44 votes

The Bible does not support Zionism (the geopolitical variety anyway)

My liberty friends, you will hear in heightened tones from your "Christian" friends and family that the bible mandates we " christian/ americans" must support the State of Israel. The bible does not endorse any geo-political entity. Please take time to watch and listen to this relatively short documentary and share it with those who are willing to consider that this long held assumption may in fact be a distortion of biblical truth, by those with narrow political and economic interests. This false mantra(meme) exits in many of my generation (50 and up) and is passed down to the next. Please watch> http://vimeo.com/29901084 Political Zionism is racism and "un-christian" because it requires one to show favoritism, which God does not do. **Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism.....
**Acts 10:33-35




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Whatever.

The world is flat, obviously, since anyone can SEE it's flat themselves. Right?

Whatever with your whatever

I believe there are more lies about religion than Moses can shake his snake stick at.

I didn't say they weren't.

I didn't adress that at all. You may be right, but it's irrelevant to the point at hand which a scientifically documented refutation of the nonsense assertion that Jews in Israel aren't "real Jews."

Yes it does

First, show some respect. Me asking you to cite your source does not show my ignorance but it shows your lack of wanting to have a real discussion.

Second, if Palestinians are 'real' Jews in regards to DNA that means they are not any different than the 'real' Jews living in Israel. So maybe we should define 'real' Jews by something other than DNA? Yes, that was my point all along.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

My point stands either way.

And what is your source? I can't refute what you don't cite. Link it.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

Nonsense.

I don't have to cite Newton to discuss the Law of Gravity.

You can look it up yourself. Whether or not I disabuse you of your own ignorance and laze in terms of educating YOURSELF neither changes the hard data, nor the science, nor the facts.

Good distictions sarx

But either you are not a Christian or just an un-educated one.

By our faith in Jesus Christ we are grafted into the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a central bank, and he can rob a country and the world.”
www.dailypaul.com/donate

Correct

I am both a Christian and educated. I have a Master's in Biblical Studies and know the original languages.

God's people are one and always have been. The in-grafting of Gentiles has nothing to do with the fact that those in the nation of Israel today have nothing to do with the Israelites of the Old Testament. Being part of God's people has never been an ethnic distinction or a political one. The distinction has always been one of faith and obedience.

Not only does the bible not teach that there are two distinct peoples of God, Israel and the Church, but it is very explicitly opposed to this idea. For one thing, the Church existed in the Old Testament, long before the outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (see Acts 7:38); and furthermore, the clear teaching of the New Testament is that the modern day Church is really just the expansion of God's people Israel. According to Paul, being an Israelite has never been based merely on outward ethnicity (Rom. 2:28-29; 9:6-8); but those who have been called according to God's promise are Abraham's true seed (Rom. 9:8). Hence, all who have faith are Abraham's children, and the true Israel of God (Rom. 4:11-17; Galatians 3:6-9, 26-29; 4:21-31; 6:16; Phil. 3:3; 1 Pet. 2:9-10; Rev. 2:9).

When Paul deals extensively with the whole question of the place of Jews and Gentiles in the people of God, in Romans 11, he shows that there is just one people, symbolized by one good olive tree; unbelieving ethnic Jews may be broken off of that tree of true Israel and believing Gentiles may be grafted in; but there is still one tree, one body, one people of God. Thus, Paul teaches elsewhere that there is no difference between Jew and Gentile in Christ (Gal. 3:26-29; Col. 3:11), but that all believers are members of the same body, citizens of the one commonwealth of Israel, inheritors of all the promises made to Abraham (Eph. 2:11-22; 3:6; Gal. 4:26-31; Phil. 3:20; Heb. 12:22-23). In short, there is and always has been one people of God, and that people includes all those who are grafted in to God's “good olive tree” to become Abraham's children by faith, whether ethnic Jews or Gentiles.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

excellent post.

excellent post.

sarx excellent scripture search

And the videos I posted above should make the hair on your neck tingle.

God is a God of covenant.

When He covenants with a person or a people He doesn't forget nor does He break His covenant.

No matter how far off course His people stray.

Is Israel full of 'assholes'? Absolutely. Liars and thugs. So what else is new?

I challenge you to review the two messages, The Harbinger and America's Fatal Mistake. This is God's promises coming to pass for real - in our time.

Zionism is God's will. But the word has been hi-jacked just as our American mission has been hi-jacked.

