Why Christians get a bad rap amongst the Jews...(an example)

[crossnote]

@UnderGrace I was just thinking, as a Preterist how do you handle this passage?...70AD? A Prophecy no longer valid? Or?

Zechariah 14:2-4 KJV
[2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. [4] And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

Did the Lord go forth and fight against the nations that came against Jerusalem? If so, it looks like He lost to the Romans.

 

[iamsoandso]

@UnderGrace I was just thinking, as a Preterist how do you handle this passage?...70AD? A Prophecy no longer valid? Or?

Zechariah 14:2-4 KJV
[2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. [4] And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

Did the Lord go forth and fight against the nations that came against Jerusalem? If so, it looks like He lost to the Romans.

And in fact in Josephus wars book 2 he describes the Jews as outraged by any type pollution of the temple then standing. The Jewish revolt is known as such because the Jews then revolted,rebelled died to the uttermost at the cost of the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem to prevent pagans from setting up pagan images in the temple.

So did they worship the fourth beast as God or did they revolt against it(Rome)? Did they receive the beast mark and buy and sell with their money or mint their own, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish_Revolt_coinage ?

So if Rome is the beast and mark spoken of in ad70 then the Jews revolted and did not buy and sell with their money so it cannot be said that they received the mark nor worshiped it's image they revolted instead,,,"Jewish revolt"....and Rev. 13 cannot be pinned on the Jews they stood their ground.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So what promises are only for Israel that have not been fulfilled in Jesus?
This is where my mind is not quite settled yet.

The promises God gave to abraham, concerning land, and concerning how how would use them as a nation to prove to all the world that he was the God eternal through their obedience,

And this was an ETERNAL promise, not a conditional promise

 

[PennEd]

Thank you Melach and Amen, human suffering is pervasive at the hands of evil people.

I have been to Hiroshima, children vaporized in an instant while their bike is left intact.

Couple points here. How many children did the Lord vaporize at Sodom & Gomorrah? What had a 3 yr old to do with the evil adult people of those cities?

There are several places the Lord commands THIS:
1 Samuel 15

15 Samuel also said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel. Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of the Lord. 2 Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt. 3 Now go and attack[a] Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, INFANT AND NURSING CHILD, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ ”

Do you think the Lord valued the lives of His people more than those lives? You BET He did!

Now what follows is an important principle. Saul does NOT heed the Word of the Lord. His Spirit departs from him and Saul is told the Kingship and ultimately his life is forfeit.
WHAT IS DAVID'S REACTION TO ALL THIS?
1 Samuel 24:6 New King James Version (NKJV)
6 And he said to his men, “The Lord forbid that I should do this thing to my master, the Lord’s anointed, to stretch out my hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord.”

WHAT!!?? Saul has repeatedly tried to kill David. He persecuted him, and made him flee to the wilderness. The Lord has SAID that DAVID would be His newly anointed. Yet David, a man after God's own heart, REFUSED to go after who the Lord anointed.

Get the picture here? David didn't say that Saul wasn't anointed anymore. David ALWAYS treated Saul with respect and even love. AND WOULD NOT LET OTHERS IN HIS COMMAND TREAT SAUL DIFFERENTLY, AND CERTAINLY NOT KILL HIM! In fact, David only wanted to serve Saul.

So WE are now in David's shoes in a sense. The vast majority of Jews today are in apostasy. Are WE going to choose to not only not ourselves persecute and kill God's anointed, the Jews, but allow others, that CALL THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS, to persecute and kill them?

 

[Melach]

PennEd why do you believe this extermination took place? we would view anyone who attacks those who cannot yet make a decision for good or evil as monster.
but God is not held to the same moral standard because He is outside His own laws.

but my question is: why did it take place? does the bible ever say? we cant say it wasnt right if God commanded it, but why?

 

[FollowHisSteps]

PennEd why do you believe this extermination took place? we would view anyone who attacks those who cannot yet make a decision for good or evil as monster.
but God is not held to the same moral standard because He is outside His own laws.

but my question is: why did it take place? does the bible ever say? we cant say it wasnt right if God commanded it, but why?

