What is the Relationship between Christians and Israel?

[The Reverend Bob]

Christianity was born in the Middle East, and 3 of 5 major ancient centers of Christianity are located in Egypt, Syria and Palestine. Europe may be the homeland for Western Christianity, but for Christianity as a whole and Eastern Christianity especially, it is and has been the Levant.

It developed in Europe, all the major conclave and council which formulated the doctrine of the Christian religion were held in Europe and were dominated by Europeans, it was Europeans who decided on the Canon of the Bible.

 

[Deeje]

i see a lot on the news about Christians being concerned about what goes on in Israel, like when the U.S. Embassy was moved to Jerusalem. I know that Jesus was Jewish but is there any other reason Christians are very interested in Israel?

I believe that it has self-interest at its base.

In the restoration prophesies, which have more than one fulfilment, the prophet Zechariah foretold...

23 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘In those days ten men out of all the languages of the nations will take hold, yes, they will take firm hold of the robe of a Jew, saying: “We want to go with you, for we have heard that God is with you people.”’” (Zechariah 8:23)

Also Zechariah 2:11.....

“Many nations will join themselves to Jehovah in that day, and they will become my people; and I will reside in your midst.” And you will have to know that Jehovah of armies has sent me to you."

Those nations who consider themselves "Christian" (most notably America) believe that those attaching themselves to the Jewish nation, do so in the hope of winning favour with God when he finally judges this world. It has little to do with agreeing with what Israel is actually doing as a political entity......or even if the support given is deserved.......Israel is a blood spilling nation, like all the rest.....Isaiah 1:15 comes to mind.

For Christians, any support given to those who fail to demonstrate love of neighbor, and who are shedding innocent blood, is misguided IMV. (Matthew 5:43-45) We are to be no part of this world and its political squabbles, (John 18:36).....especially over a literal piece of dirt. That piece of dirt, so hotly contested and claimed by all of the 'Abrahamic' religions, is no longer a feature of the end times prophesy. Literal Jerusalem in our day is a seat of violence and religious discord...I believe that it has nothing to do with what most in these religions imagine.....each with their own self-righteous agenda....each breaking the laws of the God of the Bible, when it suits them. I think that they are all in for a disappointing shock actually....

 

[Shiranui117]

It developed in Europe, all the major conclave and council which formulated the doctrine of the Christian religion were held in Europe and were dominated by Europeans, it was Europeans who decided on the Canon of the Bible.

Alright, now I know you don't know Christian history. The seven ecumenical councils which define standard Christian doctrine today were attended overwhelmingly by Egyptian, Syrian, Carthaginian, Cappadocian, Judaean and Greek Christians. Of those, only the Greek bishops represented Europe. Only a few token representatives from Gaul, Italy, Germania or Hispania ever attended, and they were less than a dozen out of hundreds at any given council. The Seven Ecumenical Councils are:

1: The First Council of Nicaea, held in Asia Minor, attended overwhelmingly by Egyptian, Syrian, Carthaginian, Cappadocian, Judaean and Greek Christians. Of those, only the Greek bishops and the two Roman legates represented Europe.
2: The First Council of Constantinople, right on the dividing line between Europe and Asia.
3: The Council of Ephesus, which was also in Asia Minor.
4: The Council of Chalcedon, also in Asia Minor.
5: The Second Council of Constantinople.
6: The Third Council of Constantinople.
7: The Second Council of Nicaea.

These seven councils clarified and put to words the dogmas concerning the nature of the Trinity and the hypostatic union of Christ's true humanity and true divinity. So much for "all the major conclaves and councils which formulated the doctrine of the Christian religion" being held in Europe.

The five primary sees of Christianity in the early centuries of the Church were Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Three of these five are Middle Eastern, not European. The local synods that were later ratified and accepted by the Ecumenical Councils which defined Christian practice and ecclesiastical structure were overwhelmingly held in North Africa (Carthage) and the Middle East (Antioch and Laodicea, among others). St. Augustine of Hippo was a North African, not a European. The first man to list out the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as we know them today was St. Athanasius of Alexandria, an Egyptian. Christian monasticism originated in the deserts of Egypt, Palestine and Syria.