“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a central bank, and he can rob a country and the world.”
www.dailypaul.com/donate

Sounds like we're not far off.

Sounds like you and I are actually not that far off from each other. We both believe in the Scriptures, we both believe God keeps his promises. Let me outline what I believe is our main difference. Please correct me if I summarize your view incorrectly, no slight is intended.

Your view: God keeps his promise to the Israelites and this is seen in the nation of Israel today. God never changes, God never lies, he keeps his word. Therefore, the nation of Israel, even though flawed, still is the heir to the promises of the Old Testament.

My View: God keeps his promises to his people. God never changes, or lies. God's people are those who have faith in Christ. The promises of the Old Testament (and New) are still valid, but they apply to those of faith, not to an ethnic group. This is consistent with how God's people has always been shown. There has always been a removal of those who are not faithful, even if they are ethnically Jews (c.f. Numbers 16, 1 Samuel 2:27-36, 1 Samuel 15, and the entire 11 tribes not named Judah for examples), and the en-grafting of those who are Gentile (c.f. Rahab, Ruth, the widow in 1 Kings 17). So, the promises still apply, but to true Israel, those of faith (again see Galatians 3). And, the promises are also heightened. Just as there were shadows and types in the Old Testament (Hebrews 8:1-7, 10:1), the fulfillment to come is greater (i.e. Jesus). The promised land is heaven, new earth and new Jerusalem.

Common Ground: The Bible is true. God does not break his word. God keeps his promises to Israel.

I am your friend. What you hold to is called Dispensationalism. What I hold to is called Covenant Theology. It's a big difference in Protestant Christianity. But it's not a disagreement worth breaking fellowship over. Your view is definitely more popular right now in America, but historically it is both new (early 1800's) and is not what the Church has believed historically.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

Did God lie about His covenant with the Israelites?

I think your answer is no except those in Israel today are completely unrelated to the Israelites.

Except Y-chromosome DNA test data shows they, in fact, are related. In fact, very CLOSELY related essentially having the precise same haplogroups by and large.

It's hard to dispute the data.

So, with that in mind, help me reconcile what you are saying here.

the Khazar Jews came from . . .

where the ancient Hittites and Scythians were situated--

When the tribes were dispersed they must have gone through that area--

who knows where all the "Jews" are--

!

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

That is historically correct, but utterly irrelevant.

What's your point?

Ashkenaz are not genetically related to Khazars ( <1% ). Nor are there many Khazar Jews in Israel. (There are maybe a few hundred in all per DNA data, i.e. a couple of families).

These nonsense theories about Khazar "false Jews" being the inheritors of Israel are just that, nonsense, as hard DNA data proves.

Ashkenaz are over 90% related through Y-DNA to the original 12 tribes and the Sephardim over 98%, with the Ashkenaz to Sephardim relationship through DNA pushing 95%.

You can downvote hard scientific data, but you can't refute it nor does the downvote change the data which speaks for itself.

I didn't say that they didn't have Israelite "blood"--

(Khazars or Ashkenazi)--

the point is that, because they are/were Jewish (but converts) they have made those DNA connections--

how many other Europeans would make them but haven't bothered?

The fact is that they are not Sephardic--

That they are part of an immense diaspora I don't doubt--

but how many people in the world are!?

At least one African (and very black) tribe is--

no, I don't have the WSJ article, but it was very extensive, and it was done during a time when things were not so tense in the middle east--

it was done in a casual, non-political, academic way--

Yes, I wish I had kept the article; I read it thoroughly, cut it out, shared it with my spouse, talked about it with a few close friends and then lost it--

I'm sure the evidence can be found somewhere; there are quite a few African Jews (practicing for many centuries) who have tried to integrate into Israel and found it difficult--

Who decides who is a Jew and who is not, when all those arguing claim to be Jews?

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

The fact is

a) the WORD Ashkenaz in Hebrew MEANS "German", "Norse" or "Northman". That's what it means. That's all it means.

b) Ashkenaz in general have approximately a 95% Y-DNA (Patrilineal) heritage correlation with the Sephardim.

That means they are generally NOT Khazar lineage.

I'm sorry, but the DNA data speaks for itself. There is an interesting recent study that shows some Ashkenaz have some Khazar heritage. That's it. Some have some. But the vast majority's DNA is tightly correlated with Sephardim DNA demonstrating they are genetically one and the same.