You have touched on some difficult issues.
Innocence of the young. Are they innocent or do they inherit the standing of their parents?
The Lord says this

5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God,
responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing with children to the third and fourth
generations of those who reject me,
6 and showing covenant faithfulness to a thousand generations of those who love me and
keep my commandments.
Exodus 20

Death comes to all men, and is our inheritance of the fall.

16 Fathers must not be put to death for what their children do, nor children for what their
fathers do; each must be put to death for his own sin.
Deut 24

So death comes as judgement and death as a result of the fall. So innocence does not play
a part here, because death has come because of inherited positional sin. For this reason God
can justly kill anyone. The exact punishment and justice will be worked out at the judgement
seat of God, so its current reality is not our concern other than in the general sense of knowing
how we stand and why it is just for God to behave as He does.

 

[PennEd]

PennEd why do you believe this extermination took place? we would view anyone who attacks those who cannot yet make a decision for good or evil as monster.
but God is not held to the same moral standard because He is outside His own laws.

but my question is: why did it take place? does the bible ever say? we cant say it wasnt right if God commanded it, but why?

Well at least in the case of the Amelekites I am convinced in my mind why. But most people don't like the answer. I have seen much resistance, mockery and scorn when this subject is brought up, but I'll tell what I think if you can have an open mind, but it does stray from the OP.

 

[Melach]

Well at least in the case of the Amelekites I am convinced in my mind why. But most people don't like the answer. I have seen much resistance, mockery and scorn when this subject is brought up, but I'll tell what I think if you can have an open mind, but it does stray from the OP.

you can send it to me i would greatly appreciate it. i will not mock you friend nor scorn.

i hope i havent given you the impression that im here to mock and scorn. i know i have lots of growing to do as a person, but im trying to not mock.

 

[PennEd]

you can send it to me i would greatly appreciate it. i will not mock you friend nor scorn.

i hope i havent given you the impression that im here to mock and scorn. i know i have lots of growing to do as a person, but im trying to not mock.

No. I didn't mean you at all. I'll make 1 post on it here and then if you have an interest to continue in it, we can start a thread or find one that deals with this issue.

In some instances of the conquest of Canaan, the people were instructed NOT to kill every man woman and child. Yet in others, like the one I posted in Samuel, they were told to look a baby in the eyes and run their swords through EVERY ONE OF THEM!. So we can say things like "well, God is God and He can do what He likes, even if it seems to go against His revealed character" or we can understand through His Word WHY he would order such a thing.

MUCH of the Bible goes back to what happened in
Genesis 6:4 New King James Version (NKJV)
4 There were [a]giants on the earth in those days, AND ALSO AFTERWARD, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

People HATE the idea that "the sons of God" referenced here, is fallen angels. Even though I believe it is Biblically fairly easy to prove.

But it's the "also afterward" that has to do with eradicating certain people groups completely. "ALL flesh corrupted itself" But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. He was perfect in his generations. I believe we can say, pure in his genes. HE wasn't corrupted like the ALL flesh with fallen angel DNA.

I do not believe Noah's wife was corrupted either, as they are "one flesh", and therefore Shem, Ham and Japheth were non corrupted as well. One, or more of THEIR wives may have carried the fallen angel gene as they could be considered part of the ALL.

Now my nieces son has Cystic Fibrosis. Terrible for that little boy. Both his mother, and his father, carry the gene for CF although neither one of them has it.

They were told that if they have another child it would have a 25% chance of developing the disease.

I think this is a similar situation with the "also afterward". Too much to get into the sin of Ham, and the curse Noah put on Canaan here, but you get the idea.

I believe the Lord is having the people DESTROY the gene carried through the line of HAM, and Canaan, that led to Him earlier to wipe out the corruption of His creation in the flood, because not just the people were corrupted.

So, we can look into that avenue further, or we can believe the Lord IS a monster that instructs His people to kill little children and babies with the sword.