Check your Eurocentrism. If you told any of the Syriac, Coptic or Palestinian Christians that their faith was a European one, you'd be laughed out of the room while they handed you some history books and showed you the icons of all the Church Fathers.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Alright, now I know you don't know Christian history. The seven ecumenical councils which define standard Christian doctrine today were attended overwhelmingly by Egyptian, Syrian, Carthaginian, Cappadocian, Judaean and Greek Christians. Of those, only the Greek bishops represented Europe. Only a few token representatives from Gaul, Italy, Germania or Hispania ever attended, and they were less than a dozen out of hundreds at any given council. The Seven Ecumenical Councils are:

1: The First Council of Nicaea, held in Asia Minor, attended overwhelmingly by Egyptian, Syrian, Carthaginian, Cappadocian, Judaean and Greek Christians. Of those, only the Greek bishops and the two Roman legates represented Europe.
2: The First Council of Constantinople, right on the dividing line between Europe and Asia.
3: The Council of Ephesus, which was also in Asia Minor.
4: The Council of Chalcedon, also in Asia Minor.
5: The Second Council of Constantinople.
6: The Third Council of Constantinople.
7: The Second Council of Nicaea.

These seven councils clarified and put to words the dogmas concerning the nature of the Trinity and the hypostatic union of Christ's true humanity and true divinity. So much for "all the major conclaves and councils which formulated the doctrine of the Christian religion" being held in Europe.

The five primary sees of Christianity in the early centuries of the Church were Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Three of these five are Middle Eastern, not European. The local synods that were later ratified and accepted by the Ecumenical Councils which defined Christian practice and ecclesiastical structure were overwhelmingly held in North Africa (Carthage) and the Middle East (Antioch and Laodicea, among others). St. Augustine of Hippo was a North African, not a European. The first man to list out the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as we know them today was St. Athanasius of Alexandria, an Egyptian. Christian monasticism originated in the deserts of Egypt, Palestine and Syria.

Check your Eurocentrism. If you told any of the Syriac, Coptic or Palestinian Christians that their faith was a European one, you'd be laughed out of the room while they handed you some history books and showed you the icons of all the Church Fathers.

We can debate this elsewhere because this is a discussion thread not a debate thread. That said I will leave with my last comment regarding this subject in this discussion: I am right and you are wrong.

 

[Gnostic Ambivalence]

I think? A people who has waited in exile for two thousand years has earned their nation.

Jews were banned from Jerusalem after 69/70 A.D. insurgency however they were not contrary to myth exiled than from Palestine, how do we know this? We know this because of the Simon Bar Kochba insurgency in 132 A.D. was larger than that one, and were they exiled after this? No, we know this because of the Misnah. The idea that there was a Jewish exile as such is a myth that probably originated among Christians and was later adopted themselves by Jews. Before the 19 th century the only Zionist movements so to speak that we see are from the Karaites who were regarded as Amalek by the Rabbis and possibly Proto-Islam which is it's own interesting story- unless of course you want to discuss the Samaritans who were actually exiled twice but found a way back to the Land as soon as possible.

The below by an Israeli journalist and historian explains the rough out lines of what we actually know historically:

Tom Friedman’s belief in an ‘ancestral homeland’ is a toxic myth and not history — Updated

 

[dianaiad]

Jews were banned from Jerusalem after 69/70 A.D. insurgency however they were not contrary to myth exiled than from Palestine, how do we know this? We know this because of the Simon Bar Kochba insurgency in 132 A.D. was larger than that one, and were they exiled after this? No, we know this because of the Misnah. The idea that there was a Jewish exile as such is a myth that probably originated among Christians and was later adopted themselves by Jews. Before the 19 th century the only Zionist movements so to speak that we see are from the Karaites who were regarded as Amalek by the Rabbis and possibly Proto-Islam which is it's own interesting story- unless of course you want to discuss the Samaritans who were actually exiled twice but found a way back to the Land as soon as possible.

The below by an Israeli journalist and historian explains the rough out lines of what we actually know historically:

Tom Friedman’s belief in an ‘ancestral homeland’ is a toxic myth and not history — Updated

Not precisely an unbiased source there, the Mondoweiss web site. Rather like giving me www.chick.com as an authoritative source for information on Catholicism, because Jack Chick publishes cartoons about ex Jesuits.

BTW, the author of that article has many, many articles/blog posts on that site, and not one of them supports Israel. Not one....and though I didn't read all of them, those I did read were incredibly biased towards Palestinians. Bias is fine, everybody who has ever formed an opinion forms a bias along with it.

However, presenting something that incredibly biased as some objective and factual article when in fact it is an anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rant is a bit, er,

biased, don't you think?

 

[viole]

False. Christians who believe the biblical scriptures know that God has a special love and purpose for His chosen people Israel.

His chosen people apparently refuse to believe in two thirds of Him.

Ciao

- viole

 

[sooda]

False. Christians who believe the biblical scriptures know that God has a special love and purpose for His chosen people Israel.

