Where I stand: “I will bless those that bless thee and curse those that curse thee” has never meant “Stand behind Israel even when they are going astray.” And it’s also a bit dubious that a modern mostly-secular state is synonymous with the group in view in Gen. 12:3. That said, the history of the region is clear that Israel has a right to exist as a nation and I don’t buy the pro-palestinian propaganda at all.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer] Where I stand: “I will bless those that bless thee and curse those that curse thee” has never meant “Stand behind Israel even when they are going astray.” And it’s also a bit dubious that a modern mostly-secular state is synonymous with the group in view in Gen. 12:3. That said, the history of the region is clear that Israel has a right to exist as a nation and I don’t buy the pro-palestinian propaganda at all.
Actually, from the looks of it, today’s political entity called Israel is more akin to a mix of the ritualistic Christ-rejecting religion of Christ’s day and the Secular Humanist Movement. It’s the farthest thing from Abraham’s religion, which is Christianity (Rom. 3-4).
One doesn’t need to be pro-Palestinian to side with the Bible in regard to the Zionist rhetoric.
[Aaron Blumer] And it’s also a bit dubious that a modern mostly-secular state is synonymous with the group in view in Gen. 12:3.
Aaron,
I am not following you here. (I also do not follow J in post #2.) There are two predicted stages to the return of Israel to her land — the first being a return, albeit in unbelief (Ezek. 36:24-28) Just as an individual has to understand his lostness before he can be saved, so Israel has to be in a lost condition before it can be saved. The people are back in their land today — but in unbelief. What part of that is dubious?
Yeah, I could have said that better… I think. But I might just get murkier. I’ll try anyway. What I mean is that I don’t think the promise of blessing and cursing is meant to refer to “unbelieving Israel” or, to put it in terms of Romans 9-11, Israel in its temporarily blinded/stumbled/fallen situation. The current presence in the land may be a kind of beginning of the prophesied return, but it is not equal to the prophesied return. So the fullness of the Gentiles (Rom.11.25) has not yet come. So does the blessing and cursing part of the promise apply to them during this time? I’m inclined to think not. But even if it does, it shouldn’t be construed to mean “we back every act and policy decision of Israel.” But many seem to take that attitude. (FWIW, it looks to me like the whole blockade thing was actually a good move on their part… but I would not say so thinking I have some obligation to “support Israel,” but rather because it seems to be necessary.)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer] Yeah, I could have said that better… I think. But I might just get murkier. I’ll try anyway. What I mean is that I don’t think the promise of blessing and cursing is meant to refer to “unbelieving Israel” or, to put it in terms of Romans 9-11, Israel in its temporarily blinded/stumbled/fallen situation. The current presence in the land may be a kind of beginning of the prophesied return, but it is not equal to the prophesied return. So the fullness of the Gentiles (Rom.11.25) has not yet come. So does the blessing and cursing part of the promise apply to them during this time? I’m inclined to think not. But even if it does, it shouldn’t be construed to mean “we back every act and policy decision of Israel.” But many seem to take that attitude. (FWIW, it looks to me like the whole blockade thing was actually a good move on their part… but I would not say so thinking I have some obligation to “support Israel,” but rather because it seems to be necessary.)
Discussion
NewBlessing and cursing
That said, the history of the region is clear that Israel has a right to exist as a nation and I don’t buy the pro-palestinian propaganda at all.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
NewAaron Blumer wrote: Where I
One doesn’t need to be pro-Palestinian to side with the Bible in regard to the Zionist rhetoric.
NewTwo-stage return
I am not following you here. (I also do not follow J in post #2.)
There are two predicted stages to the return of Israel to her land — the first being a return, albeit in unbelief (Ezek. 36:24-28)
Just as an individual has to understand his lostness before he can be saved, so Israel has to be in a lost condition before it can be saved. The people are back in their land today — but in unbelief.
What part of that is dubious?
Church Ministries Representative, serving in the Midwest, for The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry
NewNot well stated
So does the blessing and cursing part of the promise apply to them during this time? I’m inclined to think not. But even if it does, it shouldn’t be construed to mean “we back every act and policy decision of Israel.” But many seem to take that attitude.
(FWIW, it looks to me like the whole blockade thing was actually a good move on their part… but I would not say so thinking I have some obligation to “support Israel,” but rather because it seems to be necessary.)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
NewAaron Blumer wrote: Yeah, I