 

[Melach]

@PennEd your response does justice. i agree with it its a good apologetic and good explanation. merciful our Lord. praise His holy name.

thank you for teaching me dear friend. i receive it.

 

[kaylagrl]

this is just a new boogieman word

No actually it's an old theology, even some of the early church fathers believed it.


there is no replacement theology. nobody believed that. the teaching is what the bible said to moses: God will raise up a prophet among the people and whoever doesnt listen to that prophet will be ...... cut off from the people.......

Yes, there is such a theology and yes people have fallen for it. Read Romans 11 and you will see the Jews have been blinded for a time.



and the jews that believed such as the apostles, the 3000 on pentecost and the thousands and thousands more were the remnant. they were added to the church as it says in acts 2. the rest were cut off.


Not according to Romans 11, God is not done with the Jews.

thats not replacement theology but thats what the bible says. all the apostles were jews and the entire early church was jewish, it was a jew(john) who wrote that anyone who denies Jesus is God's son is in antichrist spirit.
thats not replacement thelogy, thats bible.


I posted what replacement theology is. There are still Jews that will come to Christ,they are the remnant.


this was believed by everyone throughout church history and is today.


No, the theology says the church replaced the Jews, and that is not true.

this also doesnt mean as is falsely said and advertised that there is no future for israel. everyone has read the bible and knows that there will be a spiritual awakening among the jews before Jesus returns. amillennialists dont deny that i have read it my own eyes from kim riddlebarger's.


This point we agree on!

can you define the word replacement theology? the claim is church replaced israel, but there is nothing to replace. it was simply a continuation of same people of God. the jews who accepted messiah continued on, the ones who didnt were cut off.

I posted about that,not sure if you read it...

this is very simple dont know why americans are so into israel, i find it strange and never have understood it. israel is a secular nation like germany or sweden or spain. its just a regular country like any else. i understand american politicians supporting israel because its their ally, but i dont understand christians who are supposed to be in the kingdom of God supporting a secular nation in the middle-east. no apostle or church father would of done so they were involved with kingdom of God not roman politics or judean politics

Because right now the Jews are blinded. But I believe the prophecy concerning Israel, a nation born in a day, is the Israel we have today.


sorry for my preaching tone. im no preacher im just saying what i think. i have tried to give it a chance, but i believe its just not christian to be involved in politics.

 

[PennEd]

@PennEd your response does justice. i agree with it its a good apologetic and good explanation. merciful our Lord. praise His holy name.

thank you for teaching me dear friend. i receive it.

Very kind words. Thank you for them

I would be remiss though not to inform you to follow the advice given by the Bereans in Acts 17:11.

Be Blessed!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Yes I think is where the rubber hits the road as they say.

I am not sure on this point, now perhaps in the future God will do a restoration, however from a Geo-political historical perspective I have difficulty seeing modern day Israel as a fulfillment of this promise.

If we regard it as a counterfeit, (and I do not know your view on this) can it still be the fulfillment of the promise, or fulfillment of Bible prophesy?

They are in fact in opposition still to Jesus as Messiah, correct?
Does God fulfill promises to people who are in rebellion?

From your knowledge and having been in both camps so to speak what do you think, how do you reason this?

This I can agree with, the present day is not the fulfillment, For one, Israel is still in sin and has not yet repented.. And there are still more jews in the USA then in Israel.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I'm not tying to give examples of Orthodox Judaism verses Zionist Judaism and have you believe to follow either of the two. I am Christian, you are also and I believe Jesus our Lord is that truth so I should explain that to make it clear. I see that Jesus and the apostles are all saying to love one another even our enemy's and I agree with that and believe it is the truth.

What I meant by asking if everyone knew the differences in the types of Judaism(there's more that two) is that the form of Judaism in control in Israel is Zionist. The earth,united nations set this form of Judaism into Palestine as we know in 1948. We(multiple Christian nations) support and uphold them on the belief that they are the Israel of God,the apple of Gods eye. If they are not and we being the Christians we imagined our selves to be put our fingers into settling up an Israel but should have waited for God to do so we may have set up the nation the man of lawlessness rises up in and have become his allies.