That's because Samuel Untermyer paid Cyrus Scofield to produce the Scofield Bible. .. and that really didn't catch on until the early 1930s. Poor, uneducated people were very vulnerable during the Dust Bowl years and the Great Depression.

 

[sooda]

@sooda? Can you help with this?

Sure. Scofield helped found the Dallas Theological Seminary and they have turned out hundreds of fundamentalists and evangelicals teaching the rapture.

That was to the advantage of Zionism.

 

[sooda]

Jews were banned from Jerusalem after 69/70 A.D. insurgency however they were not contrary to myth exiled than from Palestine, how do we know this? We know this because of the Simon Bar Kochba insurgency in 132 A.D. was larger than that one, and were they exiled after this? No, we know this because of the Misnah. The idea that there was a Jewish exile as such is a myth that probably originated among Christians and was later adopted themselves by Jews. Before the 19 th century the only Zionist movements so to speak that we see are from the Karaites who were regarded as Amalek by the Rabbis and possibly Proto-Islam which is it's own interesting story- unless of course you want to discuss the Samaritans who were actually exiled twice but found a way back to the Land as soon as possible.

The below by an Israeli journalist and historian explains the rough out lines of what we actually know historically:

Tom Friedman’s belief in an ‘ancestral homeland’ is a toxic myth and not history — Updated

The Diaspora is largely a myth.. Jewish followers of Jesus left before the tribulation and fled to Pella. Its impossible to comprehend until you look into the political situation in Palestine during the first century. The Jews were at war with each other AND the Romans.

1. Claudius' expulsion of Jews from Rome - Wikipedia
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudius'_expulsion_of_Jews_from_Rome
   In summary, the maximal time window for the expulsion of Jews from Rome is January AD 41 (the accession of Claudius) until January AD 53 (18 months prior to the latest possible end of Gallio's term and thus the latest date for Paul's trial). More detailed estimates such as those based on the AD 49 date of Orosius are possible but controversial.
   
   
2. Claudius Expels the Jews from Rome | Things Paul & Luke
   10 | March | 2013 | Things Paul & Lukeclaudius-expels-the-jews-from-rome
   Mar 10, 2013 · Luke tells us in Acts 18:2 that Aquila and Priscilla had left Rome and come to Corinth due to the Jews being expelled from Rome by the Emperor Claudius. The problem is that some scholars try to date the expulsion of the Jews from Rome in 41 CE at the beginning of Claudius’ reign, citing…
   

 

[Gnostic Ambivalence]

However, presenting something that incredibly biased as some objective and factual article when in fact it is an anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rant is a bit, er,

biased, don't you think?

It is by an Israeli Jewish journalist so the whole anti-Semite trope is a bit silly. He is dealing solely with the historical sources that we have. There was no exile after 70 A.D. and we know that for sure because of the Simon Bar Kochba Rebellion, and there no exile after 133 A.D. and we know that for sure because of the Misnah. So when did this exile supposedly take place?

Jews were we know expelled from Rome itself twice I think for aggressively proselytizing- we do know that, and proselytizing is the only thing that can account for the massive growth in the Jewish population of the Roman Empire towards the end of the Second Temple period. This of course came to a grind halting when the Empire became Christian and it became illegal for Jews to do so.

 

[sooda]

It is by an Israeli Jewish journalist so the whole anti-Semite trope is a bit silly. He is dealing solely with the historical sources that we have. There was no exile after 70 A.D. and we know that for sure because of the Simon Bar Kochba Rebellion, and there no exile after 133 A.D. and we know that for sure because of the Misnah. So when did this exile supposedly take place?

Jews were we know expelled from Rome itself twice I think for aggressively proselytizing- we do know that, and proselytizing is the only thing that can account for the massive growth in the Jewish population of the Roman Empire towards the end of the Second Temple period. This of course came to a grind halting when the Empire became Christian and it became illegal for Jews to do so.

They did proselytize aggressively among the Berbers of North Africa.

Kahina : the Berber Jewish queen. Christian, Jewish and pagan Berbers were spread through the region that is now Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya. They shared a common language and culture, however, and the invasion of the Arabs presented them with a common cause, to drive out the invaders.
the Berbers of Morocco
moroccanbebers.blogspot.com/

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Not precisely an unbiased source there, the Mondoweiss web site. Rather like giving me www.chick.com as an authoritative source for information on Catholicism, because Jack Chick publishes cartoons about ex Jesuits.

BTW, the author of that article has many, many articles/blog posts on that site, and not one of them supports Israel. Not one....and though I didn't read all of them, those I did read were incredibly biased towards Palestinians. Bias is fine, everybody who has ever formed an opinion forms a bias along with it.