Vote me down all you want. Downvotes cannot change scientific data.

I haven't voted you down once--

I don't feel any animosity--

The ONLY thing I am certain of (if the WSJ from the early 90s can be trusted) is that at least one African tribe have ancient Levitical DNA--

I would like to see your references. I apologize that I can't do more than say that I saw a WSJ article--

that's weak, I know. The fact is that I don't care enough.

I have a lot of questions about DNA research, etc. Just questions.

It isn't something I've studied a lot. I know what I believe, and I believe that hearts matter more than blood--

But I haven't downvoted you once--

you must be thinking of someone else--

:)

Peace--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Then, I apologize.

There are reactionaries here who will down vote if communicating scientific data makes them feel bad or conflicts with their personal philosophy which astounds me for people who claim to be Ron Paul supporters.

So, there I went reacting to you and I apologize.

Yes, there is Israelite DNA also in at least one African tribe. The revolution in DNA testing came in 1999 when a geneticist from the University of AZ discovered Y-DNA (patrilineal) DNA typing. Patrilineal DNA does not mutate, or mutates at (generally) a rate of 4% over 1000 years, which makes it an astoundingly accurate way to trace DNA markers through generations and can be used to trace cultural migrations through geographies by typing markers from bones.

He won the nobel prize for the discovery in 2000.

What's most amazing about it too is it completely obliterates all traditional concepts of "race". Everything we ever thought about "race" ever is completely obliterated, whether we realize it or not, by this science.

"Race" is now measured by Y-DNA haplogroups. Look it up. It's absolutely fascinating. And it unlocks anthropoloical migrations going back up to 100,000 years even pre-ice age.

For those of us who are religious there is also a scary aspect of it as it can be used to conclusively find patrilineal male descendants of the Levites who are the only people who can consecrate the temple. Per Revelations, consecration of a rebuilt temple is a literal harbinger of the antichrist. Before this new science that was impossible.

apology accepted--

and what you say about 'race' and about the Levites is very fascinating--

something to think about--things that 'feel' right--

but I am still unsure about DNA testing--

my father was a scientist, and I learned to be skeptical of untested science--

or of poorly tested scientific concepts--

but . . . mistakes will be made when learning--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Which 12 tribes?

Which 12 tribes? Do you use the list in Revelation 7? Or another list? The Bible lists the twelve tribes of Israel in several locations: (Genesis 35:23-26; Exodus 1:2-5; Numbers 1:20-43; 1 Chronicles 2:2; Revelation 7:5-8). It is interesting that there are slight differences in some places. The 12 sons of Israel (Jacob) were Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Benjamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher and Joseph. These were the ancestors of the original twelve tribes. However, Reuben lost his rights as firstborn by defiling Jacob’s bed (Genesis 35:22; 49:3-4). In Reuben’s and Joseph's place, Joseph’s two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, became tribes of Israel (Genesis 48:5-6). As a result, the twelve tribes became Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Benjamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Ephraim and Manasseh. In some other lists of the twelve tribes of Israel, Levi is not mentioned, presumably because the Levites were assigned to serve at the temple and therefore were not apportioned land of their own in Israel (Joshua 14:3.

All this to say your premise that DNA is what defines God chosen people is ridiculous. How did Rahab become included in that line? Or how about King David, he came from a Moabite woman, or have you not read the book of Ruth?

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

The point wasn't religious.

It was a scientific refutation that Israelis weren't "real Jews" because they were somehow descendant of the Asian people known as the Khazars.

That Khazar theory has been utterly, scientifically refuted. That was the long and the short of it.

Did God lie about his covenant(s) with the Israelites? No.

My answer is no. God did not lie about his covenant. My point is that most people misunderstand who the promise was made to and what the fulfillment is to look like now. Looking for a political/ethnic Israel and a physical patch of earth in Palestine is NOT what I think God ultimately meant by his covenants.

My point is simply that the Israel of God (Gal. 6:16) has never been an ethnic or political association, not even in Old Testament time. Even if it were, the people who make up the nation of Israel today bear little resemblance to the Israelites of the Old Testament. I know nothing of this study you say, and even if it is true, it doesn't change my premise. My premise is: God's chosen people is not based on ethnic or political origin. It is based on faith in him. I believe I've given sufficient examples already in my other posts to back this up. True Israel today, according to the Christian Bible, is those who have faith in Christ. The promises of the covenants belong to them.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

I'll buy that the relationship is not ethnic.