Now I'm saying this because the Scriptures do say that a beast would rise up out of the earth and say "let us make an image of the beast that received a deadly wound...ect." and Israel did have it's kingdom and temple removed and they were scattered among the nations that came out of Rome and this is exactly where they migrated from when they returned to Palestine(with the earths help).

Now when Revelation was written that beast that was to ascend up out of the pit was in the pit. That is Egypt was still present and a nation,Rome was still there,Greece,Babylon,Persia,Assyria ect. were all present as nations,,,all but Israel,it had received a wound and it's capital,Jerusalem destroyed and it's people removed. Let us not forget that in Solomon's days the whole then known world was under the shade of it's tree branches.

I have no intention in mind of saying filthy things of Gods beloved Israel. If an kingdom is set up in the earth and calls itself Israel it should be examined as to if it is the true Israel of our Lord and if not exposed as an imposter because the Scriptures of the Christians do say that an nation will rise and rule the whole earth and many will be deceived,even the elect if possible.

I see it not a shameful thing to examine an nation as to if God has set it up or man. I could not say yes follow it or no don't without examining it in fear of leading some of you astray blindly. It will not offend God to examine it I believe with my whole heart. I wish I knew better words to speak of this with. I am sad I have offended some. I treasure PennEd"s and Kaylagils opinion's and am sad we could not discuss this because maybe of mine own err in wording. I apologize and hope to one day continue that dialog because I respect those oppinions..

Again, My focus is on lev 26, It was told to Israel, if they did nto obey, that would happen. What occured in 70 AD is in accordance with Gods promise in Lev 26

It really does not matter if it is zionist or orthodox. Both are in opposition to the gospel. (There was also a pagan aspect of jews, who played the harlot with babylon all throughout the OT)

What we are talking about is Gods promise to Abraham Isaac and Jacob. (Not the promise which promises blessings to all nations (fulfilled in christ) but the promise concerning the land and blessings. Of which we read in lev 26 what will happen if they obey, and what will happen if they disobay. And even if after the final form of discipline (which occurred in 70 ad) would happen even after this if they would repent (god would remember the promises)

My concern is not with who is there now. They are my enemy concerning the gospel. My concern is will god keep his promise, and will prophesy be fulfilled as he spoke. And in my view, the worse thing you can do. If you can not find a fulfillment, is to change the interpretation to a symbolic or allegorical interpretation so you can make it appear to be fulfilled. It is dangerous not only to us, but to Gods reputation.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

@UnderGrace I was just thinking, as a Preterist how do you handle this passage?...70AD? A Prophecy no longer valid? Or?

Zechariah 14:2-4 KJV
[2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. [3] Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. [4] And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

Did the Lord go forth and fight against the nations that came against Jerusalem? If so, it looks like He lost to the Romans.

This is what is worrisome.

Did God not mean what he said, or did he fail. Neither choice is very good.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

And in fact in Josephus wars book 2 he describes the Jews as outraged by any type pollution of the temple then standing. The Jewish revolt is known as such because the Jews then revolted,rebelled died to the uttermost at the cost of the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem to prevent pagans from setting up pagan images in the temple.

So did they worship the fourth beast as God or did they revolt against it(Rome)? Did they receive the beast mark and buy and sell with their money or mint their own, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish_Revolt_coinage ?

So if Rome is the beast and mark spoken of in ad70 then the Jews revolted and did not buy and sell with their money so it cannot be said that they received the mark nor worshiped it's image they revolted instead,,,"Jewish revolt"....and Rev. 13 cannot be pinned on the Jews they stood their ground.

What??????

Rome in 70 AD had no power to control money by any mark.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

you can send it to me i would greatly appreciate it. i will not mock you friend nor scorn.

i hope i havent given you the impression that im here to mock and scorn. i know i have lots of growing to do as a person, but im trying to not mock.

