism / Judeo-Christianity”
To convince Christians that Zionism is wrong you need to focus on exigesis of the relevant Pauline passages. For example that passage where Paul says “he says not seeds as of many but seed as of one which seed is Christ” showing that Christ alone is Abraham’s seed. (Also there are those passages which make Christians seeds of Abraham but only by virtue of being in Christ who is the sole seed of Abraham.) If Christ alone is Abhraham’s seed then the phrase in Genesis “I will curse thos who curse you and bless those who bless you” when extended from Abraham himself to his ‘seed’ will be found to only refer to those who bless or curse Christ not any physical descendants. If it refers to physical descendants then Zionists will be cursed for cursing the Ishmaelites (physical descendants of Abraham) just as well as anti-Zionists will be cursed for cursing the Jews (physical descendants of Abraham). But (Paul points out) the text says “in Isaac shall thy seed be called” that is, adopted. It is not physical descent that makes one a seed of Abraham, but being in Christ who is the sole seed (per Pauline explanation). If that is so, then “I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you” refers neither to the Jews nor Palestinians, neither of which is a seed of Christ. Therefore, there is no reason to support Zionism, nor to actively oppose it on the grounds of that passage as the Zionists have always taught.
It wouldn’t hurt to throw in how its illegal to preach Christianity in Israel. Why do ‘evangelicals’ support a government that puts people in jail for preaching the ‘evangel’? Sheer stupidity.
My position is hands off. Let them fight their own war over there. Its their religious war. Christianity isn’t supposed to support war anyway with its turning to the other cheek. Maybe if evangelicals would start reading the sermon on the mount instead of drooling over the genocide stories in the OT the wordl would be different. Or in other words if Marcion had won rather than Catholicism. Seriously, if you want to end Christian Zionism then perhaps you should focus on proving that Marcionism was the earliest form of Christianity. A Bible that contains the sermon on the mount without the genocides of the OT so that morons can’t get confused on which one to believ is what people need. When you give them a choice between ‘kill all the infidels’ and ‘turn to the other cheek’ they tend to chose genocide against the infidels. Marcion’s canon didn’t give anyone the choice–their was only ‘turn to the other cheek.’
Of course some super-genius will say that if you complain about the genocide passages in the OT then you’re anti-semitic. That’s like saying if I complain about Hitler I hate all Germans. Why should defending teaching that make genocide a command from God be necessary to avoid being an anti-semite? And why should blaspheming God and saying he commanded the Jews to committ genocide be a prerequisite to being Christian? Do we really think that Jesus taught that? The same Jesus who said “everyone who came before me was a thief and robbers”?
and on the attitude of the Jewish Bund see here:
The last surviving leader of the 1943 Warsaw ghetto uprising against the Nazis, Marek Edelman, has died at the age of 90.
Anyone who thinks support of Palestinian rights has anything to do with antisemitism or Holocaust denial should think again!
On the attitude of Palestinian Christians see for example this:
Christians of several denominations gathered in Jerusalem Friday for a silent vigil in solidarity with besieged Islamic holy sites at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Old City.
I also have a separate page for two specific Palestinian issues —
1. responding to certain Anti-Defamation League propaganda and slander and
2. a list of Palestinian news sources (badly in need of updating).
Not forgetting Sabeel (blogs) . . . . and Sabeel.org for the site itself
PRETRIB RAPTURE POLITICS
Many are still unaware of the eccentric, 180-year-old British theory underlying the politics of American evangelicals and Christian Zionists.
Journalist and historian Dave MacPherson has spent more than 40 years focusing on the origin and spread of what is known as the apocalyptic “pretribulation rapture” – the inspiration behind Hal Lindsey’s bestsellers of the 1970s and Tim LaHaye’s today.
Although promoters of this endtime evacuation from earth constantly repeat their slogan that “it’s imminent and always has been” (which critics view more as a sales pitch than a scriptural statement), it was unknown in all official theology and organized religion before 1830.
And MacPherson’s research also reveals how hostile the pretrib rapture view has been to other faiths:
It is anti-Islam. TV preacher John Hagee has been advocating “a pre-emptive military strike against Iran.” (Google “Roots of Warlike Christian Zionism.”)
It is anti-Jewish. MacPherson’s book “The Rapture Plot” (see Armageddon Books etc.) exposes hypocritical anti-Jewishness in even the theory’s foundation.
It is anti-Catholic. Lindsey and C. I. Scofield are two of many leaders who claim that the final Antichrist will be a Roman Catholic. (Google “Pretrib Hypocrisy.”)
It is anti-Protestant. For this reason no major Protestant denomination has ever adopted this escapist view.
It even has some anti-evangelical aspects. The first publication promoting this novel endtime view spoke degradingly of “the name by which the mixed multitude of modern Moabites love to be distinguished, – the Evangelical World.” (MacPherson’s “Plot,” p. 85)
Despite the above, MacPherson proves that the “glue” that holds constantly in-fighting evangelicals together long enough to be victorious voting blocs in elections is the same “fly away” view. He notes that Jerry Falwell, when giving political speeches just before an election, would unfailingly state: “We believe in the pretribulational rapture!”
In addition to “The Rapture Plot,” MacPherson’s many internet articles include “Famous Rapture Watchers,” “Pretrib Rapture Diehards,” “Edward Irving is Unnerving,” “America’s Pretrib Rapture Traffickers,” “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” “Pretrib Rapture Secrecy” and “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” (massive plagiarism, phony doctorates, changing of early “rapture” documents in order to falsely credit John Darby with this view, etc.!).
Because of his devastating discoveries, MacPherson is now No. 1 on the “hate” list of pretrib rapture leaders!
There’s no question that the leading promoters of this bizarre 19th century end-of-the-world doctrine are solidly pro-Israel and necessarily anti-Palestinian. In light of recently uncovered facts about this fringe-British-invented belief which has always been riddled with dishonesty, many are wondering why it should ever have any influence on Middle East affairs.
This Johnny-come-lately view raises millions of dollars for political agendas. Only when scholars of all faiths begin to look deeply at it and widely air its “dirty linen” will it cease to be a power. It is the one theological view no one needs!
With apologies to Winston Churchill – never has so much deception been foisted on so many by so few!
[Also Google “David Letterman’s Hate, Etc.”]