But you keep repeating this: "Even if it were, the people who make up the nation of Israel today bear little resemblance to the Israelites of the Old Testament. "

But it's false. DNA testing proves it's false. At this point, if you are honest, you'll need to stop repeating that statement unless and until you verify the scientific DNA data for yourself.

Also, I have to ask. All Christian bibles I know include the Old Testament and are clear about Jesus being the Son of God, i.e. YHWH, the same who appeared to Moses on the mount.

Are you talking about a different Christian bible?

My point

My point is this; The chosen people of God was never a DNA or ethnic thing. It was always about faith. That is why we see people of other ethnic/DNA origins being included in God's people (i.e. Rahab, Ruth), and we see people who ARE ethic/DNA linked to Israel rejected from God's people for a lack of faith/obedience (i.e. Samuel's sons, Aaron's sons, Saul, ect.). You keep bringing up the DNA thing, but that is my whole point, DNA does not matter when defining who is God's people/true Israel. Galatians 3:7 - "Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham."

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

That's great, but you changed the point.

God, the same God who appeared to Moses, YHWH, who is ALSO the Father of Jesus Christ, also made a covenant with the Israelites. You stated that God does not lie, nor does he break his covenants.

So, while I fully agree that the NEW covenant covers all of what you write above, your points are inconsistent.

No

Since being God's chosen people is not a DNA/Ethnic thing, it is about faith/obedience. Therefore, the promises made to God's people in the Old Testament are still valid and true, but you are missing who the recipients are of said promises. The recipients are those of faith who obey God. It's same then as it is now. That is why Paul writes in Galatians 3:7 "know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham." The Church is true Israel. Additionally you misunderstand the fulfillment of the covenants. They find their fulfillment in Christ. The promise to Abraham for descendants as numerous as the stars is ultimately fulfilled in the Gentiles being included in God's people (Ephesians 3:3-6). The promise for his descendants to a blessing to all nations is also fulfilled in Jesus via the inclusion of the Gentiles (Romans 11:17). And the promise for Land is fulfilled in Christ as well (John 14:3). You are missing the recipients and misunderstanding how the promises of the Old Testament are fulfilled.

"Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics." -Thomas Jefferson

You're trying to change history.

You're completely correct with regards to the new covenant and fulfillment through Christ. But you're attempting to say without saying it, that the first covenant becomes null and void UNLESS you believe in Christ.

Sorry, that's just not in the bible at all.

The New Covenant ADDS to the glory of God and subtracts nothing including nothing about the first covenant.

The reason you wont say it is because it reveals the inconsistency in what you are saying, that God really didn't mean the first covenant he made with the Israelites, i.e. the nation of the Hebrews of that time. Which of course conflicts with other things you say about God not lying and God upholding His covenants.

I don't know everything sarx

But I do know that God blinded or hid the truth from the Jews regarding Jesus as the Messiah.

So that's one thing I know. Jews and/or Israeli's are under a God given delusion. Who am I to know which one's?

But, He also promised that the greatest harvest of souls will come not from the great preachers and evangelists of our time but from the 144,000 JEWS!

In the 46 years since I first said "I do" to Jesus Christ, I have met a few Messianic Jews and more specifically Christian Rabbi's.

Rabbi Cahn, author of "The Harbinger" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXei0Zb3dxM&feature=related - is one of those salvation preaching Jews. Just by virtue of his existence and the existence of others I heard of, the final harvest has begun...

That makes me shudder with awe. That of all the idiots in the history of man, I get to witness the greatest harvest of the "whosoever" in all time.

Scripture portrays the 144,000 as God's special end time church. According to Rev 7 they are able "to stand" when Jesus returns. They are called "first fruits" which indicates that a larger harvest will be gathered and that they are not the only ones to be saved. Since they have followed the Lamb wherever it went and since they have not joined false worship they will be with Jesus on Mt. Zion and before the throne of God in his heavenly sanctuary. We may not be able to solve all the questions related to the 144,000 and probably this is not so important either. More important is to live in such a way that we may be counted among them.

“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a central bank, and he can rob a country and the world.”
www.dailypaul.com/donate

He let them be deluded, but He didn't delude them!

There were those Jews who DID accept Jesus Christ as the Messiah!

The first Christians were Jewish--

And many Jews are becoming Christians now--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--