However, presenting something that incredibly biased as some objective and factual article when in fact it is an anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rant is a bit, er,

biased, don't you think?

Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism.

 

[Rival]

Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism.

There are anti-Zionist Jews lol.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Liberals don't like Israel. Conservatives love her.

You mean neoliberals and neoconservatives love Israel (or Netanyahu, anyway), and they're the ones deciding the foreign policy of both the Republicans and Democrats. Even the fake "nationalist" and "populist", Trump, hasn't veered from the agenda there.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

i see a lot on the news about Christians being concerned about what goes on in Israel, like when the U.S. Embassy was moved to Jerusalem. I know that Jesus was Jewish but is there any other reason Christians are very interested in Israel?

I hope amongst all the answers given, that your heart has found what it was seeking in your question, as God guides us all in mysterious ways.

Why God has chosen a certain area to be a focal point of worship, is a mystery for us to contemplate and find the answer to.

These focal points and holy places may very well sustain our true life as a spiritual being, in our material form. It will be interesting in the future when science embraces faith and humanity starts to look at how we are spiritually connected to this material world and how that connection interacts with this world.

Our path forward, is faith in harmony with science.

Stay well stay happy, Regards Tony

 

[dianaiad]

Oh, wow.

Look. I took the time to investigate that site, and the writer of the article the OP referred us all to. It really doesn't matter whether one supports Israel or has problems with the US treatment of Israel.

What IS true is this: that site...and that author...is so biased as to be completely untrustworthy as a primary source of information regarding Israel. He may have the same historical facts as everybody else does, but he is absolutely not using them in an objective and even handed manner. He is so determined to denigrate Israel and paint the Palestinians as golden angels that it should be obvious to the most partisan of anti-Zionists/anti-Semitists that he's an extreme example of the propagandist's dream.

Believe me, I know anti sites. Anti Catholicism, Anti Jehovah's Witnesses, Anti-Muslim, Anti Semitic, anti you name it....and this is a prime example.

Compared to this, CNN and The New York Times could be employed and run by Rush Limbaugh.

 

[sooda]

Oh, wow.

Look. I took the time to investigate that site, and the writer of the article the OP referred us all to. It really doesn't matter whether one supports Israel or has problems with the US treatment of Israel.

What IS true is this: that site...and that author...is so biased as to be completely untrustworthy as a primary source of information regarding Israel. He may have the same historical facts as everybody else does, but he is absolutely not using them in an objective and even handed manner. He is so determined to denigrate Israel and paint the Palestinians as golden angels that it should be obvious to the most partisan of anti-Zionists/anti-Semitists that he's an extreme example of the propagandist's dream.

Believe me, I know anti sites. Anti Catholicism, Anti Jehovah's Witnesses, Anti-Muslim, Anti Semitic, anti you name it....and this is a prime example.

Compared to this, CNN and The New York Times could be employed and run by Rush Limbaugh.

Samuel Untermeyer - Historicist.com The Protestant ...
Samuel Untermeyer - Historicist.com The Protestant Interpretation of Biblical Prophecy. The Historical Alternative
Samuel Untermeyer had a lifelong interest in Zionism. He and the leaders of the Jewish Theological Seminary wanted to inject their beliefs into Christianity in America. But had they attempted to introduce their ideas into the dominant protestant culture of 1900, they would have been ignored.

 

[dianaiad]

Samuel Untermeyer - Historicist.com The Protestant ...
Samuel Untermeyer - Historicist.com The Protestant Interpretation of Biblical Prophecy. The Historical Alternative
Samuel Untermeyer had a lifelong interest in Zionism. He and the leaders of the Jewish Theological Seminary wanted to inject their beliefs into Christianity in America. But had they attempted to introduce their ideas into the dominant protestant culture of 1900, they would have been ignored.

And this is pertinent...or disproves my point...how, precisely?

I'm sure many, many people approve of this stuff, like what is written, and all.

But then Jack Chick is very popular too.

They scratch the itch and tickle the ears of those who like what they say...mostly because what they say simply strokes what the reader already believes.

You do what you want.

(shrug)

They are still incredibly biased.

 

[sooda]

And this is pertinent...or disproves my point...how, precisely?

I'm sure many, many people approve of this stuff, like what is written, and all.

But then Jack Chick is very popular too.

They scratch the itch and tickle the ears of those who like what they say...mostly because what they say simply strokes what the reader already believes.

You do what you want.

(shrug)

They are still incredibly biased.

Untermyer was a very powerful man.. He was the chief fund raiser for 6 million starving Jews in Europe in the early 1900s... and he was an ardent Zionist. He paid for the writing and publishing of the Scofield Bible.