If I may, And like Pen Ed, it is just an optional view.

I go back to what God told Abraham, “the sin of the ammonite is not yet complete” in other words, there was still hope for these people to worship god. And for those who did not worship God to repent. He said this would be for 400 years.

When God sent Israel into the promised land, at that time, there was NO HOPE for repentance of the people. But there was a GRAVE danger to the children of Israel who would then be living side by side with these people if they did not do as God said and slay all of them.

we see that occure in reality, As they did not do what God said, the the people they should have taken care of, took their pagan Gods and israel fell for them also. Just as God warned them they would do.

I do not believe god kills people just to kill them, he has reasons. And reasons we can only fathom..

 

[PennEd]

Is Undergrace a Preterist?

 

[PennEd]

Is Undergrace a Preterist?

I'm sorry UG. That came out a little wrong. I was just taken a little aback by that.

 

[Grandpa]

Thought this might help...


Replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) essentially teaches that the Christian Church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Thus, adherents of Replacement theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and that God’s covenants with them have been cancelled. In other words, according to Replacement theology, the Jewish people today no longer have any unique part to play in God’s plans – they are just like any other nation on the earth (English, Spanish, Chinese, etc.). All the stuff God wanted to do with the Jews in the Old Testament, He is now doing instead with Christians.



1. Israel (the Jewish people and the land) has been replaced by the Christian Church in the purposes of God, or, more precisely, the Church is the historic continuation of Israel to the exclusion of the former.

2. The Jewish people are now no longer a "chosen people." In fact, they are no different from any other group, such as the English, Spanish, Chinese or Egyptians.

3. Since Pentecost of Acts 2, the term "Israel," as found in the Bible, now refers to the Church.

4. The promises, covenants and blessings ascribed to Israel in the Bible have been taken away from the Jews and given to the Church, which has superseded them. However, the Jews are subject to the curses found in the Bible, as a result of their rejection of Christ.

As a result of these beliefs, Replacement theology is forced to interpret the many prophecies in Scripture about Israel3 in allegorical and ‘spiritualized’ ways; they have to find ways of reading the Christian Church into all of those prophecies about the future instead of the literal nation of Israel and the Jewish people, since the Church has replaced the Jews in God’s plan for the world.

Yes. This is basically correct.

Why do you think the Jews hated and killed Christians?

How do you think the Jews were to be provoked to jealousy?

6 Reasons Why Replacement Theology is not a Biblical Doctrine

1. The Bible explicitly promises that God’s covenant with the Jews would be eternal (ie. unbreakable).

No. Gods Covenant was not with Jews. It is with Israel. And it is eternal.

Romans 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:



2. The New Testament explicitly states that the Old Testament promises and covenants to Israel are STILL the possession of Israel, even during this Church age and even while the nation is currently in a state of unbelief.

3. The Old Testament explicitly teaches the future, permanent restoration of the nation Israel.

4. The New Testament reaffirms the Old Testament expectation of a future salvation and restoration of Israel.

5. Nowhere in the entire New Testament is the term ‘Israel’ used for those who are not ethnic Jews. Thus, there is no biblical basis for identifying the Church as the ‘new Israel.’

Galatians 3:28-29
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Romans 9:7-8
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

6. If God could break His covenant with the Jews, then we cannot trust Him to keep His promises to us Christians!

God never broke His Covenant. It was the Jew that couldn't uphold his end. And so a New Covenant was given to replace the Old Covenant that couldn't be upheld. But the Jew didn't like this New Covenant and so they rejected it.

People who mistakenly claim that the Jew is still the chosen of God place those Jews in a very dangerous situation. They basically say "Don't worry, you can reject Christ and still make it into Gods Kingdom". But this only applies to the Jew. Anyone else who rejects Christ doesn't make it in.

No matter how much scripture evidence is given the ones who worship the flesh Jew still think this error.


I thought this was a pretty good explanation of replacement theology.