Slandering Christian Zionists

SNIPPET: "It is often said that ridiculing Christians and their beliefs is the last acceptable form of bigotry."

SNIPPET: "Bringing it back to the secular level, the friendships I have developed with Israeli colleagues over the past six years, and especially my trip to Israel last November, have solidified my support for the country. As if I didn’t realize it before, walking through the besieged city of Sderot and seeing Hamas missiles literally stamped “Made in Iran” truly brought home the fact that Israel’s enemies are America’s enemies. We share a common radical Islamic foe that seeks our destruction. That alone is reason enough for mutual understanding and support.

I strongly suspect that the vast majority of attendees at the CUFI conference view Israel in a similar way. Or as JTA’s Eric Fingerhut—who also covered the event—puts it:

“I've talked to enough Christian Zionists over the past few years to believe that for the vast majority of them, their support for the Jewish state is genuinely motivated by Genesis's admonitition that God will bless those who bless the Jewish people, as well as their respect for Judaism as a foundation for Christianity or even their general beliefs about U.S. foriegn policy.”

In closing, if J Steet truly has Israel’s best interests at heart, why on earth would it seek to alienate an estimated 70 million American evangelical Christians who are strongly inclined towards Israel during a time of great need? What is really going on here? And when will J Street issue an apology to evangelicals for its inflammatory CUFI press release?

Erick Stackelbeck is a correspondent and terrorism analyst at the Christian Broadcasting Network."

Dispensationalism, as a theology, is about 180 years old--and while it is the majority view of modern American evangelicals (who are also as a majority, Baptist) this popularity can only be traced to the wildly popular book, The Late Great Planet Earth by Hall Lindsey from the 1970s. The specific predictions of that book fell flat, but no matter...Lindsay, and more recently Tim Lahaye have still built there careers (and made millions) with spectacular detailed speculations--even while their actual knowledge of the genre of ancient near east apocalyptic literature (what the book of Revelation and most of Daniel and other prophetic parts of scripture are) is very limited.

While Dispensationalism is the dominant view amidst evangelical bible-believing Americans it is NOT the dominant view of the majority of serious Christians around the world now---nor has it been historically.

Martin Luther, John Calvin, the Puritans, John Wesley, ALL the early Baptists....NONE of whom one can claim to be NOT bible believers...were NOT Dispensationalist.

Dispensationalism came out of the same people who started 7th Day Adventism and other rather eccentric Christian movements.

Classical Dispensationalist theology (which has been moderated in the last 50 years) said that there were completely separated ages, and in each age God saved people differently. This is the "Age of Grace" (or the "Age of the Church") where people are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. In Moses' era however classical dispensationalists (50+ years ago) said they were saved by their law-keeping....not grace. To be fair, modern dispensationalists saw the problem of that...and acknowledge that everyone who has been saved at all times since Adam has been saved by grace--even the grace given once and for all at the cross of Jesus Christ.

I am an Amillennialist--NOT a "dominionist" or "replacement theologist" or a "preterist" (all of which are insulting, pejorative terms). The Church at large has believed something very similar to what I believe for over 1500 years. I have not referred to Dispensationalists with any negative titles which they do not use for themselves, so I'd appreciate it if you who disagree do not refer to persons like myself with insulting terms which we don't use either.

I believe that when the Book of Revelation speaks of numbers---it is, like the rest of it's language--clearly speaking symbolically--and it's original Jewish/Christian readers understood it that way. This was completely according to how we now know how all ancient Jewish apocalyptic literature was written, read and understood.

Those interpreters who do NOT have knowledge of how ancient Jewish apocalyptic literature was read should not try to build elaborate detailed interpretive schemes of how the end times will work out--as they are starting with a bad foundation...and will therefore have a collapsing building and ultimately--they make bible-believing Christians (of which I am one) look silly and ignorant.

I fully support the nation of Israel--as it is the one solid beacon of civilized democratic freedom in the Middle East. I really don't imagine that supporting a nation state of over 70% agnostic/atheistic ethnic Jews earns a special blessing of God, as scripture says by faith, we who trust in the Messiah Jesus are Abraham's seed--not those who share some of his genetics. Is there a place prophesied for ethnic Jews who come to Jesus in the future? Of course--as Romans 11 makes clear.

However there are not 2 peoples of God, rather one, with Christ as the Head. The whole book of Acts, and the miracle of the formation of the Church Jew+Gentile as one people, makes that very (very) clear.

One must have the correct heart and intent (what Christians call “faith,” I suppose) for observance of the Law to have any meaning or purpose.

I fully agree.

To clarify though: I go along with what the great systematizer of theology of the followers of Jesus in the 1st Century, namely the Pharisee and Rabbi Christians call the Apostle Paul, that ESPECIALLY in correct heart and intent/faith--no one at all (except Jesus alone) has perfectly followed the law (Psalm 14:2,3). On may look righteous on the outside, but as Rabbi Saul indicated, the 10th Command, "You shall not covet..." condemns us all--and breaking one point, breaks all--which is one reason Moses' Law required animal sacrifices, such as sin offerings.

This is why Messiah willing suffered and died--that the Shepherd gave his life for the sheep. The physical resurrection of Jesus proved this correct.

“Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first...” 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (KJV)

Frankly, Lindsey and LaHaye are not Real Dispensationalist....that’s why they are wrong.

But that statement causes to many Pre-Tribbers to stumble.

;-)

The first tenant of Dispensationalism is to take scripture LITERALLY then if the Spirit calls out, to dig to the next layer of Parable and/or Allegory.

However, FReepers is NOT the Place to debate the WORD.

I’m concluding my remarks here.

Dispensationalism has a better pedigree than Hal Lindsay’s work.

You did not mention Lewis Sperry Chafer (founder of Dallas Theological Seminary and author of a systematic theology) or the Scofield Reference Bible.

As a former born-and-raised Roman Catholic, I have little regard for the length of the genealogy of a church, of a theological system, or of an Ivy League university, for example.

I measure the quality of a theological system by its adherence to Scripture. After I got saved at about age 23, I read the Bible cover to cover at least seven times.

What is now called “Dispensationalism” seemed leap from the pages as lie after lie from Rome poured away from my soul.

Unfortunately, the “Reformed” Tradition (yes, it’s a Tradition) has not let loose of its Tradition that it continues to borrow from Rome.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.